CCTV legal rights question

[mikemack00]

First of sorry for posting here, but I don't have access to 'CCTV' forum yet.

I live in a detached house that has been divided in two, downstairs is flat 1 and upstairs is flat 2. The drive way is owned by me, but the downstairs flat have right of access across the driveway to their flat.

Can I put up cctv cameras out side, looking down my driveway?

Cheers for your advice.

Mike

 

[GrahamBrighton]

As long as it's attached to your bricks and mortar and your not intruding on someones privacy, it should be fine.. Although if you dont own the property outright and/or its a leasehold, you may need leaseholders/owners consent to attach the camera?

 

[tazz]

A simple sign saying CCTV in operation, is a legal statement. This is why you see them in the shops, carparks and businesses.

 

[chrish_1977]

And make sure it doesn't point on to any public paths etc as you have to satisfy the data protection act then

 

[tazz]

and next doors bathroom

 

[Spoon]

And make sure it doesn't point on to any public paths etc as you have to satisfy the data protection act then

Just out of curiosity, does that mean that if I wanted to have a CCTV camera looking over my car parked at the front of the house I then have to 'satisfy the data protection act' as it is also looking over the pavement (which I would class as a public path)?

 

[Robson689]

You don't need permission to record on public property or your own private property. You don't need to put warning signs up either, there is no law against filming someone in public without permission. We have 4 cameras which record around our property and the street/road outside. The police recommended they were pointed there so no issues!

 

[snowhead]

It's not recording that's the problem, it's what you do with the video after.
If you don't publish it or give open access to it there is no problem.

 

[Adam W]

It might be worth mentioning it to the people who live in the flat below, since they might not be able to access their property without you recording their movements. If it's for their security as well they probably wouldn't have a problem with it, but some people get funny about stuff like that.

 

[tazz]

You don't need permission to record on public property or your own private property. You don't need to put warning signs up either, there is no law against filming someone in public without permission. We have 4 cameras which record around our property and the street/road outside. The police recommended they were pointed there so no issues!

Under the data protection act cover cctv 1988 the following must be complied with

• By law, there has to be a person or organisation responsible for the scheme
• The appropriateness and reasons for using CCTV need be established.
• The purpose of the scheme must be notified to the Data Protection Commissioner.
• Operators of the scheme need to be made aware of the purpose, and can only use it for that purpose.
• The equipment must be limited to cover only those areas designated.
• Operators should not be able to adjust or manipulate cameras to cover areas not declared as part of the scheme.
• If it is not possible to restrict camera coverage of unauthorised areas, operators are required to be properly trained to recognise the privacy implications of covering such areas.
• Signs should be placed to warn that the public are entering an area covered by CCTV.
• The signs should be clearly visible and legible and will vary in size according to circumstances.
• Signs should give the identity of the person or organisation responsible for the scheme, contact details and the purpose of the scheme.
• It is permitted in extreme circumstances not to have signs, but this rule is subject to stringent conditions.
• Information obtained by CCTV is only to be used for prevention or detection of criminal activity, or the apprehension and prosecution of offenders. It should not be used for any other purpose.
• It is not permitted to make sound recordings of any person without their knowledge.

 

[snowhead]

From ico.org,,

Some uses of CCTV are not covered by the Data Protection Act; for example, the use of cameras for limited household purposes (such as to protect a home from burglary) - even if the camera overlooks the street (for more information on this, see our FAQ).

 

[tazz]

Good link Snowhead, and as this link also states, making people aware, I would still suggest a sign to cover you.

