Our Spring / Summer 2020 Riskboss Magazine Elephant in the Room article entitled, “He Said. She Said” has been updated for the Spring / Summer 2026 edition of Riskboss Magazine and is offered to anyone that may benefit from the read.
The content of this article is something that is impacting risk and security every day in residential condominiums nationwide. It is the debate created regarding installing audio recording devices at security desks to augment CCTV cameras, and whether Boards should allow residents to install their own surveilance equipment on residential condominium doors.
In this article we have been able to canvass the legal opinions of some of Canada’s best and brightest lawyers in multiple legal disciplines. This article will clarify the law on this matter, and the prudence of installing surveilance devices, what types, and where.
The Law in Canada
There is much online debate whether residents have the right to install their own cameras on residential condominium doors and whether audio at security desks is necessary, legal, and prudent.
Many take to online platforms to read up the law on this topic. Unfortunately, ‘Google law’ as many call it, more often than not contains inaccurate information or information regarding the law in other counties that does not apply in Canada. Riskboss highly recommends against relying on such online unsupported opinion(s).
One Party Consent
In Canada the law provides that only one person needs to consent and be present during the recording of conversations. That means that if you are in any place in Canada, you do not need the permission of others present to record their conversations. In fact, you do not even have to tell anyone that you are recording them.
Once you leave that place; however, any continued recording by you of people that remain in your absence is illegal. This restriction includes police authorities who require judicial authorization (a warrant) to conduct such activities.
In short, if you are present, there is no expectation of privacy and recording people is legal. If you are not present, there is a very high expectation of privacy so do not record other people talking as this is illegal. In areas where there is little or no expectation of privacy such as condominium lobbies at the security desk (whether security is there or not) recording conversations is legal as long as there is relevant signage present.
Expectation of Privacy & the Law
In Canada, the expectation of privacy is a fundamental right protected by Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms under the Canadian Constitution. Breaches of the expectation of privacy is well rooted in Canadian law such as the Criminal Code that can lead to a five-year jail sentence for the interception of private communications.
According to the Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner and as set out in the, “Guidelines for Overt Video Surveillance in the Private Sector”, surveillance is a reasonable expectation in areas requiring protection and where there is little or no privacy expectation. It is a reasonable expectation that in these areas, people will not only be monitored but also be heard. Clearly visible notices and signage must be displayed indicating what type of recording is being made.
Canadian Case Law
There are several stated cases in Canada where the courts have clarified the legal use of surveilance equipment in condominiums. In one such case the police installed pin hole (hidden) CCTV and audio surveilance equipment in a condominium hallway near a residential door where criminal activity was suspected to be occurring for example, inside fire exit signage.
The court found that albeit the police received permission from the corporation to install such surveilance equipment, the surveilance was without warrant. The courts decided that such surveilance was determined to infringe of the expectation of privacy of residents, and as such their rights.
The phrase, “Your home is your castle” is firmly entrenched in laws in most countries around the world. In Canada, infringing on a resident’s expectation of privacy falls within this motto. Privacy in the case law stated herein, includes the interception of video and conversations at the doorstep of a resident’s home.
In many of these stated cases the courts point out that in areas that are generally accessible by many residents and the public like the main lobby, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy; however, in areas that are close to residential entrance doors or inside a private room, the expectation of privacy increases exponentially and as such, privacy must be assured.
The Law on Protection Against Workplace Harassment & Abuse
The rights for the protection of workers in their workplace is very clear and well established in law. So is the protection against bullying and workplace harassment. This is a joint and shared responsibility protecting employees in all corporations including all residential condominiums.
The obligations for all corporations to ensure that all such incidents are dealt with properly and warning / sanctions against offenders are levied immediately is very clear. Proactively, corporations are obligated to ensure that the proper policies, equipment, and processes are in place to protect workers in their employment environment. This is not a suggestion; it is an absolute and strict obligation under the law.
Expert lawyer, Michael Smyth is an employment and labour lawyer at Hicks, Morley LLP in Toronto. Mr. Smyth explains, audio and visual recording devices are a particularly useful tool to help to ensure that workplaces are safely maintained.
“From an employer’s perspective, having audio and CCTV cameras in areas where there is the potential for harassment or violence makes practical sense. Such surveillance can be used to assist in maintaining a safe workplace and investigating complaints as long as privacy responsibilities have been adequately accounted for and addressed.”
According to Mr. Smyth, pursuant to Ontario’s Human Rights Code and the Occupational Health and Safety Act, condos, as employers, have a duty to provide a violence and harassment-free workplace, develop policies, and programs regarding violence and harassment, investigate incidents and implement corrective measures.
