Obtaining the Identity of Private Security Authority members

jd80

Security men etc. have to be licenced by the PSA.

They carry identity.

Whilst often, this identity hangs around ones neck, it would seem to be a 'trick of the trade' to have it reversed so as the identity details are not shown

A person who frequents the building the security men are securing, wishes to obtain the name of one of these men.

Is the security man obliged to give his name/show his identity when asked?

If not, is there a way of obtaining his identity?

Holsten

It's against their rules for the badge not to be clearly displayed. If it's not displayed correctly they can lose their PSA licence.

I know they are guilty of an offense if they don't produce for a Gardai but don't know about an average citizen.

gavindublin

My own experience is that id require the said person to be sober to give my number too. And no legal obligation to tell any member of the public your name.

jd80

Assume it is not in a pub or night club scenario, so no question of drunkenness.

These security men operate e.g. in many government offices open to the public

ormeau 1

The PSA website has a list of all licensed security personal in Ireland.

jd80

Thanks.

I see the list.

However, it does not tell me who the individual is - rather just a list of all individuals/contractors who hold a licence.

If an individual does not have the ID displayed, then is he obliged to give me his name?

Otherwise, how do I know from Adam who he is ?

Mikros

jd80 wrote: »

Thanks.

I see the list.

However, it does not tell me who the individual is - rather just a list of all individuals/contractors who hold a licence.

If an individual does not have the ID displayed, then is he obliged to give me his name?

Otherwise, how do I know from Adam who he is ?

Unless you are a member of An Garda Siochana there is no obligation for them to give you their name. They must display an identity badge if they are in a prescribed category - door men and static security (with some exceptions). The badge must be visible and legible. If the badge is not displayed where required it is an offence, but that still doesn't entitle you to their name - you would have to make a complaint to the PSA.

jd80

Mikros wrote: »

Unless you are a member of An Garda Siochana there is no obligation for them to give you their name. They must display an identity badge if they are in a prescribed category - door men and static security (with some exceptions). The badge must be visible and legible. If the badge is not displayed where required it is an offence, but that still doesn't entitle you to their name - you would have to make a complaint to the PSA.

I don't think it is an offence not to display the badge - I don't think there is any penalty for not displaying it (?)

Holsten

jd80 wrote: »

I don't think it is an offence not to display the badge - I don't think there is any penalty for not displaying it (?)

You can lose your PSA licence.

jd80

Holsten wrote: »

You can lose your PSA licence.

In reality that will not happen though will it?

The PSA is getting money from its members (yearly?)

How many members actually lose their licence unless they have (and it is proven) committed some serious breach of the legislation/rules?

I note in the legislation that as 'punishment' while a licence can be los there are other levels of penalty - one of which is 'advice' which means telling the memebr not to do it again nd be on your way

gavindublin

Are they working for an agency, brinks or group 4 for example. Or are they employed direct??

I understand you want to be vague in the details, but it was for this particular reason that names were taken off the front of the license. It ends up as a witch hunt.

Can you give anymore information on the need to know

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

Are they working for an agency, brinks or group 4 for example. Or are they employed direct??

I understand you want to be vague in the details, but it was for this particular reason that names were taken off the front of the license. It ends up as a witch hunt.

Can you give anymore information on the need to know

I need to make a complaint. Bullying and humiliation tactics were used.

In certain government offices, it would seem that some staff for whatever reason seem to attempt to escalate a problem.

When one argues ones point in a civil fashion, one is approached and asked to leave by security. When one protests that one is attempting to finish ones business, it is escalated by security in a rambo-esque fashion

I am not willing to be treated in this fashion any longer


Do not know if it is company as the badge was reversed


It appears that he is not obliged to give his name.

I must read it from his badge and risk another escalation



On a related note, what actual powers do these people posess?

They cannot assault

They cannot ask one to leave as they do not own the premises

If not causing alarm, then trespass is a civil matter

So what is the point of them except as a supposed 'physical deterrent'????

jd80

Since when were names taken off the licence (do you mean ID badge)????

gavindublin

They weren't taken off, they were moved. When the license came out they put our names on the front. Most refused to wear them because of the drunken idiot problem in pubs/clubs. So they moved the name to the back with your signature under it. You wont see this as it'll be in a card holder, arm band.

Can you physically be picked up and thrown out, not a great idea unless your throeing rocks at people! Can I stand in from of you and usher, nudge you out yes.

Is it something that would be common practice in that environment your talking about, no.

Ken.

The rules for badges are here http://www.psa.gov.ie/Website/psa/psa.nsf/agentvw?Openform&vw=psaLicensing

The important section for the op is

Since the 1st September 2009, all licensed individuals must wear an identity badge at all times while providing a security service. This is a legal reguirement and is set down in section 30 of the Private Security Services Act 2004. Failure to wear a badge may result in you being prosecuted and facing a fine of up to €3,000.

The identity badge must be clearly visible at all times and displayed on the upper torso (above the stomach and below the neck). The following is not acceptable:



Hanging the badge from a belt around the waist.
Clipping the badge behind a neck tie.
Placing the badge in a shirt pocket or jacket pocket.
Placing the badge under a jumper or jacket.

Failure to wear the badge in the correct manner may result in your licence being revoked.

Guidelines on identity badges are available here

Click on the 'here' at the end for a pdf of rules.

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

They weren't taken off, they were moved. When the license came out they put our names on the front. Most refused to wear
them because of the drunken idiot problem in pubs/clubs. So they moved the name to the back with your signature under it. You wont see this as it'll be in a card holder, arm band.

