[Closed] Neighbours pointing CCTV up my back passage?

This might be useful:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/14/amazon-asks-ring-owners-to-respect-privacy-after-court-rules-usage-broke-law

As I understand it if they are filming anything gother than their own property then that just isn't on. No need to register a domestic system with the ICO though if it isn't pointing at anywhere the public might be.
.
Although it could be useful evidence for you in the event a dispute with them, or a burglary at your house or whatever. Is it just the path it covers or can it see the garden too?

Yep, that recently case should cover it.

Ladder, tip it up skyways, they'll soon get bored. And no they can't have a private unregistered camera capturing public land.

Any way you can talk to them or will it just end with them being dicks?

This is a really elaborate humblebrag about living right by the beach. Nice work!

It's not banned, but apparently you do need signage to inform people they are being recorded, and there are various GDPR provisions on retention/processing of personal data in terms of any images they take.

To play devil's advocate, this lad might be worthy of a bit of slack-cutting, but if someone living next door was lobbing vodka bottles over my fence, with police and ambulance turning up regularly, I might have some legitimate security concerns. Do they know the context for his behaviour, or might they just think they potentially have a nightmare neighbour?

In other words, talk to them about it.

Is talking to them just going to go badly? Like martinhutch, I sympathize with your tenant's son, but throwing bottles over the place isn't cool either, but CCTV seems a bit OTT

1x bottle , once . Its not like its a daily occurance.
He's suicidal , having hallucinations , weird mood swings , prone to staggingly bad decision making .
And no, Im not on speaking terms with them .
The angle re adjustment is probably the easiset way to go , it will be on a gimball most likely.

@grum

That’s a bit unfair

Neighbours pointing CCTV up my back passage - Surely want to watch your cumming and 'goings'

I suspect tampering with the camera will only escalate the situation. And he'll have footage of you doing it.

Is there a neutral neighbour/mate who could raise your concerns on your behalf and explain the tenants situation if needed?

Info on this situation here. Options given are speak to them, or involve the police if the camera is being used for harassment (as in that Oxfordshire case).

https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/domestic-cctv-systems-guidance-for-people-being-filmed/

Get an officer of the law to visit.. Go and show them them the offending camera, and make sure that the camera records that it's being pointed at and discussed. They might get the message

but CCTV seems a bit OTT

Doubt you can alter the angle, normally adjusted from the inside and then locked before mounting.

Is the path your property or shared access etc? Agree that an intermediary is probably the best approach.

Although it could be useful evidence for you in the event a dispute with them

"Hi, I'm about to enter into a dispute with you, could you provide me with the security footage which will incriminate you please?"

When I set up CCTV cameras at our yard (fairly basic system bought by the boss) it was very easy to add block out sections of the picture on the DVR, such as neighbors windows. You could ask to see the images if it does point at the passage and ask to block them.

So, you haven't even spoken to them to explain why your tenants' son is behaving erratically?

It might be easier for your tenants to cope with their son having a mental health crisis if the neighbours understood the situation and weren't freaking out over it.

As their landlord, it's something you can help them with.

In answer to the OP:

You don't have a right not to be filmed or photographed except in specific circumstances, sorry. Ask any paparazzi photographer. You might have an argument if they were peeping through your curtains, but if you're just walking past your house then not so much.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, I'm not entirely sure why you'd care. What do you think they're doing with the footage, sat there going "look, there he goes again! Walking! With his legs and everything!"

Moving it isn't going to do anything, they'll just move it straight back again.

The Ring doorbell case wasn't about recording, it was about excessive recording. It was picking up audio like half a block away.

https://www.amazon.com/Identity-Protection-Sunglasses-Recognition-Platforms/dp/B08CT2CDR5

1. Mount your own camera on a pole (selfie stick might work).
2. Take photo that is close to the view from the cctv.
3. Print photo on waterproof paper.
4. Mount photo on something to keep it flat.
5. Position photo in front of cctv.

or sausages/lawn while the cctv isn't watching.

That’s a bit unfair

Was meant to be a joke!

Grum.
No worries, i knew you were just joking
Sausages and a hammer would be
e ace as they have 3 x uber gay fluffy yappy lap dogs, who contend with the 6ft crocodile, life sized pirate drinking from a tankard sitting on stolen beer casks at a table inhabited by model crows
A wooden pagoda with lamps supposed to resemble flaming torches plus the worst collection of homemade tat signage i have ever seen
My driveway and parking area has become his turning area because him and his family are rubbish drivers who cant reverse within 1mtr of a wall

I'm not in agreement with Cougar. You might not have and expectation of privacy from the paparazzi, etc. On the high street but on your own pathway is a different matter.

