If someone (say me) was to rig up a CCTV system on the upper part of my building that was able to read number plates at 50m (i.e. the entrance to
our close) and log them with the facility to analyse the plates to create
a whitelist such that the appearance of any other registration number triggers an alert ... what (if any) would be implications under GDPR
(etc) ?
For the sake of argument only the car is being captured, with it's plate.
This is a semi hypothetical question as a neighbour already has a rig
that does this. Only since it's over halfway from the entrance from the
road, and our close is an "L" shape where cars can (and do) turn in the
angle and are never captured by their system.
This system was loaded with the reg. number of a couple of vans a neighbouring FB group flagged up, and yesterday they were spotted
prowling our close. So there may be some utility here.
On 2025-06-16, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
If someone (say me) was to rig up a CCTV system on the upper part of my
building that was able to read number plates at 50m (i.e. the entrance
to our close) and log them with the facility to analyse the plates to
create a whitelist such that the appearance of any other registration
number triggers an alert ... what (if any) would be implications under
GDPR (etc) ?
For the sake of argument only the car is being captured, with it's
plate.
This is a semi hypothetical question as a neighbour already has a rig
that does this. Only since it's over halfway from the entrance from the
road, and our close is an "L" shape where cars can (and do) turn in the
angle and are never captured by their system.
This system was loaded with the reg. number of a couple of vans a
neighbouring FB group flagged up, and yesterday they were spotted
prowling our close. So there may be some utility here.
Sounds like unlawful processing of personal data to me, given number
plates can be connected to individual people (unless they're corporate vehicles of course), and it seems very unlikely the camera won't also be recording actual people too.
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual people"
data that this would involve ?
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 15:34:09 +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-06-16, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
If someone (say me) was to rig up a CCTV system on the upper part of my
building that was able to read number plates at 50m (i.e. the entrance
to our close) and log them with the facility to analyse the plates to
create a whitelist such that the appearance of any other registration
number triggers an alert ... what (if any) would be implications under
GDPR (etc) ?
For the sake of argument only the car is being captured, with it's
plate.
This is a semi hypothetical question as a neighbour already has a rig
that does this. Only since it's over halfway from the entrance from the
road, and our close is an "L" shape where cars can (and do) turn in the
angle and are never captured by their system.
This system was loaded with the reg. number of a couple of vans a
neighbouring FB group flagged up, and yesterday they were spotted
prowling our close. So there may be some utility here.
Sounds like unlawful processing of personal data to me, given number
plates can be connected to individual people (unless they're corporate
vehicles of course), and it seems very unlikely the camera won't also be
recording actual people too.
Let's say for the sake of argument they don't.
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual people"
data that this would involve ?
The local PCSO and team are aware of neighbours CCTV, so whatever they
have in place, would apply here (and they have already shared with me a
reg. no of the van that stole my lawnmower).
Jethro_uk wrote:
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual
people" data that this would involve ?
You need a reasonable cause, say your neighbours didn't have CCTV, but
you did, and it captured the VRM of the scrote in his van nicking your lawnmower, you could ask the DVLA to provide the keeper's details
<https://www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla/request-information-a bout-another-vehicle-registered-keeper>
And here is the ICO's piece where they do regard a VRM as personal
date
<https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/advice-and-services/innovation-ad vice/previously-asked-questions/#personal>
Andy Burns wrote:I don't think so, that page specifically links to a form for individuals
<https://www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla/request-information-a
bout-another-vehicle-registered-keeper>
That is advice for organisations however rather than individuals.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in news:mbb822Feia0U1@mid.individual.net:
Jethro_uk wrote:
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual
people" data that this would involve ?
You need a reasonable cause, say your neighbours didn't have CCTV, but
you did, and it captured the VRM of the scrote in his van nicking your
lawnmower, you could ask the DVLA to provide the keeper's details
<https://www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla/request-information-a
bout-another-vehicle-registered-keeper>
And here is the ICO's piece where they do regard a VRM as personal
date
<https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/advice-and-services/innovation-ad
vice/previously-asked-questions/#personal>
That is advice for organisations however rather than individuals. If you
can monitor a public space with CCTV I can't see the issue with an _individual_ using that system to identify vehicles albeit that they would have no cause to request the keeper's data unless in the event of a
witnessed crime.
On 2025-06-16, Peter Walker <not@for.mail> wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in
news:mbb822Feia0U1@mid.individual.net:
Jethro_uk wrote:
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual
people" data that this would involve ?
You need a reasonable cause, say your neighbours didn't have CCTV, but
you did, and it captured the VRM of the scrote in his van nicking your
lawnmower, you could ask the DVLA to provide the keeper's details
<https://www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla/request-information-a
bout-another-vehicle-registered-keeper>
And here is the ICO's piece where they do regard a VRM as personal
date
<https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/advice-and-services/innovation-ad
vice/previously-asked-questions/#personal>
That is advice for organisations however rather than individuals. If you
can monitor a public space with CCTV I can't see the issue with an
_individual_ using that system to identify vehicles albeit that they would >> have no cause to request the keeper's data unless in the event of a
witnessed crime.
