Home CCTV
- Thread starter Columbo
- Start date
I assume you're okay with the amount of CCTV Footage requests you receive, given you cover such a large amount of public space?Since you're talking about Reolink in here I have 3x cameras and a doorbell.
I've just replaced my front camera for an 180 degrees one.
This is the one I should have always had.
Since you're talking about Reolink in here I have 3x cameras and a doorbell.
I've just replaced my front camera for an 180 degrees one.
This is the one I should have always had.
You should be applying a privacy mask to that as covering that amount of others people's property and public spaces could land you in trouble (quite rightly). I suggest you read up on the regulations as although there's a bit of latitude this camera is excessive and some people have suffered the consequences when someone complains about their privacy and children being recorded.
This is why I have multiple cameras covering the front of my property and all of them not overly wide angle so I capture all the detail I need of my property but very little beyond that.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,412
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Six up to yet, it takes minutes especially using Synology Surveillance Station.
There are no kids and six houses have direct access to it with the Reolink APP.
The others are too old and don't mind.
I gave my old Reolink to the neighbour opposite and that looks directly at mine and I have access.
Fantastic neighbours round here.
Last edited:
I suggest you read the regulations as it's not the kids in the adjoining houses or current 'fantastic neighbours'. It's a public space and anyone can walk by and if you check the fines some people have incurred is not a laughing matter.
I used to install CCTV professionally and you may well get away with it but you're trying to use one camera to get a poorer overall image of the front of your property while covering spaces you should not be. I also hope you're not recording audio.
And then the police come knocking someday and ask if you have any footage of the street as one of your neighbours was broken into.
The guidelines also don't prohibit and and only suggest you SHOULD TRY to aim the cameras onto your own property. There is no requirement to not record others properties. To get into trouble you'd have to have the camera directly aimed at someone's else's property.
All my neighbours are happy to have their gardens covered by mine they know that can ask for the recording of they need it.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,412
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Funnily enough the Coppers were both happy with mine and neighbours Audio CCTV the other week where it caught an argument with homophobic remarks.
Nobody was fined by the Plod for supplying it.
Here is what the Cops had, they haven't knocked on my door yet to fine me.
What's funny is the Cops know the house to the right of my neighbour has got two CCTV cameras pointed 24/7 at my neighbours house and have said nothing.
I get on with everybody.
Last edited:
Recording audio in public spaces that's bad and again I suggest you read the regulations. Just because no one has complained or taken action doesn't mean it won't happen and you could suffer penalties.
I get the Police make happy noises sometimes but I wouldn't risk it and that's based on doing this professionally for a long time.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,401
We have an old wired system that records locally, I quite like having this as a backup, but it doesn’t send person alerts. I then have 4 Ring cams covering every angle of the perimeter for alerts. They haven’t missed a beat so far and were very quick to setup.
Have you shown each one the footage and got written permission, if so great but then if owners change do you do that again?
The wider question for me given I've installed a huge number of systems for customers is why you need to cover areas outside of your property?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,401
The police can’t even cope with serious crime, they aren’t going to care about this in the slightest.
Doesn't make it right though
I don't need to, the camera is aimed at my property and the road where I park my car, areas around it also get covered.
Here's the example given on the ICO website.
"Example
Your neighbour installs CCTV at the front of their property to deter criminals from breaking into their home. The neighbour doesn’t intend to access any recordings unless a crime has occurred.
Despite carefully considering where to place the CCTV, the camera records a small part of a public street and, on occasion, it records people walking by.
In this case, it’s likely that your neighbour’s interests outweigh any invasion of your privacy."
As long as your aiming them at your property and only keeping footage as long as needed and not saving clips of your neighbours sunbathing it's extremely unlikely you'll ever have an issue.
I only keep footage for 20 days almost never look at it. Use it more to see what the delivery drivers are leaving and where.
Anyway back on topic. I used to use Reolink but find then a bit lacking, swapped to Unifi and am extremely happy everything is POE.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,412
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Exactly this.
I never check it unless I've heard something and the videos erase after 5 days.
I was in Benidorm last year and had a Copper on the phone to me, she was asking about something that happened a week earlier and I said I wouldn't have it now.
Indeed but not given people have been fined it's not a risk I took for my installations. Having worked in the security industry I know the Police will source information when it suits them, but if a mother reports someone for videoing their daughter walking past their house every day the Police will be around in no time (and this has been done).
That view is hardly a 'small part of a public street and, on occasion, it records people walking by' given its permanent 180 degree (not a PTZ moving past) including the street and other side plus audio.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,412
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
The difference is you're doing it professionally, you have to make people aware, I was the same converting eBikes, they need to know the law.
However as an homeowner and somebody who has spoke to my neighbours I'll take the chance, if one moans I'll turn their property black.
However as an homeowner and somebody who has spoke to my neighbours I'll take the chance, if one moans I'll turn their property black.
Do you have a source for someone that been prosecuted for capturing someone walking past?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2014
- Posts
- 2,827
hikvision poe cameras here, no complaints from me.
Yes, but not a tabloid piece of fake news (although I've read some stories like this that could be true). In my case a significant number of customers I have taken over their CCTV for stated they had fines and issues due to their CCTV. I have also attended site with customers and Police stating their CCTV will cause them to be prosecuted due it recording people and especially children when some parents have taken issue after residents reported their offspring for vandallising their cars and property with CCTV evidence.
I have also experienced issues myself with neighbours reporting my personal CCTV after I declined to offer CCTV to help them with criminal activities on their property. They didn't believe I wasn't covering the road and some of their property given my double digit cameras outside which in fact was the case given good camera positioning and privacy blanking for the odd bits that I couldn't avoid. In their spite they reported me for recording the road and their children cycling/walking past and I had several visits and threats of prosecution until they realised just how badly and expensively they would lose
Last edited:
Generally yes, however they find time and resources for potential hate crimes and low risk issues like drone flights and otehr privacy invasions