As it concerns recordings, Mr. Smyth goes so far as to state that,
“If an employer has resisted implementing audio and CCTV recordings for fears of intruding on privacy rights, it should reconsider it in such circumstances, or risk being found liable for failing to take all reasonable steps to protect the health and safety of its employees.”
Controlling Surveilance Footage
Who should have access to surveilance footage? Who should maintain and secure surveilance footage?
Other laws support privacy for example, respecting compliance with the privacy provisions of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”) on when and how recordings can be obtained, kept, legally released, and used is not only important to understand, but moreover essential to abide by.
Riskboss recommends the centralization of maintenance and release of surveilance be solely limited to the role of the property manager. Such surveillance footage must be maintained properly and secured against improper access and release. By centralizing this role, this brings with it two important things: consistency; and control. In most cases, property managers should be the absolute arbiter of who is allowed (and not allowed) to view surveilance footage under the terms set out in corporate policy and the law.
Even when police arrive on site at condominiums seeking footage, they are limited to access of such surveilance. In only two circumstances should police be allowed access to surveilance footage: in emergencies; and when police have judicial authorization (search warrant or production order); or when an emergency is declared in such cases police access should be immediately provided.
In one stated case it was found that access to such surveilance by Board members to proactively target, ‘rule breakers’ was found to be both excessive and unwarranted. As the case law demonstrates, board members outside of their role or in board meetings are residents and should not engage in such behaviour. This is a classic example of overreach and how and why access to surveilance footage should be heavily restricted and limited to authorized persons only.
Installation of CCTV Surveilance on Condominium Doors
Riskboss have been asked by several clients to comment on the legality and prudence of some residents installing their own CCTV surveilance equipment on residential condominium doors, often referred to as, ‘Ring cameras’ or, ‘Peephole cameras’.
Most recently in many GTA Jewish neighbourhoods there has been an increase in incidents of criminal mischief by way of removal of door mezuzahs. This is certainly very upsetting in affected communities as such acts incite fear and anxiety. This has prompted many residents to install their own surveilance equipment on their condominium doors.
Police often find themselves frustrated as investigating such incidents after the fact reveals little evidence to go on. Obtaining judicial authorization for surveilance in residential hallways is time consuming and often declined given that privacy rights of residents may be impacted. Boards are equally frustrated as are affected residents.
Are residential door cameras installed by residents legal and prudent?
As the experts have indicated and the stated case law clearly reveals, installing surveilance cameras on condominiums residential doors is considered high risk, and neither prudent nor appropriate in the opinion of Riskboss. Most GTA condominium law firms support and concur with this opinion.
Many condominiums have surveilance systems in hallways on elevator landings that capture visual evidence only. These cameras are clearly visible and often accompanied by signage. This type of equipment is not installed near residential doors. As such, elevator landing equipment is not only legal but prudent to install.
On the other hand, capturing audio evidence anywhere in residential hallway in the opinion of Riskboss is problematic as residents and guests in hallways generally are afforded a much higher expectation of privacy by law. As such, audio equipment is not recommended in residential hallways.
There are many reasons that Riskboss recommends not to allow residents to install their own camera equipment on their doors, as follows:
- As revealed in the stated case law herein the courts have repeatedly held that surveilance near residential doors impacts negatively on the rights of residents inside and those residents walking by such doors and as such, should not be allowed without warrant (by police). There is a very high degree of an expectation of privacy near residential doorways.
- The rights of residents walking by a door with a Ring camera, or a peephole camera increases dramatically when such cameras have audio included as many of these products do. Private conversations can be illegally intercepted.
- The control of captured surveilance footage by residents cannot be assured. The protection against the improper release of such footage also cannot be assured.
- Residential condominium doors are the property of the condominium corporation. In condominium Declarations (by-laws) and Rules, there is always a clause prohibiting anyone from making any changes to condominium doors without the permission of the board of directors.
Residents have no, ‘right’ to install such equipment without authorization. Residents who ignore the Declaration / Rules leave themselves open to legal consequences. It is the opinion of Riskboss in understanding the overwhelming evidence available, that Boards should not authorize such devices on residential condominium doors.
Installation of Audio Surveilance at Security Desks
The security desk is typically the central hub and gathering point for most residential condominium communities with respect to people, parcels, deliveries, access control, and community concerns. Typically, this is also the location where there is a high likelihood of confrontations more than anywhere else in condominium communities.
There was a time not too long ago when even the thought of having CCTV cameras at a residential security desk would have some residents up in arms regarding their privacy and the perceived intrusiveness of such devices in their community.
Fast-forward, society has dramatically changed and there has been a universal wakeup call for improved security and risk management in condominiums. So too have the expectations condominium residents who demand a more secure community given the impacts of illegal short-term renters, trespassers, inappropriate behaviour of food delivery drivers, and the increase of illegal activities (e.g. prostitution, drug dealing, etc.) in condominium settings.
