closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 74 of 74

Thread: Car Reversed Into - Driver Drove Off - Wife Confronted Him Later

  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by seikopath View Post
    I found the same when I was doing charity stuff on here. Some people would diddle a charity.
    Whilst this may be true in many cases, it is possible to donate money to the fundraiser without the payment appearing on the totaliser (or whatever it's called).

    Most of my fundraiser contributions have been public, but I think there have been 2 or 3 that have been under the radar, so to speak.

  2. #52
    I so so hope that the way in which the CCTV has been collected and shared is not in breach of GDPR.

    Does the school's data protection policy for the CCTV - as shared with the Information Commissioners Office - include the purpose of investigating collisions on the road? Identifying persons in cars on that road and in their private driveways opposite?

    We're the neighbours informed that they were under surveillance?

    Does that policy include that the CCTV data can be shared with staff members and their relatives?

    Hopefully this is all in place, as otherwise writing to tell someone they (as an individual not just their car) have been identified from the school CCTV, including on their driveway and that has been shared could prove very costly for the school!

  3. #53
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    9,515
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyp View Post
    I so so hope that the way in which the CCTV has been collected and shared is not in breach of GDPR.

    Does the school's data protection policy for the CCTV - as shared with the Information Commissioners Office - include the purpose of investigating collisions on the road? Identifying persons in cars on that road and in their private driveways opposite?

    We're the neighbours informed that they were under surveillance?

    Does that policy include that the CCTV data can be shared with staff members and their relatives?

    Hopefully this is all in place, as otherwise writing to tell someone they (as an individual not just their car) have been identified from the school CCTV, including on their driveway and that has been shared could prove very costly for the school!
    “Wife had her car heavily reversed into today. It is street parking but a private road shared by the school she works for and large residential houses along it. The parking space is private to the school.”

    So - she is an employee of the school.
    Both she and the school share ownership of the road.

    I think the School is well within their rights to share the information with an employee involved in an incident on their property.




  4. #54
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,387
    Well you’ve let him off Scott free. Given the evidence and his failure to report I wouldn’t have been as generous. Sod Xmas.

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyp View Post
    I so so hope that the way in which the CCTV has been collected and shared is not in breach of GDPR.

    Does the school's data protection policy for the CCTV - as shared with the Information Commissioners Office - include the purpose of investigating collisions on the road? Identifying persons in cars on that road and in their private driveways opposite?

    We're the neighbours informed that they were under surveillance?

    Does that policy include that the CCTV data can be shared with staff members and their relatives?

    Hopefully this is all in place, as otherwise writing to tell someone they (as an individual not just their car) have been identified from the school CCTV, including on their driveway and that has been shared could prove very costly for the school!
    Consent is only one form of lawfulness. Legitimate public interest, legitimate interests of the school, legal obligations of the school are all lawful reasons for collecting data other than consent. I think.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  6. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by blackal View Post
    “Wife had her car heavily reversed into today. It is street parking but a private road shared by the school she works for and large residential houses along it. The parking space is private to the school.”

    So - she is an employee of the school.
    Both she and the school share ownership of the road.

    I think the School is well within their rights to share the information with an employee involved in an incident on their property.



    I think your emphasis is wrong regarding ownership - the road is private and shared by the school and the houses opposite, not by the school and the OP's wife.

    Irrespective, since the GDPR came in earlier this year, the data (which includes CCTV) can only be used for the purposes for which it is recorded and shared with those authorised to use it for those purposes.

    The penalty for doing otherwise is significant.

    For me, doing what the school has done seems perfectly reasonable, however the data protection regulations say otherwise.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyCasper View Post
    Consent is only one form of lawfulness. Legitimate public interest, legitimate interests of the school, legal obligations of the school are all lawful reasons for collecting data other than consent. I think.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Are you referring to the consent of the joint property owner to have the area subject to CCTV coverage?

    Your comments regarding reasons for collecting data are all completely legitimate, however businesses (including schools) now have to to declare in advance what personal data (including CCTV) is being recorded, what it can be used for, by whom etc.

    ... And how was the email address obtained?
    Last edited by Gyp; 15th December 2018 at 11:00.

  8. #58
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    28,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyp View Post
    Are you referring to the consent of the joint property owner to have the area subject to CCTV coverage?

    Your comments regarding reasons for collecting data are all completely legitimate, however businesses (including schools) now have to to declare in advance what personal data (including CCTV) is being recorded, what it can be used for, by whom etc.

    ... And how was the email address obtained?
    Are you saying that CCTVs fall foul of GDPR and as such the evidence they collect are no receivable in a civil action ?
    'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Saint-Just View Post
    Are you saying that CCTVs fall foul of GDPR and as such the evidence they collect are no receivable in a civil action ?
    CCTV use should be clearly signed.

    Take a look at page 15 of this riveting 50 page guidance. Reasonable disclosure is allowed with procedural controls.

    https://ico.org.uk/media/1542/cctv-code-of-practice.pdf

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyCasper View Post
    CCTV use should be clearly signed.

    Take a look at page 15 of this riveting 50 page guidance. Reasonable disclosure is allowed with procedural controls.

    https://ico.org.uk/media/1542/cctv-code-of-practice.pdf
    The document also comments that it's not been updated to cover the GDPR changes from 2018.

    My understanding however is that the CCTV can be shown to the police for them to determine if a crime has been committed

  11. #61
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    28,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyp View Post
    The document also comments that it's not been updated to cover the GDPR changes from 2018.

