Broadband Goes Down = CCTV Goes Down. Who's Fault?

Radicalrooster

An interesting one for you...

My elderly uncle has a user-installed home security system. It is made up of cameras and sensors and works via an app. I can login to the app and check the internal CCTV to make sure he is ok.

The alarm system relies on an internet connection, since the equipment connects via Wifi.

It does have a 3G backup system should the internet dropout, however this is purely for the alarm. I cannot view the CCTV if the broadband drops out.

Unfortunately, his Virgin Media broadband hasn't been the most reliable lately, and so when the internet goes down, so does his CCTV.

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

For example - Say he were to be burgled and CCTV evidence not be recorded because the internet was down, who's fault is it?

Speaking to the security manufacturer, they said that if the internet goes down, it's the fault of the ISP.

Speaking with Virgin Media, they refuse to take any responsibility what so ever.

If something stops working because a service stops working, does the fault not lie with that service provider?

Not looking to start an argument or rant, just looking for any advice on whether Virgin's claims are true.

neilmcl

Radicalrooster said:

An interesting one for you...

My elderly uncle has a user-installed home security system. It is made up of cameras and sensors and works via an app. I can login to the app and check the internal CCTV to make sure he is ok.

The alarm system relies on an internet connection, since the equipment connects via Wifi.

It does have a 3G backup system should the internet dropout, however this is purely for the alarm. I cannot view the CCTV if the broadband drops out.

Unfortunately, his Virgin Media broadband hasn't been the most reliable lately, and so when the internet goes down, so does his CCTV.

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

For example - Say he were to be burgled and CCTV evidence not be recorded because the internet was down, who's fault is it?

Speaking to the security manufacturer, they said that if the internet goes down, it's the fault of the ISP.

Speaking with Virgin Media, they refuse to take any responsibility what so ever.

If something stops working because a service stops working, does the fault not lie with that service provider?

Not looking to start an argument or rant, just looking for any advice on whether Virgin's claims are true.

Nobody's fault but the burglars in question.

VM's stance is correct, they are responsible for the internet service, nothing more.

IvanOpinion

Since you are aware that the service is unreliable then would you not be better moving the service to another provider?
There are many factors that can result in a service going down - level of service is probably detailed within the T&C.

I think you would probably struggle to hold either responsible.

powerful_Rogue

As above, the burglar.

VM t&c's -

 Due to the nature of the internet, we cannot guarantee specific levels of performance for internet access.

Radicalrooster

Many thanks for all your replies.

IvanOpinion said:

Since you are aware that the service is unreliable then would you not be better moving the service to another provider?
There are many factors that can result in a service going down - level of service is probably detailed within the T&C.

I think you would probably struggle to hold either responsible.

I am considering this, however Virgin are by far the fastest in his location and the CCTV requires a fairly quick connection.

neilmcl said:

Radicalrooster said:

An interesting one for you...

My elderly uncle has a user-installed home security system. It is made up of cameras and sensors and works via an app. I can login to the app and check the internal CCTV to make sure he is ok.

The alarm system relies on an internet connection, since the equipment connects via Wifi.

It does have a 3G backup system should the internet dropout, however this is purely for the alarm. I cannot view the CCTV if the broadband drops out.

Unfortunately, his Virgin Media broadband hasn't been the most reliable lately, and so when the internet goes down, so does his CCTV.

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

For example - Say he were to be burgled and CCTV evidence not be recorded because the internet was down, who's fault is it?

Speaking to the security manufacturer, they said that if the internet goes down, it's the fault of the ISP.

Speaking with Virgin Media, they refuse to take any responsibility what so ever.

If something stops working because a service stops working, does the fault not lie with that service provider?

Not looking to start an argument or rant, just looking for any advice on whether Virgin's claims are true.

Nobody's fault but the burglars in question.

VM's stance is correct, they are responsible for the internet service, nothing more.

Understood - But does that mean as a consumer I shouldn't be reliant on their service? I understand when they mention stats in their terms such as '99% up time' but where does that leave me as a consumer that requires something reliable?

powerful_Rogue said:

As above, the burglar.

VM t&c's -

 Due to the nature of the internet, we cannot guarantee specific levels of performance for internet access.

Interesting, thank you. So my uncle (and all of us I suppose) are effectively paying for a service that isn't guaranteed?


Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

Aylesbury_Duck

Radicalrooster said:

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

Depends on the thing happening.  If the internet service is out, VM is responsible for the loss of service, but they're not liable for a whole load of potential consequences.  What service provider would take customers on if they were exposed to practically unlimited liability for consequential loss.  Similarly, the alarm provider is responsible if their equipment or software fails, but again, they can't be held liable for a burglary that happens in that eventuality.  Any losses arising from burglary would normally be covered by insurance.  In your example, it's the CCTV that goes down if the internet goes down.  That doesn't prevent the burglary taking place, it just removes one avenue of evidence.  The loss still occurs.  Equally, even with the alarm system functioning fully, a burglary might still take place and the CCTV not be helpful.  The loss still occurs, so I can't see that you can demonstrably prove your uncle would be any worse off than he might have been had the system been functioning fully.