GDPR means that they must have a purpose for the processing of your data and a legal basis for the processing that outweighs your right for the data to not be processed. The processing must also not be excessive for the purpose. If their purpose is to monitor their property then a camera monitoring your property seems excessive and I doubt they have done a legitimate interest assessment of the installation.

Get on the ICO and CCTV commissioner's website and download the various templates that they provide and ask to their their completed copies. A print out of the Daily Mail "ring doorbell 100k award" article might also focus their mind.

You could also put in a Subject Access Request for all your data, they'll soon get bored. 😀

A YouTube channel called The Black Belt Barrister has recently released a video on this due the a case in the press. Might be worth a watch for some more info. He also provides links to the court ruling in full.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1RVpQJJ_BHQ

Just ask them nicely to remove it as it is impinging your privacy, you can always state that you could fit a camera to cover that area, if they aren't covering the area that they own or is public then it's a hard one to prove they aren't breaching privacy rules, otherwise we could all just ram cameras up to spy on the neighbours.

I’m not in agreement with Cougar. You might not have and expectation of privacy from the paparazzi, etc. On the high street but on your own pathway is a different matter.

GDPR means that they must have a purpose for the processing of your data and a legal basis for the processing that outweighs your right for the data to not be processed.

Disagree all you like, the OP's path is no different from the street from a legal point of view. There are places where it is unlawful to take photographs (railway platforms for instance) but generally you have no rights not to have your photo taken.

GDPR applies to businesses not individuals, it's irrelevant here. Their neighbours aren't data processors, they're chavs with a security camera.

You could also put in a Subject Access Request for all your data, they’ll soon get bored.

More like, they'll have a good laugh at their loony neighbour and then throw it in the bin.

GDPR Recital 18:

“This Regulation does not apply to the processing of personal data by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity and thus with no connection to a professional or commercial activity."

https://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/recital-18-GDPR.htm

https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/domestic-cctv-systems-guidance-for-people-using-cctv/

Using CCTV at your home
There are many domestic CCTV systems on the market to help you protect your home. If you’re thinking of using one, you need to make sure you do so in a way that respects other people’s privacy.

If you set up your system so it captures only images within the boundary of your private domestic property (including your garden), then the data protection laws will not apply to you.

But what if your system captures images of people outside the boundary of your private domestic property – for example, in neighbours’ homes or gardens, shared spaces, or on a public footpath or a street?

Then the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA18) will apply to you, and you will need to ensure your use of CCTV complies with these laws. This guidance refers to them as the ‘data protection laws’.

Regardless of whether or not your use of CCTV falls within the data protection laws, the ICO recommends you use it responsibly to protect the privacy of others.

What does ‘private domestic property’ mean?
It means the boundary of the property (including the garden) where you live.

How can I use CCTV responsibly at my property?
You should ask yourself whether CCTV is actually the best way to improve your home security.

Think about the following questions:

Do I really need CCTV?
Are there other things I could use to protect my home, such as better lighting?
What is the most privacy-friendly way to set up the system?
What areas do I want the cameras to capture?
Can I position the cameras to avoid intruding on my neighbours’ property or any shared or public spaces?
Do I need to record the images, or is a live feed enough?
Has my CCTV system got an audio-recording facility? Audio recording is very privacy-intrusive. So in most cases where householders use CCTV, they should disable audio recording.
Think about the problem you are trying to tackle. It will usually be to safeguard you and your property against crime. Check your local police advice about crime prevention. Better locks, security lighting or an alarm system may be more effective and less expensive ways of securing your property.

If you decide to use CCTV, think about what areas need to be covered, and whether your cameras need to capture images beyond the boundary of your property. Remember, if your cameras don’t capture images beyond your boundary, the data protection laws won’t apply to you.

What is the law if my CCTV captures images of people outside my own home and garden?
If your CCTV captures images beyond your property boundary, such as your neighbours’ property or public streets and footpaths, then your use of the system is subject to the data protection laws.

This does not mean you are breaking the law. But it does mean that, as the CCTV user, you are a data controller. So you will need to comply with your legal obligations under the data protection laws.

You can still capture images, but you need to show you are doing it in ways that comply with the data protection laws and uphold the rights of the people whose images you are capturing.

