[Pentland]

For those of you who have these things, you might want to check out your CCTV signage and GDPR protocols…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58911296

[Harryg]

There is more to this than what is being released his next door neighbour has one fitted and does not cause a problem but his does.
This must have been going on for a while because you don't just file a complaint and go to court the next day so he will have had warning this was going to happen and he must of thought he would win, instead of working together he went against it and now he has to pay the penalty.

[isleaiw1]

I have CCTV covering all of our doors and parking spaces. The current neighbours love it - especially the one with the RRS SVR! If anyone doesnt like it in the future we will just reangle all of the cameras and save the benefit for us!

[KRS_SN]

I have a ring doorbell and a ring spotlight camera. They are set such that they only activate if anyone sets foot on my driveway or front lawn ie my property...
To the great disappointment of my neighbour who had his car stolen 2 weeks ago and the police both of whom couldn't believe that I had no footage.

[xenon]

Originally Posted by Harryg

There is more to this than what is being released his next door neighbour has one fitted and does not cause a problem but his does.
This must have been going on for a while because you don't just file a complaint and go to court the next day so he will have had warning this was going to happen and he must of thought he would win, instead of working together he went against it and now he has to pay the penalty.

This exactly. From what I read his neighbour had politely requested a reposition of one or more cameras and it escalated into one of those petty disputes where he deliberately fitted other cameras over her property just to antagonise her. This would not have seen the light of a courtroom had he not been a prick about it.

[ArthurKing]

Headline is somewhat misleading, there is far more to the story than just an average ring doorbell user.

Those who have a Ring Doorbell have nothing to worry about here.

We have six CCTV cameras around the house, one overlooks the front door as we park a car outside on the road. It gets the road itself, our neighbours path and the door from the flats opposite. Funnily enough the Police have knocked on the door twice in the 3 years we have had it to ask if we had any footage showing a car or people for two incidents which happened up the road.

[Pentland]

Originally Posted by ArthurKing

Headline is somewhat misleading, there is far more to the story than just an average ring doorbell user.

Those who have a Ring Doorbell have nothing to worry about here.
.

While a quick google will indeed show there is more to the story, I think some of you are missing the point that there are laws surrounding the use of surveillance cameras that, like any law, must be complied with.
The facts that no one has complained, neighbours are happy with my cams etc are irrelevant to that.

Your last sentence would be be phrased as, reasonable people who have a ring doorbell have nothing to worry about here.

[Watsey]

One of those stupid cases where someone decides to place the strict letter of the law above the benefits of common sense.

The vast majority of people only stand to gain from home security systems.

Personal / private conversations are best kept inside the home. I really don't see see why the neighbour has made such a fuss.

[RobUK]

Originally Posted by Pentland

Your last sentence would be be phrased as, reasonable people who have a ring doorbell have nothing to worry about here.

Think that hits the nail on the head here.

The case is in stark contrast to a world where millions like to publish the intimate details of their daily lives on social media to anyone who'll watch.

[rosstin]

Originally Posted by Watsey

Personal / private conversations are best kept inside the home. I really don't see see why the neighbour has made such a fuss.

If there was a camera looking over your fence, recording video and audio of most of your garden 24/7 - presumably also backed up to a cloud somewhere, you wouldn't object?

As a parent, I'd have a massive problem with this.

So I can see why the neighbour had an issue in this case. Used correctly cameras are a fantastic tool, but doesn't sound like that happened here.

[nickcuprar]

Does this open the door towards dash cameras?

Plenty of recordings in public places and most get posted online or to YouTube without the persons consent?

Just curious as I have no idea

[Watsey]

Originally Posted by rosstin

If there was a camera looking over your fence, recording video and audio of most of your garden 24/7 - presumably also backed up to a cloud somewhere, you wouldn't object?

As a parent, I'd have a massive problem with this.

So I can see why the neighbour had an issue in this case. Used correctly cameras are a fantastic tool, but doesn't sound like that happened here.

Fair point if the recordings could capture young children.

[R0B]

There is way more to this particular story... I know first (second) hand.

[Pentland]

Originally Posted by nickcuprar

Does this open the door towards dash cameras?

Plenty of recordings in public places and most get posted online or to YouTube without the persons consent?

Just curious as I have no idea

Many people here are focusing on the rights, wrongs and he said, she said, of the neighbours and missing the main point that there are laws (and for good reason) regarding the use of cameras. So it's a good question.

Dash cams fall under the category or mobile recording devices and they are generally used in public areas where it's quite legal and legitimate to film. Where it become interesting is say your dashcam has parking mode and is filming (inadvertently or not) your neighbours property. I don't have the answers but I'm aware there is a distinction.

Upshot is, as others have concurred, film sensibly and within reason and there "shouldn't" be any issues. But keep in mind there are laws in place and the camera operator can easily fall foul off them with large penalties should someone take exception. I suspect saying, most people think it's Ok, I'm not harming anyone etc is just burying your head in the sand.

[C320]

Originally Posted by isleaiw1

I have CCTV covering all of our doors and parking spaces. The current neighbours love it - especially the one with the RRS SVR! If anyone doesnt like it in the future we will just reangle all of the cameras and save the benefit for us!

Yes, we specifically focussed the front driveway one to cover just our drive, when it was first installed it was covering too much of the property opposite us and I was conscious to ensure we don't cover anymore than we require!