If I'm a trader/speculator/gambler and midway through placing what would be a lucrative purchase/bid/bet, or wanting to cash out before a particular result or price, and my internet drops out at an inopportune time, is the service provider liable for my lost gains or increased costs?  I wouldn't have thought so.


To answer the specific question, I think "who's at fault" is the wrong question.  Either party (or both) might be the cause of the outage, but it's the burglar that's at fault for the burglary and the loss.

powerful_Rogue

Radicalrooster said:

Many thanks for all your replies.

Interesting, thank you. So my uncle (and all of us I suppose) are effectively paying for a service that isn't guaranteed?


Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

That's correct.

They pay a very large amount of money for a business connection with an extremely quick turn around service should an issue be detected.

TadleyBaggie

Radicalrooster said:

Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

They will have a B2B contract that specifies a Service Level Agreement (SLA), in that there will an agreement on what happens when the service is down. This is why they will £1000's for their connection and not £22.99 or so.

Many will also have a backup connection to mitigate service loss.

The current BT Halo 3 product can have a EE 4G connection in case of broadband loss, but you pay a premium.

Ergates

Radicalrooster said:

An interesting one for you...

My elderly uncle has a user-installed home security system. It is made up of cameras and sensors and works via an app. I can login to the app and check the internal CCTV to make sure he is ok.

The alarm system relies on an internet connection, since the equipment connects via Wifi.

It does have a 3G backup system should the internet dropout, however this is purely for the alarm. I cannot view the CCTV if the broadband drops out.

Unfortunately, his Virgin Media broadband hasn't been the most reliable lately, and so when the internet goes down, so does his CCTV.

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

For example - Say he were to be burgled and CCTV evidence not be recorded because the internet was down, who's fault is it?

Speaking to the security manufacturer, they said that if the internet goes down, it's the fault of the ISP.

Speaking with Virgin Media, they refuse to take any responsibility what so ever.

If something stops working because a service stops working, does the fault not lie with that service provider?

Not looking to start an argument or rant, just looking for any advice on whether Virgin's claims are true.

A couple of points here.   I (obviously) don't know the details of the particular CCTV system installed at your uncle's house, but many IP cctv systems will have local storage that is connected to the cameras via the premises' internal network.  This means that if the internet (i.e. connection to the wider world) goes down, the cameras still work.  It just means you cannot log in and monitor them remotely.  So, is it definitely the case that your uncles system does not have this?

Secondly - if it is absolutely critical that your uncle's house maintains internet connectivity at all times, then you should not be relying on a simple domestic broadband supply.  There are systems with levels of redundancy in place that can kick in if the broadband drops out.  The simplest of these involves a 4g/5g backup (i.e. it switches to the mobile network) - but whether that is an option depends on where your uncle lives (as, obviously, you need 4g/5g coverage).   There are other options, but they are significantly more expensive and not really intended for domestic use).

Virgin Media are correct though - they did not offer their system has having 100% reliability and/or as being suitable for running a security system.

Radicalrooster

Thank you so much all for your replies, this is actually somewhat insightful.

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Radicalrooster said:

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

Depends on the thing happening.  If the internet service is out, VM is responsible for the loss of service, but they're not liable for a whole load of potential consequences.  What service provider would take customers on if they were exposed to practically unlimited liability for consequential loss.  Similarly, the alarm provider is responsible if their equipment or software fails, but again, they can't be held liable for a burglary that happens in that eventuality.  Any losses arising from burglary would normally be covered by insurance.  In your example, it's the CCTV that goes down if the internet goes down.  That doesn't prevent the burglary taking place, it just removes one avenue of evidence.  The loss still occurs.  Equally, even with the alarm system functioning fully, a burglary might still take place and the CCTV not be helpful.  The loss still occurs, so I can't see that you can demonstrably prove your uncle would be any worse off than he might have been had the system been functioning fully.

If I'm a trader/speculator/gambler and midway through placing what would be a lucrative purchase/bid/bet, or wanting to cash out before a particular result or price, and my internet drops out at an inopportune time, is the service provider liable for my lost gains or increased costs?  I wouldn't have thought so.


To answer the specific question, I think "who's at fault" is the wrong question.  Either party (or both) might be the cause of the outage, but it's the burglar that's at fault for the burglary and the loss.

A very good analogy. I hadn't thought about it that way.

