Donate SIGN UP

Verisure Security

Avatar Image
renegadefm | 18:09 Wed 03rd Apr 2024 | Law
29 Answers

Last year we had Verisure Security system added because someone was going round damaging cars, so we decided to add cameras at the back and front of the house, especially as I work night shifts, it makes my partner feel safer too. 


So the front camera monitors the front of our property and our car parked on the road which was what we wanted to catch any criminal activity. 


Then my partner went out to our car this morning, and there was a nasty dig on the bumper, so checked back through the security footage, and it looks like a car did hit it, but drove off, but the clarity of the footage was very poor, you couldn't even make out the colour of the car that drove off. 


So we took the footage into our local Police station thinking they might be able to investigate further, but they said without clear dash cam footage they can't do anything. 


They went onto explain that did we realise having personal security like Verisure means if your filming a public area or road isn't allowed by law. 


So I said but surely if it makes us feel more secure and catches criminal activity it's in our and the polices interest. They said they kind of agree, but the reality is it's not concidered legal to film part of a street. 


Shops can do it, but apparently you need a licence. 


So why are we encouraged to have home security, Verisure is always advertised on the tv for example. But if it's no legal it doesn't make sense having it. 


Am I missing something here? 



1 to 20 of 29rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by renegadefm. 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.

Is this of interest? -

Question Author

Lie-in King, 

That link doesn't work or open anything. 

I have cameras all around my property but they only record up to the boundaries, not the public highway nor my neighbours', expect for my next door neighbour who wants me to record her front drive.

I know it is illegal to record outside my boundaries but it is legal for me to view a wider area live.


The link works for me 

So why do police appeal for doorbell evidence (or dashcam evidence) when investigating crime ?

A dash cam is legal, it is legal to film other road users.

A home camera is legal if it records your own property.  The police know that people don't bother to use the ring fence to limit the scope of the recording but will only take action if someone complains, such as a neighbour who feels spied on.


Question Author



Exactly, it doesn't make sense does it?


First thing the police would say is have you got any footage as evidence. 


I said that to them today, I said surely some footage is better than non. 


But no they just said its not legal to film an area of a public place. 


We are not deliberately filming the public, it's just our front and where the car is parked. Although you do see the public walking past our house. But that has proven very helpful in the past. We have had parcel's just left on our door step when we have been out, so we rang our neighbour to bring it in. 

Question Author



I see what you mean. 

We are not filming anyone as such, it's just where we park our car. 


The Verisure guy set it all up and said its fine. 

yes you made the mistake that the police are here to help you. They arent

Some good  posts here - you should be covered to detect criminal activity - and as far as I can see, you should register with the ICO ( I do, as I keep peoples names ( their data) on my computer).

The police saying you arent allowed to do this and that - you misunderstood what they were saying or they mistook the law - but hey dont  worry ! it was just an excuse to do nothing.

er and that is just about it

renny - this covered by the ICO - office of the information commissioner and the URl another poster has given

you can CCTV your drive and it can encroach on the road

( law changed: you werent allowed to - but  the ICO had thousands and thousands of complaints so made it lawful)

bit odd I agree to say 

"here is video of a crime which I video'd in order to prevent it"

and for the answer to be - "oh you are not  allowed to do that."

at least you know then they are gonna do diddly squat

This guy knows his law:;fl=&pid=2767

Here's what he has to say about the matter under discussion here:

CHRIS, the ICO disagrees.


"The use of recording equipment, such as CCTV or smart door bells, to capture video or sound recordings outside the user’s property boundary is not a breach of data protection law.  

People should try to point their CCTV cameras away from their neighbours’ homes and gardens, shared spaces or public streets. But this is not always possible.

When people capture images and audio recordings outside of their property boundary, they should consider how intrusive this activity is. They should consider whether they can point their cameras elsewhere or, if possible apply filters or privacy blocks. In these circumstances, data protection law also requires them to follow certain rules – although these are difficult to enforce." [emphasis added]



That's actually stated in the video!

CHRIS, I watched up to the point he  said, "If they say you're not breaking the law by filming someone outside of the property, they're wrong. You can be breaking the law."

That appears to be at odds with the ICO stating, "video or sound recordings outside the user’s property boundary is not a breach of data protection law. 

Viewing those links, it's a minefield. I sometimes think the lawmakers are deliberately making ambiguous laws so that lawyers can trouser enormous fees when poor old Joe Public gets caught out.  Interpreting/arguing the word "reasonable" has no doubt made many a barrister very rich. 

I think that unless they were investigating a crime which I reported I would deny police access to any stuff I've recorded on the grounds that it is [quote] not the purpose for which I obtained it [unquote].

A commercial company usually encourages potential customers to buy their product or service.


Thought it was well known that you can't film outside your property. Probably data protection act or something similar. But many do, which can prove useful on occassion, if you get away with it. Not that anyone would suggest you break any laws.

“They went onto explain that did we realise having personal security like Verisure means if your filming a public area or road isn't allowed by law.”

Which illustrates perfectly why you should never, ever take legal advice from a serving police officer.

so what about all the cameras in the high st? Are they illegal then?

No, they are registered with the necessary agencies and have systems in place to comply with data protection laws.

Plod are wrong.  Do this, as per ICO rules and you will be fine:

1, tell people that they are using recording equipment;

2. in most circumstances, provide some of the recording if asked by a person whose images have been captured;

3.regularly or automatically delete footage;

4. in most circumstances, delete recordings of people if they ask; and

5. stop recording a person if they object to being recorded, but only if it is possible to do so. For example, if they can point the camera in a different direction but still use it for the same purposes, eg keeping their property safe.

1 to 20 of 29rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Verisure Security

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.