What must I do if I capture images of people outside my own home and garden?
If you are capturing images beyond your property boundary, you should have a clear and justifiable reason for doing so. In particular, you will need to think why you need these images. If asked by an individual or the ICO, you will need to be able to explain your reasons, so you should write them down now. You should also write down why you think capturing the images is more important than invading the privacy of your neighbours and passers-by.

You will also need to:

Let people know you are using CCTV by putting up signs saying that recording is taking place, and why.
Ensure you don’t capture more footage than you need to achieve your purpose in using the system.
Ensure the security of the footage you capture – in other words, holding it securely and making sure nobody can watch it without good reason.
Only keep the footage for as long as you need it – delete it regularly, and when it is no longer needed.
Ensure the CCTV system is only operated in ways you intend and can’t be misused for other reasons. Anyone you share your property with, such as family members who could use the equipment, needs to know the importance of not misusing it.

You also need to make sure you respect the data protection rights of the people whose images you capture. This includes the following things:

Responding to subject access requests (SARs), if you receive any. Individuals have a right to access the personal data you hold about them, including identifiable images. They can ask you verbally or in writing. You must respond within one month and give them a copy of the data.

uber gay fluffy yappy lap dogs

How do you know the sexual orientation of their dogs? Maybe it's woke, but I think we've moved on from using 'gay' like this.

Hum.

That's self-contradictory. I need to do some digging.

It will be because your neighbour's CCTV is so open to abuse and could be considered surveillance versus the "difficulty" your neighbour might have abusing your privacy rights if they were just badly processing your contact details.

The recent 100k doorbell one is interesting as its been so badly reported by the press. The 100k is iirc a theoretical maximum fine as as someone mentioned above it was the excessive number of cameras to achieve the stated purpose and the fact they recorded the neighbour's property. I think the fact the bloke was also an arsehole about it when confronted didn't help his cause.

The OP should definitely take it up with his neighbour to get the camera shifted at the very least.

Maybe write a polite and courteous letter to the neighbour. Explain the situation, express your concerns over being filmed going to the beach? Ask if they have security concerns, explain without being too personal about the young chap ( not sure the neighbour needs to know what meds the lads is on?) be a good neighbour and look for a mutual solution.

As I said earlier simply ask them to set up privacy zones where the camera looks at your property. It's not a big ask. If its not an option, ask them to rotate it slightly.

Are you sure it's not a dummy camera?

It only looks at my property . The angle is such it cannot see the ground / path thats on his side of the fence . Its aimed down the path to record faces / top half of persons using that path.
Maybe its additional security should anyone be tempted to steal the skeleton dressed as a pirate or the Crocodile .

In that case ask for it to be moved.
In all honesty I hate that kind of thing and if talking doesn't solve it would block it's field of view if possible.
GDPR or not, you're not supposed to point CCTV outside your boundary, into others property as stated above. It was a big no when I worked in the trade many many years ago. Hence the privacy zones

The Register have a few more details about that recent cctv case
https://www.theregister.com/2021/10/13/amazon_ring_audio_recording_data_protection/

Hum.

That’s self-contradictory. I need to do some digging.

Its not contradictory as far as I can tell the ICO are quite clear, which part are you viewing as self contradictory?

The ICO page is a lot like a lot of the recent government COVID pages. A mixture of advice and law, and not making clear which is which.

Even if the camera is subject to GDPR, all the owner needs to do is give good reason for the purpose of the capturing of data. And crime prevention is a good enough reason. As long as they can also show they manage the data (recordings) appropriately and only use them for the purpose declared, as well as responding to subject access requests, they’re completely legal.

My question - is the passageway in any way open to the public, can they use it as a cut through to the beach? That would strengthen the case of the camera owner in using it for ‘crime prevention’.

The case in the papers recently was all around the camera owner using the captured film to harass the neighbour, not about actually having the cameras themselves.

Basically, don’t be a dick with what you film, and you’re on the right side of the law.

You don’t have a right not to be filmed or photographed except in specific circumstances, sorry. Ask any paparazzi photographer. You might have an argument if they were peeping through your curtains, but if you’re just walking past your house then not so much.

Um, photography on private property is a specific circumstance that requires permission of the landowner. As I understand it photography from public property of things that are on private property but can be observed from public property are a gray area. Depends exactly on the nature of the activity.

Cctv, as I understand it, on private property if it capture only that property is fine and not under data protection. If it captures things or people outside that property, even inadvertently, is subject to data protection. You can request that it be remedied, you can request any info they hold on you and you can request that they delete any footage of you.