I suppose another situation to consider - Should my uncle fall or be in danger someway and to eventually become injured, and I not know due to no connection, there is then no third party creating the 'cause'.

If my uncle's injury could have been prevented should the internet been reliable would be an interesting matter.

powerful_Rogue said:

Radicalrooster said:

Many thanks for all your replies.

Interesting, thank you. So my uncle (and all of us I suppose) are effectively paying for a service that isn't guaranteed?


Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

That's correct.

They pay a very large amount of money for a business connection with an extremely quick turn around service should an issue be detected.

TadleyBaggie said:

Radicalrooster said:

Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

They will have a B2B contract that specifies a Service Level Agreement (SLA), in that there will an agreement on what happens when the service is down. This is why they will £1000's for their connection and not £22.99 or so.

Many will also have a backup connection to mitigate service loss.

The current BT Halo 3 product can have a EE 4G connection in case of broadband loss, but you pay a premium.

Ergates said:

Radicalrooster said:

An interesting one for you...

My elderly uncle has a user-installed home security system. It is made up of cameras and sensors and works via an app. I can login to the app and check the internal CCTV to make sure he is ok.

The alarm system relies on an internet connection, since the equipment connects via Wifi.

It does have a 3G backup system should the internet dropout, however this is purely for the alarm. I cannot view the CCTV if the broadband drops out.

Unfortunately, his Virgin Media broadband hasn't been the most reliable lately, and so when the internet goes down, so does his CCTV.

This makes me wonder - If anything were to happen, who would be liable?

For example - Say he were to be burgled and CCTV evidence not be recorded because the internet was down, who's fault is it?

Speaking to the security manufacturer, they said that if the internet goes down, it's the fault of the ISP.

Speaking with Virgin Media, they refuse to take any responsibility what so ever.

If something stops working because a service stops working, does the fault not lie with that service provider?

Not looking to start an argument or rant, just looking for any advice on whether Virgin's claims are true.

A couple of points here.   I (obviously) don't know the details of the particular CCTV system installed at your uncle's house, but many IP cctv systems will have local storage that is connected to the cameras via the premises' internal network.  This means that if the internet (i.e. connection to the wider world) goes down, the cameras still work.  It just means you cannot log in and monitor them remotely.  So, is it definitely the case that your uncles system does not have this?

Secondly - if it is absolutely critical that your uncle's house maintains internet connectivity at all times, then you should not be relying on a simple domestic broadband supply.  There are systems with levels of redundancy in place that can kick in if the broadband drops out.  The simplest of these involves a 4g/5g backup (i.e. it switches to the mobile network) - but whether that is an option depends on where your uncle lives (as, obviously, you need 4g/5g coverage).   There are other options, but they are significantly more expensive and not really intended for domestic use).

Virgin Media are correct though - they did not offer their system has having 100% reliability and/or as being suitable for running a security system.

I saw the BT product advertised (such a shame we have such poor infrastructure that a company has to offer two connections incase their main service goes down - As a consumer it almost makes me think 'is your service likely to go down then?!) but thus far it doesn't seem like Virgin offer this.

I am guessing it's not easy/possible to setup my own backup connection?

Unfortunately the CCTV doesn't have a secondary hard drive. It records 'to the cloud' which of course requires internet.

So really my only options are to find a more reliable (but potentially slower) connection.


Another thought out of interest - Is this lack of reliability down to our infrastructure in the UK or is 'the internet' in general just not very reliable globally?

MattMattMattUK

Radicalrooster said:

Understood - But does that mean as a consumer I shouldn't be reliant on their service? I understand when they mention stats in their terms such as '99% up time' but where does that leave me as a consumer that requires something reliable?

As a consumer you have a choice, accept their 99% (usually higher) uptime threshold, or have a backup solution.

Radicalrooster said:

Slightly off topic but this got me wondering - How do big companies that rely on an internet connection for business, or indeed security, manage to cope?

It depends on the business and how impactful their internet connection being down would be. Many will have multiple provisions anyway. If I took my largest client, their London office has a primary connection which is a dedicated high bandwidth line (I don't know how much, but I suspect several Gbps), that is provisioned over two separate fibre cables coming in from two different connections (so the chance of both being severed by a digger is fairly low), they have a primary backup from BT which would support a limited provision in their office (no video calls, streaming etc.) and a secondary satellite backup which covers critical systems and users. Data centres will have even more, multiple different fibre optic connections, UPS systems, backup mass storage battery systems and/or generators as well as a backup admin link provided by satellite in case there is a problem with local networking provision.

At the SME I used to run we had a fibre primary and a ADSL backup. I run my own business now and having broadband to the office is not critical as all servers are cloud based and if the office fibre went down then we could just tether. If broadband was critical I would probably consider Starlink as a secondary, which goes live in the UK in a few months.