[isleaiw1]

Originally Posted by nickcuprar

Does this open the door towards dash cameras?

Plenty of recordings in public places and most get posted online or to YouTube without the persons consent?

Just curious as I have no idea

I have a case ongoing at the moment where a guest complained about some "influencer" posting a few vids of the public areas of the hotel that they were in.... the general response from lawyers was not to worry, posting a pic of someone that shows their face isnt a breach of their privacy without a few more conditions being met. I can post them if you want to know....

[agentorange]

The day I see a CCTV camera climb off its pole and put a mugger in a choke hold, I'll be a convert. Until then they are only good for mopping up after the event and a scourge on our privacy.

[isleaiw1]

Originally Posted by agentorange

The day I see a CCTV camera climb off its pole and put a mugger in a choke hold, I'll be a convert. Until then they are only good for mopping up after the event and a scourge on our privacy.

You dont believe in the idea of Preventative controls then?

As for invasion of privacy, got a mobile? use social media (like car forums?). How do they compare as a scourge on privacy?

I work in an industry where CCTV is not only a godsend but a legal requirement in some parts of the building.... So I am quite happy to have it and find the people who like it least are the ones it catches....

[agentorange]

Originally Posted by isleaiw1

You dont believe in the idea of Preventative controls then?

As for invasion of privacy, got a mobile? use social media (like car forums?). How do they compare as a scourge on privacy?

I work in an industry where CCTV is not only a godsend but a legal requirement in some parts of the building.... So I am quite happy to have it and find the people who like it least are the ones it catches....

If CCTV is such a good preventative control, why is there so much crime footage on YouTube and the like? For sure they do little to stop terrorism or the determined ex-spouse/significant other killer. Like the line in the song, "But Earl walked right through that restraining order
And put her in intensive care".

I don't use social media other than a few forums. My mobile is set up to issue what I consider an acceptable amount of location data. Many of the apps bitch about the amount I allow and how I always have the WiFi and/or Bluetooth disabled, so I must be doing something right.

CCTV inside a premises is up to the owner of that premises. Outside surveillance must respect the privacy of others.

In the case of dashcams it pretty much removes the doubt when it comes to crashes. Insurance adjusters and lawyers on the losing end must detest them. Good, the insurance industry has been making up its own rules as it went along for far too long. Anything that puts them back in their box is a good thing.

Bodycams worn by law enforcement or other who may find themselves interacting with the masses in an official capacity are a damned good idea. Inside schools? Absolutely. Again, take the doubt away. As before, those caught in a lie by a camera must hate them. Does that mean we should have them simply hanging about on every corner? No, not for me.

[ArthurKing]

Originally Posted by agentorange

CCTV inside a premises is up to the owner of that premises. Outside surveillance must respect the privacy of others.

We have two cameras outside the front of our house, one above the front door which looks into the road and another on the drive which points at the driveway itself and part of the road.

Do they act as a deterrent? I suspect they might to some but probably not those who are career criminals who are good at hiding their faces.

The one on the drive actually caught a couple of dirtbags stealing some tools from a van outside the house opposite us, I think they were builders doing some work. Another van pulled up, two guys got out and proceeded to steal the tools. Fortunately my CCTV picked up the reg number of the van and the Police were very keen to have the footage, which I provided.

I think Police are keen to see CCTV from householders, I have had them knock twice to view ours. If you watch the Nightstalker TV show that was on recently in the UK, the Police were actively looking for householders CCTV to try and find the person.

[isleaiw1]

Originally Posted by agentorange

If CCTV is such a good preventative control, why is there so much crime footage on YouTube and the like? For sure they do little to stop terrorism or the determined ex-spouse/significant other killer. Like the line in the song, "But Earl walked right through that restraining order
And put her in intensive care".

I don't use social media other than a few forums. My mobile is set up to issue what I consider an acceptable amount of location data. Many of the apps bitch about the amount I allow and how I always have the WiFi and/or Bluetooth disabled, so I must be doing something right.

CCTV inside a premises is up to the owner of that premises. Outside surveillance must respect the privacy of others.

In the case of dashcams it pretty much removes the doubt when it comes to crashes. Insurance adjusters and lawyers on the losing end must detest them. Good, the insurance industry has been making up its own rules as it went along for far too long. Anything that puts them back in their box is a good thing.

Bodycams worn by law enforcement or other who may find themselves interacting with the masses in an official capacity are a damned good idea. Inside schools? Absolutely. Again, take the doubt away. As before, those caught in a lie by a camera must hate them. Does that mean we should have them simply hanging about on every corner? No, not for me.

If it stops one person doing something then it has been worth the installation. We have it at work and sometimes you see people casing the building and when they look up and see the CCTV they move on to another location. And sometimes the stupid / desperate / drunk ones do it anyway and then we hand over to the police who pay them a visit - the desperate ones they probably already know, the drunk are probably guests passed out somewhere!

I have no worries about privacy, I've done nothing wrong. But I do find it amusing that Americans worry about their privacy but think everyone should have a right to bear arms, think they may have their priorities wrong! Not saying that you fall into that category, just an observation....

Like all deterrents CCTV isnt perfect, but its relatively cheap and better than nothing in my humble opinion...