Cctv

Yorkie1

DELETED USER wrote:

The Human Rights Act does apply to individuals so you could make a case for the right to privacy. I'd complain to the police, see if they can send a Community Support Officer round to get it pointed in a different direction.

If that fails buy a laser pointer and aim it directly at the camera lens to blind it.

No, it does not apply to individuals as such. It applies to public authorities, and only to those individuals who perform public functions and in that capacity. See s.6 of the Act:

6 Acts of public authorities.
(1)It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.specifically only makes it unlawful for a public authority.

(3)In this section “public authority” includes—
(a)a court or tribunal, and
(b)any person certain of whose functions are functions of a public nature,
but does not include either House of Parliament or a person exercising functions in connection with proceedings in Parliament.

(5)In relation to a particular act, a person is not a public authority by virtue only of subsection (3)(b) if the nature of the act is private.

LADYXXMACBETH

I don't thnk there are rules per se about the installation of CCTV on private property. I have CCTV that has been oked by the police and they state that if you can see it from your front window then you are allowed to film it. When it comes to privacy it is a right to a peaceful life as outlined in the human rights act but I think it would be difficult to prove he had violated your human rights. Unfortunately there are very few rules as I understand with regards to filming people. As long as you aren't going up to the window and being a peeping tom I think it is acceptable. CCTV can't capture very much at all and it is usually a deterrent more than anything. I don't think you would be able to do much unless you wanted to claim a violation of human rights but you would have to know that the camera was in you window. How about net curtains?

jaymidlands

put a camera pointing his way.........or late at night pop round and move the camera..

Yorkie1

LADYXXMACBETH wrote: »

I don't thnk there are rules per se about the installation of CCTV on private property. I have CCTV that has been oked by the police and they state that if you can see it from your front window then you are allowed to film it. When it comes to privacy it is a right to a peaceful life as outlined in the human rights act but I think it would be difficult to prove he had violated your human rights. Unfortunately there are very few rules as I understand with regards to filming people. As long as you aren't going up to the window and being a peeping tom I think it is acceptable. CCTV can't capture very much at all and it is usually a deterrent more than anything. I don't think you would be able to do much unless you wanted to claim a violation of human rights but you would have to know that the camera was in you window. How about net curtains?

Yet again, the HRA does NOT apply in this situation.

AmIBeingRobbed

Thanks for all the comments. It is still not clear what action I should or could take.

My concerns are:
1. The fact the CCTV focuses on the sitting room window and path when there is no need to focus it in that direction. There are other alternatives.
2. I think the footage is published over the internet and probably watched in the offices of the two owners

My options are:
1. Harassment: I doubt the police will see it as harassment. If this saga continues in the vein it has with my neighbour reporting all manner of idiocy to the police, the police have a job for life.
2. Human Rights: Might just form a case against the police for failing to treat the issue as harassment.
3. Data Protection: I am not sure on this one at all. The house could be owned by a limited company as one of the owners is an accountant. Even if was owned by a company, it would say it let it out to private tenants, hence not covered by the DP Act. Then, reading the footage in an office at a place of work may well be covered, but I cannot prove it.
4. Nuisance: Not sure at all about this one. Two obvious points - it would probably be expensive in legal fees and I have never heard of it being used successfully in a situation like this.

If I choose to sell, the real problem is disputes with neighbours have to be disclosed - and this could reduce the value of our house significantly. The police have already given me a harassment warning for telling the neighbour off after he shouted "I don't give a !!!!" when I tried to speak to him reasonably about problems with his builders.

The whole situation is becoming increasingly nasty.

Yorkie1

AmIBeingRobbed wrote: »

Thanks for all the comments. It is still not clear what action I should or could take.

My concerns are:
1. The fact the CCTV focuses on the sitting room window and path when there is no need to focus it in that direction. There are other alternatives. This is your strongest point
2. I think the footage is published over the internet and probably watched in the offices of the two owners Without proof this is not relevant.

My options are:
1. Harassment: I doubt the police will see it as harassment. If this saga continues in the vein it has with my neighbour reporting all manner of idiocy to the police, the police have a job for life.

This is the one to pursue.

(1)A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and

(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

(3)Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—

(a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

(b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

(c)that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

s.7=References to harassing a person include alarming the person or causing the person distress.

Harassment is potentially arguable here.

2. Human Rights: Might just form a case against the police for failing to treat the issue as harassment.

No, you're on a non-starter here. If the police decide on evidential grounds that an investigation or harassment warning is not appropriate, court action will not be successful unless you can prove that no reasonable police force would have reached the same decision. This will cost you £thousands.

3. Data Protection: I am not sure on this one at all. The house could be owned by a limited company as one of the owners is an accountant. Even if was owned by a company, it would say it let it out to private tenants, hence not covered by the DP Act. Then, reading the footage in an office at a place of work may well be covered, but I cannot prove it.

In the absence of proof it's a non-starter. Forget it.

4. Nuisance: Not sure at all about this one. Two obvious points - it would probably be expensive in legal fees and I have never heard of it being used successfully in a situation like this.

I agree.

If I choose to sell, the real problem is disputes with neighbours have to be disclosed - and this could reduce the value of our house significantly. The police have already given me a harassment warning for telling the neighbour off after he shouted "I don't give a !!!!" when I tried to speak to him reasonably about problems with his builders.

The whole situation is becoming increasingly nasty.

Neighbour disputes are a nightmare for both sides and you already have a dispute to declare, it seems to me.

paddedjohn

Do you know anyone who is a good shot with an air rifle?

Yorkie1

paddedjohn wrote: »

Do you know anyone who is a good shot with an air rifle?

Paint gun might be just as effective and perhaps less illegal [not meant to be taken seriously :eek: ]

chris_m

Yorkie1 wrote: »

Paint gun might be just as effective and perhaps less illegal [not meant to be taken seriously :eek: ]

Or point a laser pen at the camera - it'll either blind it or, better, knacker it with no indication of why it's failed.

lord_tyrannus

was the planning dispute between you and your neighbour?


In certain situations residential CCTV camera's do require planning IE Westminster council will only allow certain sizes of CCTV camera's pointing in certain directions as an example


you could send them a letter before action asking them to remove it or reposition but this could inflame the situation further. Have you and the other residents tried talking to them?