Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

security cameras

  • 02-05-2014 4:37pm
    #1
    Walker34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭


    Hi,
    if a neighbouring property has a security camera installed which may also be capable of viewing my premesis, do I have any grounds for objection or legal action. The camera is a dome type which has a pan/tilt action, and the owner claims it is for the protection of his own premesis/property/vehicle. If it views the adjoining street is that permissable?
    Tia,John


Comments

  • #2
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,782 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    This sort of thing has in the past been found to be a breach of the constitutionally protected inviolability of the dwelling.

    This is only applicable if there is footage of the inside of your house, imo.

    More here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88477421&postcount=5


  • #3
    Walker34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭Walker34


    Thanks for the repy
    ...............It would only be viewing the back yard/garden of my premises I think, its an outdoor unit.


  • #4
    Beano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭Beano


    can the camera see anything that is not visible from a public place? If not i cant see how there can be any expectation privacy.


  • #5
    Walker34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭Walker34


    The difficult term here is "Public"......adjacent gardens would not have free public access, .....as in every tom,dick, or harry might freely legally acces the area. The adjacent gardens would be private........but access to the garden and right of view are entirly different things, and to my mind would have differn rules applying. Anyone have any insight on this.?? If a lefitimatly installed security camera can see adjacent gardens.......is this in breach of any law. lets say the gardens are narrow (20meters) and the camera lense is wide angle view.

    A similar case would be a street where a car is parked being covered by a security camera which obviously will take in the opposite side of the road and any houses there on. It is virtually impossible to screen out adjacent properties ,doors front gardens or passing pedestrians, eventhough the main target is the car when it is parked there......cars come and go frequently so how does the law view such cases, Is it possible to legislate for such things effectively.?


  • #6
    The Muppet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,006 ✭✭✭✭The Muppet


    Walker34 wrote: »
    Hi,
    if a neighbouring property has a security camera installed which may also be capable of viewing my premesis, do I have any grounds for objection or legal action. The camera is a dome type which has a pan/tilt action, and the owner claims it is for the protection of his own premesis/property/vehicle. If it views the adjoining street is that permissable?
    Tia,John

    No you have no grounds to object and yes it is permissable to view the public street. Out of Interest why would you want to object to something that enhances security in your area?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    BenRowe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 104 ✭✭BenRowe


    In this case they were able to block the range of the camera but as your neighbour is presumably a private person he would not come under the act as far as i know

    What about planning permission. is PP needed for cctv?

    From Irish Council for Civil Liberties site
    If you think the CCTV is causing you harrassment, you should contact the Gardaí.
    You could also contact a solicitor who could advise you whether you could sue your neighbour for invasion of privacy.


  • #8
    The Muppet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,006 ✭✭✭✭The Muppet


    BenRowe wrote: »
    In this case they were able to block the range of the camera but as your neighbour is presumably a private person he would not come under the act as far as i know

    What about planning permission. is PP needed for cctv?

    Privately owned cctv camerars are not covered by data protection.


  • #9
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Your business or part of gets covered by someone else's CCTV ,
    I'd consider if a free bonus ,especially if your premises isn't covered by your own CCTV
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #10
    Walker34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭Walker34


    The Muppet wrote: »
    Privately owned cctv camerars are not covered by data protection.

    Are you certain of this and if its the case is there any other law which would prevent their use.


  • #11
    BenRowe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 104 ✭✭BenRowe


    Walker34 wrote: »
    Are you certain of this and if its the case is there any other law which would prevent their use.
    i do not know of any other law but private cctv does not come under data protection act

    Data protection commisioner site:
    The processing of personal data kept by an individual and concerned solely with the management of his/her personal, family or household affairs or kept by an individual for recreational purposes is exempt from the provisions of the Acts. This exemption would generally apply to the use of CCTVs in a domestic environment.
    https://www.dataprotection.ie/docs/Data-Protection-CCTV/242.htm


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    The Muppet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,006 ✭✭✭✭The Muppet


    Walker34 wrote: »
    Are you certain of this and if its the case is there any other law which would prevent their use.

    Yes I'm certain. There are currently no law to prevent their use I doubt there ever will be.


  • #13
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    This sort of thing has in the past been found to be a breach of the constitutionally protected inviolability of the dwelling.

    I's really just a breach of your privacy and the above would only be called in the case of a domestic situation i.e where the data protection act does not apply.

    The Data Privacy Commissioner has a lot of info on CCTV. Read here: http://www.dataprotection.ie/viewdoc.asp?m=m&fn=/documents/guidance/cctv.htm

    You would be in your rights to request your neighbour to put in shielding on the camera so that the cameras can't view into your property.

    Question is if the neighbour is a business or company?


  • #14
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    See Atherton v DPP.


  • #15
    Wheelnut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 977 ✭✭✭Wheelnut


    Beano wrote: »
    can the camera see anything that is not visible from a public place? If not i cant see how there can be any expectation privacy.