A laser pointer ‘accidentally’ being shone into the lens could, theoretically, burn out or corrupt the CCD inside the camera.
Just saying, like…

Its not contradictory as far as I can tell the ICO are quite clear, which part are you viewing as self contradictory?

The bit I posted which states the opposite. I'm no longer sure, as I said I need to do some more digging.

Um, photography on private property is a specific circumstance that requires permission of the landowner.

"On," not "into." I think I've found it (emphasis mine):

Taking a photo of a person where they can expect privacy (inside their home or garden) is likely to be a breach of privacy laws.

Is it reasonable to "expect privacy" walking past your house? I don't know.

On,” not “into.” I think I’ve found it (emphasis mine

Yeah, that's where the gray area comes in. Taking a picture of something that can be seen from the footpath is generally okay. Taking pictures specifically into a front window is less so, although technically not an offence if it's a one off.

Setting up a chair, tripod, lense the size of a cannon and taking photos of a side passage every hour of everyday would probably constitute harassment.

Black widow.

10mm steelies.

Fun. 😁

Set up your own camera to photograph their path. Now it’s their move, report back to us.

Dress up as the skeleton that’s dressed as a pirate then steal the dogs and shave them in front of the camera. If you don’t like animal cruelty do something disturbing with frozen sausages instead.

Surely, it's more annoying for them than the OP - they've put the camera up to catch anyone dodgy coming down the passage to get to their house (or using it for access to the beach, maybe?) and yet every time the OP walks to or from his doorway it triggers the camera, so they have to check it.
I'm sure they aren't the slightest bit interested in his comings and goings, but it's going to produce more false-positives than actual events, thereby rendering the camera just an annoyance for everyone. Seems like a lose-lose situation to me. And they are just thick rather than nosy or spiteful.

Surely, it’s more annoying for them than the OP – they’ve put the camera up to catch anyone dodgy coming down the passage to get to their house (or using it for access to the beach, maybe?) and yet every time the OP walks to or from his doorway it triggers the camera, so they have to check it.

Most people I know with cams get bored with the notifications pretty quick. Who wants to be woken up every time a cat walks past or spider crawls across the lens? People check the footage after something happens.

Time for a "what air rifle" thread again?

Does the neighbour have a right of way down your back passage - ie is it shared access? If it is not then his case for filming it is diminished somewhat I would have thought

Does the neighbour have a right of way down your back passage – ie is it shared access? If it is not then his case for filming it is diminished somewhat I would have thought

This forum needs an out-of-context hall of fame.

thought better of amusing but naughty comment. deleted.

Does the neighbour have a right of way down your back passage – ie is it shared access? If it is not then his case for filming it is diminished somewhat I would have thought

So the neighbour wants to know if the OP is coming or going?

No
The ginnell that runs down the side of their house is mine and they have no need to use it at all
Potentially yes, member of the public could nip up and use it as a cut through, but this happens maybe once a year to my knowledge
This cam is, imo, a step on the ladder to getting at me or some vain attempts at getting them evicted.
Yes, i think they are just thick if they think that is going to happen

IMO then, they have no right to be filming your property. If your back passage is your private property then they have no right intruding up it, either physically or with a camera. And I empathise with you - I have had a camera up my back passage a few times and it is deeply uncomfortable.

Seriously though, if the passage is yours then them filming it is no different than if they were filming you in your garden all the time.

Take photo of the ally and stick it in front of camera. Like in the movies.

Rub a bit of fish paste on the camera. Leave it to the seagulls, it'll never function again 😆

Mount a camera right in front of theirs pointing directly at it. It'll completely block their camera and they can hardly complain about your camera as long as their camera is there. If they do complain, tell them it's an art installation on the modern interpretation of surveillance being surveiled by surveillance. It's meta.

The ginnell that runs down the side of their house is mine and they have no need to use it at all

But it's the side of their house? They might not have need to use it but could it be a potential security risk?

This cam is, imo, a step on the ladder to getting at me

Why would they want to get at you?

IMO then, they have no right to be filming your property.

If it's not excessively intrusive then the OP has no rights not to be filmed. If.

if the passage is yours then them filming it is no different than if they were filming you in your garden all the time.

A back passage - ie, a path - is open to the public. A garden is typically enclosed. No?

Wouldn't this whole situation be resolved by installing a door at the front of the ginnel?

