Ontario PI Complaints and Investigations 2026: How the Process Works

Filing a complaint and its limits

Section 19(1) sets the three grounds for a complaint: that a licensee has breached the code of conduct, has failed to comply with the Act or the regulations, or has breached a condition of a licence. The complaint has formal requirements under s. 19(2). It must be in writing, signed by the complainant, and filed with the Registrar within 90 days after the subject matter that gives rise to the complaint arose, or at a later date with the Registrar's consent. The Registrar has some discretion. Under s. 19(3), the Registrar may, in writing, inform the licensee of the nature of a complaint. Under s. 19(4), the Registrar may decline to deal with a complaint related to a breach of the code of conduct that the Registrar considers frivolous, vexatious, or not made in good faith, and s. 19(5) then requires the Registrar to give notice of that decision to the complainant and specify the reasons.

Facilitators and remedial instruction

Code of conduct complaints that are not declined go to a facilitator. Under s. 19(6), the Registrar shall refer such a complaint to a facilitator unless the complainant does not wish the matter to be referred. The process is participatory: s. 19(7) provides that the licensee must attend any meetings required by the facilitator, and that a facilitation shall not take place without the participation of the complainant. After the facilitation, s. 19(8) requires the facilitator to communicate the results along with either a decision to make no recommendation, or a recommendation that the Registrar require the licensee to take appropriate remedial instruction. If that recommendation is made, s. 19(9) is mandatory: the Registrar shall impose the taking of the remedial instruction as a condition of the licence. The facilitation route is therefore aimed at correction rather than punishment.

• A complaint must be in writing, signed, and filed within 90 days, per s. 19(2).
• The Registrar may decline a frivolous, vexatious or bad-faith code complaint, per s. 19(4).
• A facilitation cannot proceed without the complainant's participation, per s. 19(7).
• A recommendation for remedial instruction becomes a mandatory licence condition, per s. 19(9).

Investigators, warrants and exigent circumstances

Investigations run on a separate track. Under s. 20, the Registrar may appoint persons to be investigators and shall issue each one a certificate of appointment bearing the Registrar's signature or a facsimile of it; police officers are investigators by virtue of office, and the certificate requirement does not apply to them. Every investigator who exercises powers under the Act shall, on request, produce the certificate of appointment or identification as a police officer. Section 21 lets the Registrar or an investigator initiate an investigation even if no complaint has been made. To search, s. 22(1) provides that on an application made without notice by an investigator, a justice of the peace may issue a warrant, with the powers under it set out in s. 22(2) and conditions, expiry, use of force, obstruction and return of items addressed in s. 22(3) to (9). Section 23 allows searches in exigent circumstances where it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant, and s. 24 governs the admissibility of copies. An investigator must possess their certificate under s. 25.

Inspectors and inspection powers

Inspection is different from investigation, and the test likes to contrast the two. Under s. 26, the Registrar appoints inspectors, and s. 27 sets out inspections. Section 27(1) and (2) authorise an inspector to conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with the Act, and s. 27(3) and (6) list the powers on inspection and make obstruction of an inspector an offence. Where a warrant is needed for inspection purposes, s. 28 provides for it, and s. 29 requires an inspector to possess the certificate of appointment. The Act also contains an arrest power tied to this enforcement scheme: s. 29.1 provides for arrest without warrant in the circumstances it describes. The distinction to remember is purpose. An investigation targets a suspected breach and can be triggered even without a complaint, while an inspection is a routine compliance check, and each officer must be able to produce their appointment on request.