    I think Beano has hit the nail on the head although he may not have expressed it well. If the neighbour can see the OP's back garden from his property (say an upper window) and the camera can see no more than is already visible, it is unreasonable of the OP to expect privacy from the camera.

    In my experience there is usually an existing background dispute to these complaints and each party is determined not to let the other away with anything.


  • #16
    Beano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭Beano


    Wheelnut wrote: »
    I think Beano has hit the nail on the head although he may not have expressed it well.

    I am deeply hurt and offended that you would say that :D


  • #17
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Wheelnut wrote: »
    I think Beano has hit the nail on the head although he may not have expressed it well. If the neighbour can see the OP's back garden from his property (say an upper window) and the camera can see no more than is already visible, it is unreasonable of the OP to expect privacy from the camera.

    Not so. There is a difference - the ability to record and store data with a CCTV system.
    In my experience there is usually an existing background dispute to these complaints and each party is determined not to let the other away with anything.

    You are probably right.


  • #18
    Wheelnut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 977 ✭✭✭Wheelnut


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    Not so. There is a difference - the ability to record and store data with a CCTV system.

    I'm not sure that recording the view makes any difference but I will have to ask for guidance here. I'm not a lawyer but I did a lot of amateur photography back in the 1970s and 80s. I seem to remember that a precedence was set in an English case sometime in the 1920s or 30s. The case involved a person taking a photo of a private property from a public road. The owner objected. The court held that if a person could see a view from a public place he could photograph it. I am extrapolating from this that if a person can see a view from his own property he can photograph it. Right or wrong?


  • #19
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Wheelnut wrote: »
    I'm not sure that recording the view makes any difference but I will have to ask for guidance here. I'm not a lawyer but I did a lot of amateur photography back in the 1970s and 80s. I seem to remember that a precedence was set in an English case sometime in the 1920s or 30s. The case involved a person taking a photo of a private property from a public road. The owner objected. The court held that if a person could see a view from a public place he could photograph it. I am extrapolating from this that if a person can see a view from his own property he can photograph it. Right or wrong?

    A snap with a camera used in the 1920's is substantially different to a CCTV that can record and store images 24/7 with a time/date stamp.

    Furthermore the CCTV camera is not on a public space as it's on a neighbouring property.


  • #20
    Beano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭Beano


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    A snap with a camera used in the 1920's is substantially different to a CCTV that can record and store images 24/7 with a time/date stamp.

    Furthermore the CCTV camera is not on a public space as it's on a neighbouring property.

    A movie is just a series of stills. No major difference between a still and a movie. I dont see how the time/date stamp is relevant. A still can have a timestamp ad well.

    If the area being viewed is visible from your neighbours property then i cant see how there can be an expectation of privacy.

    It might be different if the neighbour was only filming your property. I could see that as being harassment. But as a part of a cctv system protecting their own property i cant see a problem.


  • #21
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    Had a similar situation before. Neighbours installed CCTV directed onto my driveway. I went to the gardai and said it was an invasion of privacy and harassment (it was both and was intended to be both). Guard came down, went in to view what they could see and said that it wasn't directed onto my driveway...

    Yes, there was a background between us.

    It's not acceptable to be continuously recorded or to have your property recorded in my opinion. Whether the law sees it similarly, I don't know, but the guard followed up on it anyway. In my case, it was as close to stalking as you'd get under the law!

    Thankfully, I have since moved house (though I would currently be grateful of a few CCTV cameras about lol!). Never happy!


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Beano wrote: »
    A movie is just a series of stills. No major difference between a still and a movie. I dont see how the time/date stamp is relevant. A still can have a timestamp ad well.

    If the area being viewed is visible from your neighbours property then i cant see how there can be an expectation of privacy.

    It might be different if the neighbour was only filming your property. I could see that as being harassment. But as a part of a cctv system protecting their own property i cant see a problem.

    There is a huge difference in that you are recording data as far as the law is concerned. A world of difference from somebody taking a single photograph from a public place.


  • #23
    Beano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭Beano


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    There is a huge difference in that you are recording data as far as the law is concerned. A world of difference from somebody taking a single photograph from a public place.

    I dont think you understand what a photograph is.


