He said it was for security reasons, but when the investigators went looking, they found something else entirely.

He said it was for security reasons, but when the investigators went looking, they found something else entirely.
Society

Neighbor installs 3 cameras, says it is to monitor his property but after complaints and investigations, the truth is discovered

Calum Roche
Sports-lover turned journalist, born and bred in Scotland, with a passion for football (soccer). He’s also a keen follower of NFL, NBA, golf and tennis, among others, and always has an eye on the latest in science, tech and current affairs. As Managing Editor at AS USA, uses background in operations and marketing to drive improvements for reader satisfaction.
Update:

If your neighbor sets up three surveillance cameras and tells you they’re “just for protection,” you might raise an eyebrow. When one man in Greece did exactly that, he soon realized he wasn’t just being paranoid, he and his family were being recorded inside their own property.

What the neighbor saw

As reported by Lawspot, the neighbor, who ran a restaurant business on the same plot of land as his home, claimed the cameras were there to guard against theft and vandalism. Two were supposedly active, and the third? “Just a dummy,” he insisted. He also said the footage was stored on memory cards for five days before being auto-deleted, and that none of the cameras pointed beyond his property. Except they did.

But in May 2022, a complaint was filed after the man noticed he was repeatedly caught on camera while at home. He sent a formal access request by registered mail, asking for footage that showed him during specific times. The request went unanswered. That led to a second complaint for violating data access rights under GDPR.

As the case escalated, he submitted photos, technical specs, and even video to the Hellenic Data Protection Authority showing that two cameras could rotate – and at least one clearly recorded movements inside his yard and home entrance. He also obtained footage via a related police report that contradicted the neighbor’s earlier claims.

How much was the neighbor fined?

The Authority concluded the system didn’t qualify as “personal use” because it surveilled both private and public space and was used in connection with a business. It also noted that the explanations from the camera owners kept shifting as more evidence came in.

The ruling: €6,000 in total fines ($6,480), split equally between the two owners for breaching GDPR rules on legality, transparency, and data subject access. The pair were also ordered to reconfigure the system so that no footage from neighboring property or public areas is ever captured again.

Related stories

Get your game on! Whether you’re into NFL touchdowns, NBA buzzer-beaters, world-class soccer goals, or MLB home runs, our app has it all.

Dive into live coverage, expert insights, breaking news, exclusive videos, and more – plus, stay updated on the latest in current affairs and entertainment. Download now for all-access coverage, right at your fingertips – anytime, anywhere.

Tagged in:
Comments
Rules

Complete your personal details to comment

We recommend these for you in Latest news