CCTV cameras with audio included is now the norm at security desks nationwide and for good reason. Technology has advanced so dramatically in recent years that it seems like everyone has audio and visual recordings devices in cars, motorcycle helmets, bicycles, and even home nanny-cams.
Audio and visual recording is available on all cellular phones with a quick click of a button. Two-way communication in condominiums has been recently enhanced through the innovation of remotely monitored security kiosks that includes both audio and visual.
Society has not only accepted both audio and visual in the mainstream but in fact, in many respects society is demanding and expecting it. So, the question begs, how do decision makers (the Board) struggle with the residents demanding their right to privacy versus the rights of condominium residents and workers to be protected conundrum?
Claims and fear of potential intrusions of privacy are most often used to dissuade against installing audio devices at security desks. Lawyers and experts strongly recommend the inclusion of audio especially at security desks as it removes the inevitable, “He said. She said” outcomes of investigations into inappropriate behavior by security guards, realtors, tradespersons, delivery workers, and even resident-to-resident interactions.
With an increase of reported harassment and aggression towards property management personnel of late, many property management firms have demanded the inclusion of audio and visual surveilance in site property management offices. There has even been a call by many firms you include audio recording of all telephone conversations similar to that found when everyone calls their banking institutions. This is becoming the new norm in condominiums and something Boards will have to contend with during their decision making processes.
Without objective eyewitnesses or evidence from visual/audio surveilance, investigations of this nature most often fail falling short of expectations for condominium corporations. In short, everyone wants to be believed and have very strong opinions when making a complaint of inappropriate behaviour. Installing audio at security desks directly answers the often-overlooked question of whether it is fair to both the alleged aggressor and/or the victim of such incidents to leave questions unanswered during investigations where no audio evidence is available?
The legality and prudence of audio in condominiums at security desks question was posed to expert condominium lawyer, Gerald Miller, managing partner of Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP. He points out that with the implementation of amendments to the Condominium Act, 1998, boards and managers are under increased pressure to utilize technology to assist in enforcing the law (e.g. workplace harassment of employees), rule compliance, and to ensure condominium security,
“Audio visual surveillance with recording capability at the security or concierge desk should become the norm in all high-rise buildings. It becomes critical that property management have audio and visual records of what exactly transpires in all circumstances in cases when an owner or tenants complains.
Similarly, when owners, tenants or guests complain about the behaviour of the concierge or security guards, the recording can verify the truth of any allegations made against the condominium corporation’s employees or contractors. This is especially true when allegations of sexual or other forms of workplace harassment are made.”
The Risk of Not Having Audio
Riskboss has conducted well over seventy-five comprehensive and independent risk assessments of condominiums, commercial buildings, institutions, and organizations for over the past sixteen years. Part of these assessments is to measure risk using several variables that identifies threats and provides alternatives and solutions to such threats.
Riskboss evaluators consider the lack of audio at security desks as one of the highest risks that a condominium can have and something that should be mitigated immediately. The lack of audio leaves far too many unintended consequences. It leaves both the alleged aggressor and the victim without closure, that in most cases perpetuates negative feelings and further conflict(s).
There is a clear duty placed on all corporations in Ontario to use all means necessary and reasonable to protect employees in their workplace from abuse and to act decisively and professionally when such behaviour occurs. Not having audio at security desks limits the ability of condominium corporations to effectively determine what occurred. Such equipment is not only legal and prudent, but necessary for condominium corporations to fulfill obligations under law.
Is the inclusion of audio legal and prudent at a security desk?
As the experts have indicated, installing audio recording devices in high-traffic areas in buildings, and, in particular, at security desks, is legal, prudent, necessary, and appropriate. The question is no longer whether audio is required or not as the law is very clear on the matter. It is rather a matter of what is the impact and implications of not having it.
Riskboss recommends the following:
- The law emphasizes that where CCTV (and audio) is being captured, residents and guests should be warned by way of signage or other system alerting residents and guests so that it is clear that any assumed expectation of privacy is completely removed.This is also why in Riskboss condominium comprehensive and independent risk assessments we recommend a red flashing lights beside all CCTV cameras and signage strategically erected throughout areas under surveilance warning people that these areas have no expectation of privacy.
Where audio is included (e.g. security desks), such signage is a must have.
- Condominium Boards would do well to follow the law on capturing, maintaining, and releasing surveilance footage and audio. Condominium lawyers who are experts in such matters should be consulted to enact building Rules outlining where such surveilance is occurring and the process for the maintenance and release of such footage. Every condominium corporation should create and implement a Privacy and Video/Audio Surveillance and Retention Policy.