  • #24
    BenRowe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 104 ✭✭BenRowe


    NipNip wrote: »
    I went to the gardai and said it was an invasion of privacy and harassment (it was both and was intended to be both). Guard came down, went in to view what they could see and said that it wasn't directed onto my driveway...
    !
    what would be the legal situation if they did not show the garda where the cameras were pointed? Are they obliged to do this


  • #25
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    BenRowe wrote: »
    what would be the legal situation if they did not show the garda where the cameras were pointed? Are they obliged to do this

    Haven't a clue. I suppose you could go to a solicitor if you were particularly peeved? I was moving out in 2 months time anyway, so I wasn't too perturbed. I just didn't want the individual harassing and stalking me for the final two months. It was pure and utter intimidation. Imagine having your neighbour recording every move you make? Every time you leave the house? Every time you go for a walk/drive/have visitors? Creepy!!!!!! :eek:


  • #26
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    NipNip wrote: »
    Haven't a clue. I suppose you could go to a solicitor if you were particularly peeved? I was moving out in 2 months time anyway, so I wasn't too perturbed. I just didn't want the individual harassing and stalking me for the final two months. It was pure and utter intimidation. Imagine having your neighbour recording every move you make? Every time you leave the house? Every time you go for a walk/drive/have visitors? Creepy!!!!!! :eek:

    Your posts make you sound paronoid ,

    Your been stalked /harassed but yet you then say you wouldn't mind been covered by cameras ,

    Weve a situation in our apartment block where several owners are accessing the CCTV and making copies of footage for there own personal use ,

    Wouldn't feel one bit harassed or stalked over the presence of CCTV
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #27
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    Gatling wrote: »
    Your posts make you sound paronoid ,

    Lol - so be it! :cool:


  • #28
    Walker34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭Walker34


    Some interesting information and comments here....thanks.


  • #29
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Beano wrote: »
    I dont think you understand what a photograph is.

    You're right, I haven't a clue.


  • #30
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Gatling wrote: »

    Weve a situation in our apartment block where several owners are accessing the CCTV and making copies of footage for there own personal use ,

    Bizarre - what use would it be for?!?

    Sounds like the movie 'Sliver'.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    Gatling wrote: »
    Your posts make you sound paronoid ,

    Your been stalked /harassed but yet you then say you wouldn't mind been covered by cameras ,

    Weve a situation in our apartment block where several owners are accessing the CCTV and making copies of footage for there own personal use ,

    Wouldn't feel one bit harassed or stalked over the presence of CCTV

    I have no issue with CCTV for security purposes. In fact, if I could afford it, I'd have it myself. What I do take issue with, is a complete and utter ******bleep****** trying to harass and intimidate me by training his CCTV on to my drive in order to annoy and irritate me.


  • #32
    Wheelnut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 977 ✭✭✭Wheelnut


    NipNip wrote: »
    ... trying to harass and intimidate me by training his CCTV on to my drive in order to annoy and irritate me.

    If this is true, and we don't know if it is because it's unlikely that you have seen the viewing screen, what could he do with the information?


  • #33
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    Wheelnut wrote: »
    If this is true, and we don't know if it is because it's unlikely that you have seen the viewing screen, what could he do with the information?

    Nothing only annoy me. And no, I didn't see the viewing screen. I saw the camera in his upstairs window pointing down at me after he installed it. Not pointing straight out in front over his drive, but pointing down at an angle onto my drive. This was his last effort at :cool: annoying me. Idiot. Some people have too much time on their hands. It's very annoying. Like someone constantly peering over your fence. All day long. Would you tolerate that?


  • #34
    Wheelnut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 977 ✭✭✭Wheelnut


    NipNip wrote: »
    ... Like someone constantly peering over your fence. All day long. Would you tolerate that?

    Actually yes!

    I'm not winding you up, this is the truth: my next-door neighbour is a Lotto millionaire and he installed CCTV cameras all over the place on the advice of the Gardai. I think there are about eight of them.


  • #35
    NipNip
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 656 ✭✭✭NipNip


    Wheelnut wrote: »
    Actually yes!

    I'm not winding you up, this is the truth: my next-door neighbour is a Lotto millionaire and he installed CCTV cameras all over the place on the advice of the Gardai. I think there are about eight of them.

    Yes, well I'm sure your neighbour is actually interested in protecting his property rather than antagonising you!


  • #36
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,652 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I'm not sure what use a pan-tilt-zoom camera is for general security, as it can be pointed away from the relevant view - deliberately or accidentally. PTZ cameras are used for looking at particular focal points and zooming-in on them.
    hullaballoo wrote: »
    This sort of thing has in the past been found to be a breach of the constitutionally protected inviolability of the dwelling.

    This is only applicable if there is footage of the inside of your house, imo.
    I'm not so sure about this. Wasn't there a case recently where a community organisation was running CCTV that viewed (exclusively?) the public street and it was held to be illegal for a non-state authority to do this?
    The Muppet wrote: »
    Privately owned cctv camerars are not covered by data protection.
    I would think they do, as the view seems to extend beyond the camera owner's property.
    BenRowe wrote: »
    What about planning permission. is PP needed for cctv?
    Normally no, not unless you were materially altering a facade or installing a mast or something.
    Gatling wrote: »
    Your business or part of gets covered by someone else's CCTV , I'd consider if a free bonus ,especially if your premises isn't covered by your own CCTV
    It's not a business - it's his back garden.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,782 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    I think you're confusing the DPC's views on legality with the actual law, tbh.


Advertisement