 

[monkeyelectric]

Have a read and register here whoiswatchingme.org

 

[chrish_1977]

A company I did CCTV with, always had to register the systems we installed with data protection as they looked onto public highways etc, and also had to make the system block out certain areas of the screen, neighbours bathrooms schools etc

 

[tazz]

Have a read and register here whoiswatchingme.org

Another good link

 

[pjcomp]

A company I did CCTV with, always had to register the systems we installed with data protection as they looked onto public highways etc, and also had to make the system block out certain areas of the screen, neighbours bathrooms schools etc

What a company does can be for various reasons. It could be law, it could be company practice, it could be a requirement of a trade body to which they belong, it could be something imposed by a customer once and adopted as company policy ever after. Look at all the nonsense passed off as "health and safety" which is not actually H&S law and you can see how these things can get out of control. We can all be guilty of getting something in our heads as "law" through some level of misunderstanding when in fact it's nothing of the sort.

PJ

 

[Knobhead]

There was a case in New York that set a worldwide legal precedent.

If a photograph is used outside the context it was intended for, the photographer is liable to prosecution.
The photographer should inform people of their intension to take a photograph. A prominent notice fulfils this.

Where things fell apart was a social photographer asking a happy couple if they would mind him taking a photograph for a publicity brochure. They agreed thinking it was something to do with NY city.

The photograph appeared with the caption:
“Someone near you may have AIDS”

 

[Adam W]

How do they get away with programmes such as 'police, camera, action' if the cameras were originally intended for the purposes of crime prevention/detection then get sold to a TV company? I can't imagine the criminals giving their consent to have their misdemeanours shown on national TV.

 

[Knobhead]

Because it’s not taken out of context.

You act in a criminal manner in an area under surveillance, what do you expect?

 

[MDJ]

First of sorry for posting here, but I don't have access to 'CCTV' forum yet.

I live in a detached house that has been divided in two, downstairs is flat 1 and upstairs is flat 2. The drive way is owned by me, but the downstairs flat have right of access across the driveway to their flat.

Can I put up cctv cameras out side, looking down my driveway?

Cheers for your advice.

Mike

Ring the police and ask, I did before installing mine

 

[Adam W]

There's a bit on their website, but it seems to be aimed mainly at homeowners rather than installers:
CCTV Systems

This seems like a handy website:
CCTV Installation - CCTV Information

There's a section on the data protection act here:
A Guide to Complying with Current Legislation - CCTV Information

 

[ian.settle1]

You don't need permission to record on public property or your own private property. You don't need to put warning signs up either, there is no law against filming someone in public without permission. We have 4 cameras which record around our property and the street/road outside. The police recommended they were pointed there so no issues!

Remember when I worked at Liverpool City Council we where informed by the council legal department if we didn't then put the signs up then should any tape be used in court as evidence then the defence could ask for it not to be inadmissable due to no signage was inplace stating that CCTV was in use.

 

[PEG]

Put em' up,don't worry too much,Google never asked my permission for jack....

 

[FrankUK]

Under the data protection act cover cctv 1988 the following must be complied with

• By law, there has to be a person or organisation responsible for the scheme
• The appropriateness and reasons for using CCTV need be established.
• The purpose of the scheme must be notified to the Data Protection Commissioner.
• Operators of the scheme need to be made aware of the purpose, and can only use it for that purpose.
• The equipment must be limited to cover only those areas designated.
• Operators should not be able to adjust or manipulate cameras to cover areas not declared as part of the scheme.
• If it is not possible to restrict camera coverage of unauthorised areas, operators are required to be properly trained to recognise the privacy implications of covering such areas.
• Signs should be placed to warn that the public are entering an area covered by CCTV.
• The signs should be clearly visible and legible and will vary in size according to circumstances.
• Signs should give the identity of the person or organisation responsible for the scheme, contact details and the purpose of the scheme.
• It is permitted in extreme circumstances not to have signs, but this rule is subject to stringent conditions.
• Information obtained by CCTV is only to be used for prevention or detection of criminal activity, or the apprehension and prosecution of offenders. It should not be used for any other purpose.
• It is not permitted to make sound recordings of any person without their knowledge.

I think this only applies to business premises. The rules are different for domestic premises.

 

[Adam W]

I heard somewhere there has to be a certain distance between cameras, ie you can't have a big bunch of them around one corner.