SKIP NAVIGATION SAUT DE NAVIGATION
Closed municipal meetings

Municipal Meetings

"When in doubt, open the meeting" Learn More
E-Newsletter

The Watchdog
E-Newsletter

Read the latest issue or sign up to get it delivered right to your inbox
Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently asked questions

FIND ANSWERS TO COMMON QUESTIONS
View FAQ
Investigations (general)

Investigations

From newborn babies to lottery players to property owners, the Ombudsman's investigations have helped Ontarians.
Read about them
Careers

Join Our Team

If you're interested in making a difference, you should work here.
Read our Annual Reports

Annual Reports

THE ONTARIO OMBUDSMAN RESOLVES THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS EVERY YEAR. READ ABOUT THEM IN OUR ANNUAL REPORTS
Learn more
Caught in the Act

G20 Report:

CAUGHT IN THE ACT Read the Report
Make a Complaint

Make a complaint

Do you have a complaint about a government service or agency? Start the process

Money in the Kitty

Administrative Tribunals

Date: 2008

The owner of a missing cat was relieved to find it at the local animal shelter.  

But before he could take the cat home, he had to pay for the food, care and treatment that had been provided.

He was also ordered by the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA) to continue the veterinary care the cat had been receiving while at the shelter.

Believing some of the veterinary expenses to be unnecessary, the man asked the Animal Care Review Board to revoke the order and have him reimbursed. 

During the Board's proceedings, the OSPCA expressed concerns about the health of the cat and the man agreed to take it to a vet.  

Upon receiving the vet's report, the OSPCA revoked its order, meaning the Animal Care Review Board no longer had jurisdiction to hear the man's appeal, or deal with the issue of his costs.

The man contacted the Ombudsman and after our discussions with them, the Board and the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services offered the man $300.     

To avoid similar situations, the Board is using this case as a training tool for staff regarding the importance of explaining its process and jurisdiction to the public.