Tools Of Any Trade In A Song, Fun!
ChatterBank1 min ago
Cctv & The Law
2 Answers
Afternoon all, hope everyone is enjoying the start to the bank holiday weekend?
I need help with a potential issue in the HMO that I currently live in.
My landlord has CCTV installed in the house being downstairs in the communal hall and also in the backyard which I believe not only covers the yard itself but also the neighbouring properties.
There is no signage stating that cctv is in operation and I am lead to believe that the landlord hasn't registered with the ICO due to the cctv covering neighbouring properties.
So my question would be, is my landlord breaking the law?
Thanks In advance
I need help with a potential issue in the HMO that I currently live in.
My landlord has CCTV installed in the house being downstairs in the communal hall and also in the backyard which I believe not only covers the yard itself but also the neighbouring properties.
There is no signage stating that cctv is in operation and I am lead to believe that the landlord hasn't registered with the ICO due to the cctv covering neighbouring properties.
So my question would be, is my landlord breaking the law?
Thanks In advance
Answers
1 to 2 of 2
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chrisuk013. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The law (or, rather, the interpretation of it) keeps changing in this respect.
The Data Protection Registrar originally ruled that the use of CCTV on domestic premises fell within the scope of the Data Protection Act, thus requiring all home owners (and landlords performing a similar role) using CCTV to register with his office.
Then a test case before the courts reversed that ruling, so that the Information Commissioner (as the DPR had morphed into by then) said that domestic CCTV systems weren't covered by the Act (irrespective of the areas actually covered by the cameras).
Since then the ruling has changed yet again, so that there is a requirement to register domestic CCTV systems when the cameras cover areas beyond the relevant premises. (That creates a strange anomaly, whereby it's perfectly legal to stand at a window, or on the roof of your house, with a hand held camera and record the movements of your neighbours, or of passers-by in the streets, but it becomes illegal if you use a fixed CCTV system to do so without good cause).
This link probably answers your question better than I can though:
https:/
The Data Protection Registrar originally ruled that the use of CCTV on domestic premises fell within the scope of the Data Protection Act, thus requiring all home owners (and landlords performing a similar role) using CCTV to register with his office.
Then a test case before the courts reversed that ruling, so that the Information Commissioner (as the DPR had morphed into by then) said that domestic CCTV systems weren't covered by the Act (irrespective of the areas actually covered by the cameras).
Since then the ruling has changed yet again, so that there is a requirement to register domestic CCTV systems when the cameras cover areas beyond the relevant premises. (That creates a strange anomaly, whereby it's perfectly legal to stand at a window, or on the roof of your house, with a hand held camera and record the movements of your neighbours, or of passers-by in the streets, but it becomes illegal if you use a fixed CCTV system to do so without good cause).
This link probably answers your question better than I can though:
https:/
erm I dont think it is that complicated
for a start you are not domestic
you are paying a contract
this ALMOST covers you
https:/
and you can decide whether you fit or not
however you are a passerby or user and so for example you should be able to demand the CCTV you are on - hence the need for signage. So there isnt a law for signage but you and others should have access to an address to apply for footage
for you - is this legal blah-de-blah or does this sort of thing make sense ?
You can very sensibly ask ( the landlord ) what he is doing with the info, and what his retention policy is.
also the use he is making of it
and why not try - you think he should be registered with the ICO why isnt he?
THEN having thoroughly irritated him, you complain specifically to the ICO using the internet form they have ....
good luck
this is more than a bank holiday suck
GDPR has made the regs bite harder against the CCTV users
it is not really a case of the regs say this - oh oops they say that now - oops nope they say the other....
yeah if you are being recorded I think you have every right to say
what is all this about then?
for a start you are not domestic
you are paying a contract
this ALMOST covers you
https:/
and you can decide whether you fit or not
however you are a passerby or user and so for example you should be able to demand the CCTV you are on - hence the need for signage. So there isnt a law for signage but you and others should have access to an address to apply for footage
for you - is this legal blah-de-blah or does this sort of thing make sense ?
You can very sensibly ask ( the landlord ) what he is doing with the info, and what his retention policy is.
also the use he is making of it
and why not try - you think he should be registered with the ICO why isnt he?
THEN having thoroughly irritated him, you complain specifically to the ICO using the internet form they have ....
good luck
this is more than a bank holiday suck
GDPR has made the regs bite harder against the CCTV users
it is not really a case of the regs say this - oh oops they say that now - oops nope they say the other....
yeah if you are being recorded I think you have every right to say
what is all this about then?
1 to 2 of 2
