I have a surname (my step-Fathers) which I have been using…

Technically, I am sure that You are right and pretty well knew what You are saying. However, take into consideration that the name that I have used since I was 8 and as a professional (photographer) is not technically my legal name, but many, if not most, people know me as such and when I get paid at said profession, I may receive cheques in that name. It is under those circumstances that I have used the aforementioned unnamed financial institution in which I have held an account in what is technically not my legal name for decades. Everything has gone very smoothly, especially when using bank machines. I even had a long-term employer that paid me for years with company cheques where he made them out with simply my first name. Again, I suppose things probably went smoothly partially due to the fact that I always deposited them through an ATM. In all of these circumstances my income was reported in taxes and they readily accepted these declarations etc, as I always only used my one social insurance number (which I remind You, is still in that original, technically not legal name.) So having said all this, is it not legitimate to simply continue what I have always done, as long as my banks don't complain again? If not, if I were to legally change my name, and add on the 5th name, therefore having a total of two or three surnames, depending on how you view my mother's maiden name (which, by the way is my brother's surname... complicated these days eh?), could I then legally use at least, my 4th and 5th names both as legal or even simply not-illegal surnames? I want to be able to cash cheques and be recognized as both, preferably and not have to choose one. I think I have a more than valid argument from just what I have said, but also take into account the fact that my Mother and Step-Father (who raised me completely and who I consider to be my Father as much, if not more so, then my biological Father) are separated and as has been since that separation I still do not want to choose sides. My dual surnames reflect the solidarity and devotion I still feel towards both and having to limit myself to one is not the true me and would be a misrepresentation of what I stand for. If the Canada Revenue Agency can see around this, I don't see why lesser bureaucracies and common folk can't... afterall, aren't we all just a number? Thank You for Your first response. I intend to leave positive feedback for You, but would appreciate some more advice based on this additional information. Feel free to ask me more questions and also if You think this warrants further payment, let me know. I think that especially with my unique name, it shouldn't matter what it ends with at a bank etc. because I figure there is only one of me. Thank You again.

Sincerely,

Jevon Isaac Baisch Greco Safarik

Thank You. Now just to confirm then, when I legally have changed to all five of these names, instead of just the first four, will I, legally be able to use Greco or Safarik as a Surname, or will I then be forced to only use Safarik, as I am now being forced (it seems) to only use Greco?

Legal name now: Jevon Isaac Baisch Greco

Proposed change: Jevon Isaac Baisch Greco Safarik

Thank You again,

Jevon