There's no GDPR exemption for "individuals". It doesn't apply to
"domestic purposes" but that doesn't include "videoing people in the
street who you don't know". If it covers public areas (including audio)
then GDPR applies.
https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/home-cctv-systems/
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2025-06-16, Peter Walker <not@for.mail> wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in
news:mbb822Feia0U1@mid.individual.net:
Jethro_uk wrote:
Out of interest how do you access the "connected to individual
people" data that this would involve ?
You need a reasonable cause, say your neighbours didn't have CCTV, but >>>> you did, and it captured the VRM of the scrote in his van nicking your >>>> lawnmower, you could ask the DVLA to provide the keeper's details
<https://www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla/request-information-a >>>> bout-another-vehicle-registered-keeper>
And here is the ICO's piece where they do regard a VRM as personal
date
<https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/advice-and-services/innovation-ad >>>> vice/previously-asked-questions/#personal>
That is advice for organisations however rather than individuals. If you >>> can monitor a public space with CCTV I can't see the issue with an
_individual_ using that system to identify vehicles albeit that they would >>> have no cause to request the keeper's data unless in the event of a
witnessed crime.
There's no GDPR exemption for "individuals". It doesn't apply to
"domestic purposes" but that doesn't include "videoing people in the
street who you don't know". If it covers public areas (including audio)
then GDPR applies.
https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/home-cctv-systems/
If that is so, what’s the position regarding the use of doorbell cameras, which have been shown on TV to be recording people in the street that the owners don’t know?
Note that when it comes to investigating crime, the police are quite happy
to use doorbell and dashcam footage, presumably overlooking all the other times in its daily use when people, etc have been recorded.
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If that is so, what’s the position regarding the use of doorbell
cameras,
which have been shown on TV to be recording people in the street that
the owners don’t know?
Note that when it comes to investigating crime, the police are quite
happy to use doorbell and dashcam footage, presumably overlooking all
the other times in its daily use when people, etc have been recorded.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 22:26:17 +0000, Spike wrote:
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If that is so, what’s the position regarding the use of doorbell
cameras,
which have been shown on TV to be recording people in the street that
the owners don’t know?
Note that when it comes to investigating crime, the police are quite
happy to use doorbell and dashcam footage, presumably overlooking all
the other times in its daily use when people, etc have been recorded.
"Round our way" every weekly update from the local police team ends with
a request to log cameras and CCTV with them.
(I have to admit, I don't know why. In all the footage people share (so presumably the best available) all you ever see are shadowy youths with a hoodie and scaft uniform making sure you never see a face.)
In the case where I screengrabbed the post with a picture of the van,
man, and reg. no. nothing has happened. (This is the van that was later
seen in our road).
It's this hit ratio that's stayed my hand from investing in CCTV. It
might look and feel nice, but IME never seems to lead to anything. And I include 3 experiences from work with professional quality CCTV and
recording and ANPR.
On 17/06/2025 08:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 22:26:17 +0000, Spike wrote:Lots of thefts from cars in our road. Some of us are thinking about
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If that is so, what’s the position regarding the use of doorbell
cameras,
which have been shown on TV to be recording people in the street that
the owners don’t know?
Note that when it comes to investigating crime, the police are quite
happy to use doorbell and dashcam footage, presumably overlooking all
the other times in its daily use when people, etc have been recorded.
"Round our way" every weekly update from the local police team ends
with a request to log cameras and CCTV with them.
(I have to admit, I don't know why. In all the footage people share (so
presumably the best available) all you ever see are shadowy youths with
a hoodie and scaft uniform making sure you never see a face.)
In the case where I screengrabbed the post with a picture of the van,
man, and reg. no. nothing has happened. (This is the van that was later
seen in our road).
It's this hit ratio that's stayed my hand from investing in CCTV. It
might look and feel nice, but IME never seems to lead to anything. And
I include 3 experiences from work with professional quality CCTV and
recording and ANPR.
getting CCTV that points at the public highway and records everyone who passes up and down the road, perhaps to get a good image before they don their face covering. Would the police and/or the council turn a blind
eye to any infringement of data protection laws?
On 17/06/2025 08:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 22:26:17 +0000, Spike wrote:
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If that is so, what’s the position regarding the use of doorbell
cameras,
which have been shown on TV to be recording people in the street
that the owners don’t know?
Note that when it comes to investigating crime, the police are quite
happy to use doorbell and dashcam footage, presumably overlooking
all the other times in its daily use when people, etc have been
recorded.
"Round our way" every weekly update from the local police team ends
with a request to log cameras and CCTV with them.
(I have to admit, I don't know why. In all the footage people share
(so presumably the best available) all you ever see are shadowy
youths with a hoodie and scaft uniform making sure you never see a
face.)
In the case where I screengrabbed the post with a picture of the van,
man, and reg. no. nothing has happened. (This is the van that was
later seen in our road).
It's this hit ratio that's stayed my hand from investing in CCTV. It
might look and feel nice, but IME never seems to lead to anything.
And I include 3 experiences from work with professional quality CCTV
and recording and ANPR.
Lots of thefts from cars in our road. Some of us are thinking about
getting CCTV that points at the public highway and records everyone
who passes up and down the road, perhaps to get a good image before
they don their face covering. Would the police and/or the council turn
a blind eye to any infringement of data protection laws?
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in news:mbcmm0FmctqU1@mid.individual.net:
[quoted text muted]The alternative is to educate locals not to leave anything of value in
their cars, certainly nothing of value.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 17:35:42 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,953 |