Video Cameras

[pixie374]

Could anyone please tell me- is it legal in the UK to film someone in their own home, without their knowledge or agreement?
Thank you.... x

[barry1010]

Pixie, sandy is referring to cases like this dreadful report in today's Mail. Many carers have been caught abusing their charges by covert cameras https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10485725/Care-worker-48-jailed-life-caught-raping-99-year-old-dementia-patient.html

[pixie374]

I know, Barry.... and the camera didn't stop it, did it? It just provided an audience.
Thanks pp... x

[barry1010]

But he would probably have got away with it without the camera.
I have cameras in my home that I don't tell workmen about.

[pixie374]

Personally, I would rather he got away with it, than have my family watching. Not her problem to catch him.
However, this is nothing to do with suspected abuse at all.

[pixie374]

She made it quite clear to them- without cameras.

[barry1010]

I can't believe you said that, Pixie. Some poor souls suffer long term abuse because their carers get away with it and nobody should be raped or get away with it.

Anyway, back to your situation. Any idea how the cameras were planted?

[pixie374]

Barry, I don't think abusing someone, with the aim of preventing more, is the answer. She was scared and unhappy. Move her. Don't wait and film it!
Yes, by the daughter.

[THECORBYLOON]

I'm a wee bit confused, who installed the cameras?

[sandyRoe]

Peter Pedant,
In a situation where the vulnerable person couldn't give consent?

[pixie374]

TCL, her daughter.

[pixie374]

Not for me and my sister (carers). We have been there over 10 years, 3x daily- and she asked us to turn them off when we arrive, and on when we leave.
This lady is not prone to falls (can't guarantee, of course) and if she did, a camera wouldn't stop her or get anyone to her quicker.

[Peter Pedant]

The claim was for unlawful covert surveillance in breach of his right to respect for his private and family life and his home under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) and section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (the 1998 Act). The Tribunal ruled that, as the case related to the use of Private Investigators to undertake directed surveillance in relation to an employment dispute, no public interest would be served by giving the Tribunal exclusive jurisdiction over such a case. ""

seems always to come back to the usual 4

[pixie374]

Thank you, pp x the usual 4?

[Peter Pedant]

AM I right
Mrs X is vulnerable and disabled, Mrs X's daughter has put in cameras, to video carers ( you)
Mrs X doesnt know but asks you to turn the cameras on and off

Do you have any come-back - no they have obviously been put in to forestall criminal activity

[Peter Pedant]

Human rights act
data protection
regulation of investigation

[barry1010]

So if the lady asks you to turn them off she knows about them. If she objected she could turn them off or unplug them, or ask you to leave them switched off.
So who is it that doesn't know they are being recorded?

[pixie374]

Not quite, pp. The client doesn't know at all (dementia). The daughter asked us to turn them off and then on- she knows she trusts us.
We are both uncomfortable, with having someone constantly filmed, who doesn't know. Drummed into us from Day 1, as you probably know... dignity, privacy, confidentiality....

Don't get me wrong, on occasions, we don't go by "the book", if common sense says otherwise. A luxury in homecare.
But, there is no benefit here, just a massive invasion of privacy...