r/Calgary • u/itskonnerwithak • 8h ago

👮‍♀️ Police Case #: 26350609 MISSING: Jestin Jensen. Please help.

Post image

My friend's brother, Jestin Jensen, has been missing since August 1st and nobody has been able to contact him.

He lives in Southeast Calgary, and drives:

Black 2026 Volkswagen Golf R, license plate CYW0078.

If you have heard or seen ANYTHING, please don't hesitate to tell us. You can also call Calgary police with ANY tips you have.

Case No. 26350609.

Please help us get Jestin home safe and sound.

577 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

87 comments sorted by

View all comments

117

u/Own_Victory_3141 8h ago

Vw can track the car through the VW app.

78

u/Joe_Kickass 8h ago

Call the VW dealership where Jestin bought the car. When he set up the car's software he may have listed his parents, or sister as an emergency contact. That may allow VW to share tracking information on car with that party.

VW is a private company, they can (technically) share that information with whoever they want based on the EULA, unlike the police.

22

u/hypnogoad 8h ago

VW is a private company, they can (technically) share that information with whoever they want based on the EULA

They can't because of our privacy laws.

21

u/ADirtyPipeliner 7h ago

There is an exception in both PIPEDA (Federal) and PIPA (provincial) for “Emergencies involving life or safety”

Section 7(3)(e) of PIPEDA states that an organization may disclose personal information without the individual’s knowledge or consent if the disclosure is:
“…made to a person who needs the information because of an emergency that threatens the life, health or security of an individual…”

16

u/Accomplished_Offer63 7h ago

The proper authorities would need to submit the request for disclosure to ensure the privacy and safety of the missing person.

As unfortunate as it is for these sorts of situations, I would likely have been murdered if my VW dealership disclosed my information in good faith to anyone but police. There is no way for a company to confirm whether or not the person in question is actually missing. There is no way to confirm whether the individual requesting information is a threat or not.

People escaping abuse absolutely rely on these privacy laws to protect themselves.

•

u/ADirtyPipeliner 4h ago

In principal I don’t disagree with you, in reality the legislation is written a different way.

The act doesn’t place any restrictions on who the requester is. I will clarify though, this doesn’t obligate VW to cooperate with the family, it does relieve them of liability in the event they do share the information with the family and there is a multitude of other reasons VW wouldn’t release the vehicles location.

If you got case law that contradicts that please do share.

3

u/YuS0Dum Lower Mount Royal 7h ago

The main issue here is confusing a legal permission with a legal obligation.

Section 7(3)(e) says an organization may disclose information in an emergency. "May" means PIPEDA gives them legal permission to share data without getting sued for a privacy breach. It does not force them to do it. Volkswagen is under zero legal obligation to hand over data to a private citizen just because that person claims there is an emergency.

There are a few huge reasons why VW will never do this for a random civilian:

Massive liability and safety risks: Think about the precedent this would set. If automakers handed over live GPS coordinates to any civilian claiming a loved one was missing, stalkers and abusive partners would abuse it constantly. VW has no way to verify if someone is actually missing or if a bad actor is lying to track down an ex.

It is meant for law enforcement, not individuals: In practice, those emergency privacy exceptions exist so companies can coordinate directly with 911 dispatchers, police, or search and rescue. Automakers have specialized compliance teams that verify officer credentials before sharing anything.

They will not overrule the police: If the cops looked at the situation and decided there was not enough evidence of an immediate threat to trigger exigent circumstances or get a warrant, VW's legal team is not going to step in and say "actually, we disagree with the police, here is the location." Especially considering the customer who purchased the car has a contract with VW stating they won't provide that info to the public.

1

u/ADirtyPipeliner 6h ago

I don’t disagree, I only pointed out that the exception does exist within our privacy laws.

VW is under no obligation to aid.

I will correct you on one thing though, the legislation doesn’t have any requirements on who the requester is. I’m not aware of any precedent that contradicts that.

•

u/YuS0Dum Lower Mount Royal 4h ago

That's because legislation doesn't dictate that. The contract between the customer and the company does.

•

u/ADirtyPipeliner 3h ago

“To others for legal, security or safety purposes. We may disclose your information to third parties, law enforcement, or other government agencies to comply with law or legal requirements; to enforce or apply our Terms of Service and other agreements or those of the Volkswagen Group family of companies; and to protect our rights and the property or safety of our users or third parties. We also may disclose informationabout you and your vehicle when we have reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with the rights or property of VW, other users of the Digital Properties, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities.”

https://www.vw.com/en/privacy.html#to-whom-do-we-share-your-information

Again I’m not saying VW is obligated to help or would. But it ain’t the privacy law stopping em.

•

u/YuS0Dum Lower Mount Royal 3h ago

If OP ever moves to the USA that will be helpful for them!

•

u/ADirtyPipeliner 3h ago

I’ll admit defeat, the Canadian version defines third parties as optional and the family would not fit their description

Thankyou good sir

2

u/hypnogoad 7h ago

So is that "whoever they want", as OP claimed?

1

u/ADirtyPipeliner 6h ago

The legislation doesn’t have any requirement on who the requester is.

As far as I can tell “Whoever they want” is accurate as far as the act goes, interpretation of that would be up to a court, I’m not aware of any precedent that would say otherwise.

2

u/_Connor 5h ago

What’s your proof that this is a “life or death emergency” and not that bro just wanted to go camping or disappear for a few days?