I got assualted in Tesco!

superscaper

Not sure what the law is on that. I'll have to look it up. I know it's perfectly legal to secretly record conversations you're involved in. So whether you can extend that to video I'm not sure. BTW do you actually have a quote or link to where in the law it is?

Poppy9

We haven't heard from the OP for a few days. Perhaps the Peelers have banged him up:D

superscaper

superscaper wrote: »

Not sure what the law is on that. I'll have to look it up. I know it's perfectly legal to secretly record conversations you're involved in. So whether you can extend that to video I'm not sure. BTW do you actually have a quote or link to where in the law it is?

Gonna need that link because from what I've read so far RIPA only governs the surveillance of people by public bodies and has no juristiction over individuals and private institutions that are performing the surveillance.

Edit: also there's diminished expectation of privacy so they are also allowed to install hidden cameras without your knowledge but, there's still an expectation of privacy in such places as toilets and changing rooms.

uktim29

m.colak wrote: »

The data protection act does deal with the use of CCTV and the invasion of privacy

There is no issue with it though. All the company has to do is inform someone (can't remember who, not the customers, some government department) that they have CCTV, thats all they need to do under the data protection act.

For market research purposes which this system seems to be they're not going to need to see anyones face or cross reference it with CCTV. Are you not thinking of security tagging for high value items? I can understand why that would be linked to CCTV.

caroleiw

Can't get this banana song out of my head now.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=B78rrwSQB24

or this rather more annoying one

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VvrCiQYmC9g

or there's a rather nice Audrey Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart one

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eDbcIJbzpbQ

Swattie

Or even more annoying :-

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wky5H1xC6-I

and even more annoying - if that's possible

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3vWm47yPLGc

and for Harry Potter fans

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JKf7pPj6T7M&feature=related

Pixie28

OP I really feel for you being intimidated like that, especially as you were on your own! The most they should have done is ask you to leave the store.

On a lighter note, and far aside from the upset that this situation has caused you, this thread has really made my smile....I think we should rename it "BananaGate"!

Blacksheep1979

pinkshoes wrote: »

It's also not a crime to put your hand on someone's shoulder as far as I know, otherwise people crammed onto London tubes in rushhour would be screaming "assault" on a daily basis.

It can be depending on intent, even speaking to someone can be deemed as assault and to top that off there has been incidents (don't know if it should be plural as I've only read of one) of someone being done for GBH over the phone.

peterbaker wrote: »

And many produce counters seem to have very little understanding of such things as the poison in green potatoes and in the mould on 'over ripe' fruit.

would that be the mold that is know as penicillium notatum - that is one of the more common molds that grow on fruit, have a guess what it's a precursor to?

superscaper wrote: »

But he didn't commit an actual crime, at worst he violated the store's policy.

But by violating store policy he no longer has permission to be there - tresspass surely (all be it a civil offence)

superscaper

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

But by violating store policy he no longer has permission to be there - tresspass surely (all be it a civil offence)

As I said in that circumstance he should be asked to leave, there's nothing they could take him to court on unless he refused to leave. But there's no indication either way that there was any signage indicating policy he supposedly violated. As I mentioned I don't remember ever seeing a no photography sign. If there was obvious signs then he would be trespassing the moment he took the photograph. If there weren't then he'd wouldn't be trespassing until the moment he was asked to leave. In either case being prevented leaving kind of negates the trespass. But I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to bet on anything I say.

rosysparkle

I have a real craving for banana bread now. I need overripe bananas though, I wonder if the OP knows where I could get some?