    My understanding however is that the CCTV can be shown to the police for them to determine if a crime has been committed
    I deliberately mentioned a civil action.
    'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.

  12. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Saint-Just View Post
    I deliberately mentioned a civil action.
    I know you did and I don't know the answer so I skirted round it

  13. #63
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    28,933
    thank you. I don’t know either.
    'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.

  14. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Saint-Just View Post
    thank you. I don’t know either.

    All I really know is that I've been stopped from using data at work as my use was not the use for which it was intended (even though all involved agreed that it would have been useful and appropriate) and I've subsequently sat through what seems like hours of GDPR training.

    The key messages being

    - businesses or public bodies have to state in advance and agree what data is being collected, the purpose that the data's being collected for, and who will have access to that data
    - that purpose must be lawful and appropriate
    - collecting anything else, using it differently or releasing it to the wrong person could end up with an eye wateringly big fine.

    With that in mind, the OP's situation rang alarm bells.

  15. #65
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    28,933
    I agree. And the first eye watering fines were dished to many a well known charity so they wouldn’t think twice about going for a school.

    I am not sure however that in this case GDPR would apply because banging someone’s car can hardly be called sharing data.

    But I wouldn’t want to test it in court. At all.
    'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.

  16. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Saint-Just View Post
    I agree. And the first eye watering fines were dished to many a well known charity so they wouldn’t think twice about going for a school.

    I am not sure however that in this case GDPR would apply because banging someone’s car can hardly be called sharing data.

    But I wouldn’t want to test it in court. At all.
    Banging the car isn't sharing data

    Sharing the CCTV footage would definitely be sharing data

    Under the GDPR, the ICO can impose up fines of up to 20 million Euros or 4% of group worldwide turnover (whichever is greater) against both data controllers and data processors. Not sure with a school if the group would be the school, the local council, the department of Education...

  17. #67
    Master johnbaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    sheffield,england
    Posts
    4,095
    Quote Originally Posted by eldrich View Post
    Don't send that letter, get a quote, tell him what it is to get it repaired and ask him for his insurance details. Do not get it repaired with him 'offering' to pay it because what happens if he doesn't pay it - you're then stuck with the bill and will find it difficult to claim on his insurance.

    Do it the proper way and the loss of his excess/increased insurance is all you need to get satisfaction.


    I made this mistake years ago when my mums neighbour reversed from his mums drive at speed and smashed the nearside wing of my mk1 Escort, He said 'Get it done and i'll pay you', never ever saw him again!!


    John

  18. #68
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    5,472
    Off tangent to the OP’s original post but regarding GDPR, what is the situation regarding dash cams?
    I have one in my taxi with a camera both inside and out.

  19. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytip View Post
    Off tangent to the OP’s original post but regarding GDPR, what is the situation regarding dash cams?
    I have one in my taxi with a camera both inside and out.
    https://www.griffinhouseconsultancy....ed-notify-ico/

  20. #70
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Mid Glamorgan
    Posts
    5,472
    Thanks for that but unfortunately that tells me nothing for my situation because it’s my dash cam fitted in my own taxi.

  21. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytip View Post
    Thanks for that but unfortunately that tells me nothing for my situation because it’s my dash cam fitted in my own taxi.
    I felt that...

    "As Dashboard cams are not covered by the legislation you do not need to Notify the ICO, nor is*signage required, which is obligatory for non-domestic CCTV*cameras. However, if the Dashboard Cams *are on work or commercial vehicles, then a member of the public has the right under*Section 7 of the DPA to make a Subject Access Request to view the footage which contains their image;*for that reason a sign saying how they can apply for this may be warranted but not currently compulsory."

    would cover you on the basis that your taxi is a work/commercial vehicle

  22. #72
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Coming Straight Outer Trumpton
    Posts
    9,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Gyp View Post
    I felt that...

    "As Dashboard cams are not covered by the legislation you do not need to Notify the ICO, nor is*signage required, which is obligatory for non-domestic CCTV*cameras. However, if the Dashboard Cams *are on work or commercial vehicles, then a member of the public has the right under*Section 7 of the DPA to make a Subject Access Request to view the footage which contains their image;*for that reason a sign saying how they can apply for this may be warranted but not currently compulsory."

    would cover you on the basis that your taxi is a work/commercial vehicle
    It’s an unclear situation but my interpretation is this is aimed at inward facing cameras covering the driver and punters not external facing ones but i accept my interpretation is worth little until clarified by the ico or courts.

  23. #73
    Master steptoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Putney
    Posts
    1,867
    Quote Originally Posted by noTAGlove View Post

    However, you may be aware that failing to leave details, or directly inform the police of damage caused to a car is a criminal offence, and CCTV is available on this occasion.
    You have 24 hours to report a non injury accident to the police.. In fact it works out 3-5 days as you're given a form to fill in and send off to the police section that deals with such incidents.
    Unlike the "good old days" when it was dealt with at the counter of the police station.

  24. #74
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    15,908
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Morgan View Post
    It’s an unclear situation but my interpretation is this is aimed at inward facing cameras covering the driver and punters not external facing ones but i accept my interpretation is worth little until clarified by the ico or courts.
    The next paragraph covers inward facing cameras.

    “Inward facing cameras however are a different kettle of fish as these will have greater privacy concerns for individuals, and come under the rules for monitoring staff. Data Controllers will need to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment and have to justify the use on a case by case basis. There is nothing within the legislation to stop an organisation installing these cameras if it is proportionate to the problem it is addressing, but relations between management and staff may be tested, and the ICO may have questions if over-monitoring is employed without serious reasons for doing so.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information