To film..or not to film
 

.......So there this guy in Islington, North London and he is getting fed up with his motorbike being vandalised on a regular basis whilst being parked out on the street.

The police are unhelpful and in fact last time he reported damage he was told that the "police do not normally investigate such trivial matters." This "trivial" matter has so far cost him £3,500-00 in repairs!

So he buys a video camera to record activities around the bike, the vandals see the camera so they leave the bike alone.......A Result!!!!!

That is until he is visited by the law and was told that because the camera was overlooking the street, he was breaking the law. Apparently, it breaches the Data Protection Act and that means that members of the public including the yobs who were causing the damage to his bike could sue him for "invasion of Privacy" under the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act.

As my Avatar suggests, it is an uphill struggle all the way!!

The P.C. Brigade strike again!!:mad: :mad:

Re: To film..or not to film
 

It just goes to show that you are better off causing criminal damage and committing theft, than trying to protect your property. Property that you have paid for out of your hard-earned money.

Re: To film..or not to film
 

How cwuel of the nasty man to photograph the vandals - but of course, they have RIGHTS! Funny how the law-abiding amongst us don't, isn't it?

Re: To film..or not to film
 

I would contest that one, cause he was protecting his own property, his bike the fact that it was in the street don't matter it is his property.
Similar problem. Car parked in street, wing mirrors kicked off by yobs. CCTV camera from house focused on car in street. 3 yobs on bikes, wing mirrors kicked off again, whole thing recorded on tape. Police phoned, crime number given, followed by visit morning after, PC views tape, and asks can I take that with me, someone at the station may know the yobs, tape returned later in week, no problems.Think the PC involved in the above incident needs to check the DPA. Information can be found here
http://www.informationcommissioner.g...l.aspx?id=5739
or phone data protection help line 01625 545745, explain what he's doing and ask their advice.

Re: To film..or not to film
 

What the guy did to protect his property did not contravene the Data Protection Act.
The police who told him that it did were wrong and have had to apologise to him. You are right Park... you are entitled to protect your own property!

Re: To film..or not to film
 

Oh, and Busman......love your new avatar!

Re: To film..or not to film
 

The Neighbourhood Watch in Ossy has cameras trained on the Park, with Police knowledge!
Also on the 'Ossygobbin' photo site, there are pics of yobs vandalising the War Memorial. Hope the little darlings can't read they might sue.

Re: To film..or not to film
 

the only thing the public is entitles to is a copy of any recordings with their image on it so if i was on the video walking by his house i would be witing my rights to have a copy made free of charge but i could not sue for invasion of privacy

Re: To film..or not to film
 

Re: To film..or not to film
 

I'm saying nothing until l've spoken to my lawyer, before l end up in trouble [again!]

Re: To film..or not to film
 

Re: To film..or not to film
 

the way the laws are today you could also get accused of much worse

i think i better make it clear i am not saying anyone is but in todays world filming a park where children play could get you in trouble especialy if you were to get a vindictive parent with nothing better to do than try and claim some money or somthing

hell you cant even film or photograph your own children these days without having to think realy hard if it can get you in trouble or not

i personaly think all parks should be monitored by cctv and anyone caught urinating on or vandalising property especialy property children playon should be slung in jail or find a minimum of £1000

Re: To film..or not to film
 

I find it laughable that this is the age of the CCTV in the streets to assist police in preventing crime or to help apprehend criminals, Shops and warehouses all over the country have cameras that overlook entrances to their premises.......and if it wasn't for the sleepy security guards at Buck house, you would be observed on the pavement before you attempted to climb a wall!

I would say that it is virtually impossible to put one foot down in Oxford St, London without being captured on camera, and yet this guy is being penalised for protecting his own property.

If he has a tape in his possession that shows various people walking past his home, does it matter? What could he possibly do with that information!

How many snapshots are taken daily that show passers-by in the background! What about the media that take photos of stars and celebrities? Sheryl Crow was photographed changing during a photo shoot and the News of the World probably paid thousands to get the rights to a photo that certainly wasn't stage-managed. Now THAT is what I call "Invasion of Privacy!" not the poor sod that wants to protect his property from vandalism.

(Sorry Sheryl for showing your picture, it is only to make a point)

Re: To film..or not to film
 

Re: To film..or not to film
 

i was thinking of twin peaks myself :)