Just fit some kind of spotlight or light with IR bulb and aim it at the camera.

Also, do you actually know what the footage is like? I mean, is it ACTUALLY aimed at you, or is it aimed at his property and just manages to cover the alley way too or could it be possible you're being a bit sensitive? The angles some of these cameras record / fisheye lense etc.... My cameras at home look at odd angles but records/covers well. Just to look at it, you'd think it wasn't aimed well or accurately but it is.

If it’s not excessively intrusive then the OP has no rights not to be filmed.

Are you saying that having someone film your property 24/7 is not excessively intrusive?

If a member of the public were to walk by the passage they may get a fleeting glance down it just as you can see in my back garden from the road but again, only as you are passing it. A passerby is not permanently monitoring you on your property.

Filming it 24/7 is an entirely different proposition.

Are you saying that having someone film your property 24/7 is not excessively intrusive?

I thought you could film whatever you could see with your eyes from a public space?

Get a bigger camera with a night vision array and point it at theirs. Fight!

I thought you could film whatever you could see with your eyes from a public space?

Film the woman next door through her living room window and try that one in court.

This thread needs pictures (or cctv images) of the camera and alley in question.

This is a really elaborate humblebrag about living right by the beach. Nice work!

😀

@cougar

But it’s the side of their house? They might not have need to use it but could it be a potential security risk?

Aye, if the burglars plan to use a C4 charge to breach their outer wall. It's his property, they have no right to video it, that was established way back when.

Why would they want to get at you?

That was mentioned by the OP in his thread opener.

If it’s not excessively intrusive then the OP has no rights not to be filmed. If.

In Tesco, with appropriate signage no. On his property, yes he does!

A back passage – ie, a path – is open to the public. A garden is typically enclosed. No?

Wouldn’t this whole situation be resolved by installing a door at the front of the ginnel?

Why should the OP install a door he doesn't see any need for in an attempt to *maybe* keep his paranoid voyeur neighbours from carrying out 24hr surveillance of his property?

What has the typical state of a garden have to do with anything? It's his property. Do I suddenly lose all rights to not being filmed because my fence panel blows over?

The camera is mounted up under the eaves and is angled so it would catch the top half of people on my side of the fence, but maybe the top of your head of their side as you would standing underneath the camera.
Its not public property . Its mine, It says private property on the steps up from the beach .
And its pretty much enclosed as there are 5ft fences on each side . Its more enclosed than alot of peoples gardens .
I dont use it much , maybe once a week. The tennants maybe more.
The filmers ( neighbours ) are worriers . CCTV , PIR lights everywhere , As if someone is going to steal the stolen beer barrels he has re appropriated into seats, or the prirate , or the Croc.

It is in fact pointless. You either get a grey IR film of a yoof in a hoody for 3 secs before the spray the camera with paint . Or a film of me walking to the beach with a windsurf board /mast/sail. Or a film of my tennants lad doing something daft, but to what end. The police won't do anything o local bobby and no serious crime. I havent locked my front door at night for 20 years. I am not going to evict a 10yr tennant whose lad is going through it just now because my neighbours don't like him.

Still not happy about it. I think its rude .

Apologies if this was already covered - but you are ensuring you're naked every time you walk past it now, yes? Maybe some star jumps could be routinely deployed as part of your new morning ritual too

If the camera is something like a Ring, it can be configured to only trigger by movement in the area that is his property, and privacy zones added to mask off above the fence line. I do that with the cam watching my bikes.

But getting that organised/agreed would involve speaking.

Film the woman next door through her living room window and try that one in court.

Shut the bloody curtains then.

Well if it were my house, I'd speak to them about privacy zones as above. If diplomacy failed I'd disable the thing one way or another.
I like the laser pointer idea.

I'm pre-coffee so may be being dim here but I think I've misread some of this. I thought the wayward son was the son of the neighbours.

Who's the tenant? Where do they live? Is actually there three properties involved?

You seem to have a fairly intimate knowledge of what is and isn't being filmed. How come?

It is in fact pointless.

What's the issue then? Just the principle?

I am not going to evict a 10yr tennant whose lad is going through it just now because my neighbours don’t like him.

Why would you even be considering this? Is there more to this tale, have they made threats?

Still not happy about it. I think its rude.

It probably is.

My Tenant and his wayward son live below in in a self contained flat .

So Yes , there are 3 properties involved

I can tell from looking at the camera exactly where its pointing . Its 8ft up in the eaves.