CCTV being used in communal areas and threatened with court action

abcan

Hello and thanks in advance for any advice.
I live in a leasehold flat which has a large communal deck. All the flats (maisonettes) open onto the deck and the whole thing is built on top of a market hall.
lots of the residents have kids (younger ages 1-9) and when the weather is good there can be groups of maybe 4-8 children playing outside, parents are always closely supervising the children (there is a sex offender living in the complex)
The kids play from 4-7 pm at the latest. Not every day or every weekend but maybe 1/4 nights. We have estate rules from the landlord which say things like we can’t have pets (there are) we can’t hang out washing (there is) and one rule is children can’t play in the communal area. (We are inner city our closest green space is about 10 min walk) so the majority of us still let the kids play. 

A resident today witnessed the caretaker of the building using his phone to take pictures of the kids playing and another also saw him photograph the cctv screen. The caretaker told a resident that the building manager is going to take the residents to court who are letting their kids play. I didn’t know they are filming the deck- I’m not sure they are allowed to do that with GDPR nor take photos. I’m happy enough to wait for the court letter as I believe my household insurance legal cover would support me in arguing that since they are only choosing to enforce one of the rules they are discriminating against the children.- why not go after the washing people or pet owners? 
But what about the cctv of the children? And the photos being taken and stored? Is this legal? What can I  do about this?
I will also add we each pay £2400 service charge and £300 ground rent every year and we all feel justified in using the deck considering we pay so much for it. We also look after the communal area and our elderly neighbours. It’s a lovely community.    

FreeBear

Generally speaking, if the area is a public space, there is no restrictions on taking photographs or using CCTV. That said, there are restrictions on what you can do with the images after the event. Posting on a public forum or publishing the images in a magazine/newsletter could require the consent of all those in each image.

The GDPR is not as far reaching as many think, nor is there any laws/protections (with respect to privacy) when in public spaces. So your first step is to establish if this communal area is a public space or private.

simon_or

OP, the likelihood of a managing agent or a freeholder taking court action to stop residents' children playing in the communal areas is negligible to say the least.

Jonboy_1984

This sounds similar to the shops with flats and car park on top round the corner from my parents house. 

The 6-11 year olds playing on the car park with parents out sipping wine and gossiping was lovely….three years or so later when they started to “acquire” mini-moto’s/stolen mopeds and a penchant for setting fire to the shop bins whilst screaming, shouting abuse, smoking and drinking with their mates it became a different story. It cost the leaseholders hundreds in extra charges as security fences etc were installed around the shop service yard at their expense and repairs to light fittings etc were needed on a weekly basis.

It took around 5 years to regain control and get it back to a civil area.

BobT36

Taking pictures / CCTV to use as evidence for enforcing existing rules will absolutely be considered "reasonable use" under GDPR. 

silvercar

“ one rule is children can’t play in the communal area.” I would consider that an unfair contract term. Saying children need to be supervised is one thing, saying they can’t play in a communal area strikes me as unenforceable.

CSI_Yorkshire

silvercar said:

“ one rule is children can’t play in the communal area.” I would consider that an unfair contract term. Saying children need to be supervised is one thing, saying they can’t play in a communal area strikes me as unenforceable.

That certainly would be interesting to test - I would expect that most of the reasons they might try to give, supervision would be considered an appropriate mitigation.

eddddy

silvercar said:

“ one rule is children can’t play in the communal area.” I would consider that an unfair contract term. Saying children need to be supervised is one thing, saying they can’t play in a communal area strikes me as unenforceable.

I'm not so sure. It's very standard for lease covenants to be very specific about what communal areas can be used for. (e.g. just for walking across to gain access to flats, etc.)

The legal argument would probably be that the OP had the opportunity to read the lease (and get advice from their solicitor) before buying the leasehold flat. And if the OP didn't like the terms of the lease, they shouldn't have bought it.


And the fact that the landlord is planning enforcement action suggests that another leaseholder has complained that it's causing them annoyance.

Landlords don't generally take enforcement action for no reason.

eddddy

abcan said:

I’m happy enough to wait for the court letter as I believe my household insurance legal cover would support me...

A dispute between a Freeholder and Leaseholder would be classed as a dispute between a Landlord and Tenant - so it's likely that it won't be covered by your household insurance legal cover.

abcan said:

The caretaker told a resident that the building manager is going to take the residents to court who are letting their kids play. 

Unfortunately, in reality, the law is weighted towards the freeholder/landlord.  it will probably play out something like this...

• Your freeholder will send you a letter telling you not to breach your lease. The freeholder might add an admin fee of around £30 to £50 to your service charge - to cover the cost of sending the letter.

• Your freeholder will send you a 2nd letter telling you not to breach your lease. The freeholder is very likely to add an admin fee of around £30 to £50 to your service charge - to cover the cost of sending the letter.

• Your freeholder will instruct a solicitor. The solicitor will send you a letter telling you not to breach your lease, and threatening to forfeit your lease (i.e.repossess your flat). The freeholder will add solicitor's fees of around £200 to £400 to your service charge

• Your freeholder's solicitor will serve a Section 146 notice on you saying that they intend to forfeit your lease (repossess your flat). That might be another £200 to £400 on your service charge.

So that might even reach £1000 in admin charges added to your service charge.

• You'll get the opportunity to go to tribunal to argue that you're not breaching the lease

• If the tribunal agrees with you, you can challenge the £1000 in Admin Charges and probably get it back

• If the tribunal doesn't agree with you, you'll have to pay the £1000 in Admin Charges

• If you then stop breaching the lease, the enforcement action would stop. If you continue to breach the lease, in theory, you could lose your flat - but it's unlikely a court would agree to that. More likely, you'll just keep racking up more fees.

 

Ms_Chocaholic

I know on the beach some parents allow their children to run around with very little or no clothing on at all, I presume that the parents of the children concerned ensured their children were dressed due to the sex offender living nearby but if they did (due to the extremely hot weather) and the children have been photographed then that is illegal.

MalMonroe

I'd be looking for somewhere else to live asap, for two reasons -
 
'There is a sex offender living in the complex'

and 

'we each pay £2400 service charge and £300 ground rent every year'

You say,  'we also look after the communal area and our elderly neighbours. It’s a lovely community.'

I'm 73 so I guess you'd call me elderly. But I don't need looking after by any neighbours.

Sorry but it really does not sound like a lovely community.  Containing creeps and sex offenders?   No.