Rules on CCTV and Public Highways

[PeterW]

Ok you mention a court order here - that is very different ..!! 

 

To issue a court order for harassment (unlikely) or invasion of privacy in England you would first need to issue a summons and legal proceedings at which point the complainant would have to outline their case and the defendant (i.e. CCTV owner) would be allowed to put their evidence and case. Based upon this then a court order may be issued. That is a legally enforceable document. 

 

If I was served with a court order that I had no previous notice of then I would immediately challenge it as it's a requirement to prove a summons was served. 

 

The Police can only enforce a court order where there is a breach, and only when a court has ordered that to be done. At that point you become in breach of court, which is a criminal offence, not in breach of the order which is civil. 

[dogman]

Two examples i am aware of.  ( before the changes to register for DPA.)

1. person puts up camera covering a communal parking area as car had been damaged. Camera was a fixed camera and was aimed at their allocated parking spot but also caught a path and access to the road. Neighbour complained to police who looked at CCTV and told complainant that it was within the law and there was nothing they could do. Sting to this was that it was a housing association property who removed camera as it was a breach of their rules. 

2. Person has camera in back garden that covers neighbours garden. There was an existing dispute between them. neighbour complained. Police checked and camera was a fixed camera and only covering their own garden so at that point it did not breach any law. However neighbour saw the cctv owner move camera after police had been and filmed it being moved. Police served a harassment notice on cctv owner advising them to take it down or it would be investigated as a case of harassment. Camera was moved.

 

With police and CCTV they are very cautious as it is also useful in the investigation of crime and often is the only evidence of the offender available. That is why the DPA allows private cctv with conditions 

 

[Steptoe]

right,

you are getting caught up with it being a polis matter,

if I could really be bothered I could get you the guidelines for mounting CCTV on private property, but you can google them yourself,

a person can have your cctv camera removed if they 'feel' it invades their privacy, their is no onus of proof required!

that is fact,

it matters not one jot if the polis look at it and see it only covers your property, the case is in the feeling of invasion,

argue all you want, it wont change how the law actions on it.

public property is a different matter,

 

[dogman]

Sorry @Steptoeread this

https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/cctv/

and this

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-cctv-using-cctv-systems-on-your-property/domestic-cctv-using-cctv-systems-on-your-property

i spent the last 15 years working with the authorities that manage cctv and other surveillance systems

what you describe has never happened in my experience.

if you comply with the rules its ok

in @Construction Channel example he can do one of 3 things

ignore the requirement to register. and only do so if someone complains and plead ignorance

move camera so it only covers his land

or register and comply with code of practice.

 

if all it took was someone saying they feel intimidated then we would have no cctv anywhere as the civil liberties brigade would be complaining about every camera going  

 

 

[Construction Channel]

I was quite happy with the first 2 responses  

but in what you are all discussing does it make a difference if what i can see is just a public road?

from what i can read it only seems to become an issue when someone else's private property gets involved?

[dogman]

@Construction Channel you will need to register as it is public place 

[dogman]

"If your camera covers, even partially, any areas beyond the boundaries of your property, such as neighbouring gardens or the street, then it will no longer be exempt from the Data Protection Act (DPA) under the domestic purposes exemption. This does not mean that you are breaching the DPA but it does mean that you might need to take some steps to comply with it."

 

the advise direct from the ICO

[Construction Channel]

Fair enough, I'll wait until i get a complaint  

[Steptoe]

12 hours ago, Construction Channel said:

I was quite happy with the first 2 responses  

but in what you are all discussing does it make a difference if what i can see is just a public road?

from what i can read it only seems to become an issue when someone else's private property gets involved?

 

Your camera can cover the public area directly in front of your property without any adverse effects providing it doesnt encompass a private area also

 

[Construction Channel]

12 hours ago, Steptoe said:

 

your camera can cover the public area directly in front of your property without any adverse effects providing it doesnt encompass a private area also

 

 

I'll let you guys debate that one out, I'm not fussed either way, as above I'll wait until someone starts moaning before I worry about it  

[Steptoe]

briefing paper 01803

[MikeSharp01]

10 hours ago, dogman said:

"If your camera covers, even partially, any areas beyond the boundaries of your property, such as neighbouring gardens or the street, then it will no longer be exempt from the Data Protection Act (DPA) under the domestic purposes exemption. This does not mean that you are breaching the DPA but it does mean that you might need to take some steps to comply with it."

Likely that you will have to take steps, our neighbours have such a system and the advice they were given means that they have to keep the recordings safe for a period of time and if anybody, driving / walking / riding or cycling by asks they have reasonably to be able to show them anything they have that identifies them, two years nobody has asked. 

[PeterW]

1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Likely that you will have to take steps, our neighbours have such a system and the advice they were given means that they have to keep the recordings safe for a period of time and if anybody, driving / walking / riding or cycling by asks they have reasonably to be able to show them anything they have that identifies them, two years nobody has asked. 

 

The DPA domestic exemption lists what you should do as best practice anyway such as password protection to hard drives or systems, no open access, etc .I currently run a system for someone and it picks up a road through a wood - as the camera resolution is so low at the distance it is not deemed to be subject to any DPA as it is not possible to identify anyone from the CCTV.

[Temp]

Make sure your CCTV cameras are secure. There are web sites that specialize in finding unsecure cameras and making them available to the public. They even categorise them so you can search for them by location and " content".

 

On the other hand if your content is "interesting" perhaps you should charge for it...

 

www.reallife.com

Edited January 6, 2017 by Temp