That would not seem to correlate to post # 15

gavindublin wrote: »

Can you physically be picked up and thrown out, not a great idea unless your throeing rocks at people! Can I stand in from of you and usher, nudge you out yes.

no nudging - ANY contact is assault - even if I reasonably think I am going to be assaulted THAT is an offence - sec 2 Non fatal 1997 (iirc)

I can be asked to leave, I do not have to follow the direction.

Unless I am causing alarm or intent to cause an offence, trespass is a civil matter

What actually gives the security gaurd the right to interupt one's business and raise his voice???

There is no way a member of AGS or a judge would be spoken to in the way some of these people speak to others


I am not against security.

In a certain office, there would seem to be an air of rambo - esque and humilating behaviour that I should not have and am no longer prepared to take.


There would seem to be very much an air of superiority and treating people as second class citizens. Hovering around people, listening in on their business is another irksome trait.

I see no other purpose for the security here than a bullying threat

gavindublin

Under these conditions I agree completely. You know yourself the law, and the application of the law differ.

But from the issues you've noted the only grivence you can make with the psa is that their badge is backwards. They can be difficult and lengthy to deal with.

From my own position, which would be one of an employer of people you have the problem with, your first point of call is with the employer and not the psa.

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

Under these conditions I agree completely. You know yourself the law, and the application of the law differ.

But from the issues you've noted the only grivence you can make with the psa is that their badge is backwards. They can be difficult and lengthy to deal with.

From my own position, which would be one of an employer of people you have the problem with, your first point of call is with the employer and not the psa.

Does that mean the employer e.g g4s/the contractor or the government agency?



If they do not have to disclose a name (or a contractor's name), i am back in square one

Apart from the backwards badge, ones only option is to examine if the gent in question has broken any law by raising his voice or interupting ones business.

I could think of - at a very very long shot - harrassment

I am also thinking of threatening behaviour- whereby I think that must occur in a public place

One thing is for sure, if I did it to someone on the street, I would be prosecuted

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

That would not seem to correlate to post # 15



no nudging - ANY contact is assault - even if I reasonably think I am going to be assaulted THAT is an offence - sec 2 Non fatal 1997 (iirc)

I can be asked to leave, I do not have to follow the direction.

Unless I am causing alarm or intent to cause an offence, trespass is a civil matter

What actually gives the security gaurd the right to interupt one's business and raise his voice???

There is no way a member of AGS or a judge would be spoken to in the way some of these people speak to others


I am not against security.

In a certain office, there would seem to be an air of rambo - esque and humilating behaviour that I should not have and am no longer prepared to take.


There would seem to be very much an air of superiority and treating people as second class citizens. Hovering around people, listening in on their business is another irksome trait.

I see no other purpose for the security here than a bullying threat

If you are asked to leave and refuse then you are now trespassing and security have the right (i believe) to remove you from the premises.

gavindublin

What uniforms are they in. Any agency will stick their logo all over them. Ties, shirt breast pocket, jackets.
Also their are 2 types of bagde to wear. One is psa issued, its orange and navy. Number, picture and psa halogram on the front. A different one can also be issued from the security employer. The guidelines on this are it has to be white, same size as psa, number name and expiry date. But also included is the company name on these. It may be easier to seperate them from in house rather than agency.

Or just ring externally and ask should you leave a cv for work with the department or are they agency!

gavindublin

bumper234 wrote: »

If you are asked to leave and refuse then you are now trespassing and security have the right (i believe) to remove you from the premises.

This is also my interpretation of how I address the issue

ted1

gavindublin wrote: »

My own experience is that id require the said person to be sober to give my number too. And no legal obligation to tell any member of the public your name.

Unless the brethalyze they can not say he is not sober.

What use is an identity badge if it does not reveal an identity?

OP have you contacted the people who hired the security?

jd80

bumper234 wrote: »

If you are asked to leave and refuse then you are now trespassing and security have the right (i believe) to remove you from the premises.

i would not be soooo sure

Trespass is a civil matter

Trespass causing alarm or with intent is criminal

Not sure if security have any 'right' - it is not their property

Even considering trespass on ones OWN property - one can only apply 'reasonable force' to remove someone.

That would mean not much more than touching their elbow and gently ushering them off the property. Anything above that will be assault

even that could be considered assault by some judges

gavindublin

ted1 wrote: »

Unless the brethalyze they can not say he is not sober.

I said id require, not that id ask if they were

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

i would not be soooo sure

Trespass is a civil matter

Trespass causing alarm or with intent is criminal

Not sure if security have any 'right' - it is not their property

Even considering trespass on ones OWN property - one can only apply 'reasonable force' to remove someone.

That would mean not much more than touching their elbow and gently ushering them off the property. Anything above that will be assault

even that could be considered assault by some judges

Yes but we are only getting ops side of the story here. Was he as calm and collected and going about his business as claimed? Or was he being loud/abusive/intimidating in any way? If he was any of the latter (we will never know for sure) then i believe security would have the right to "physically" remove him from the premises. This is my understanding but am in no way claiming this to be fact.

jd80

All the loudness/talking over/intimidation was coming from security

Staff continually talking over in an aggressive but more condescending and not allowing one to make ones point.

Indeed, security also breached into the area of defamation

It is an office that deals a lot with the public

They seem to have a way (as is said of many members of AGS also ) of escalating a situation to attempt make it look as if the citizen is at fault

I think, they believe - right or wrong - that as they are security they will be rather believed by AGS than the citizen and that the citizen will 'wet his pants' if AGS are called

Not so.



As to physical removal - Assault is assault is assault

The only defence that I know of is in self defence

(self defence is a defence as uttered by a local Judge once)

jd80

anyway, even if security got loud - what actual offence if any have the committed?

234

jd80 wrote: »

i would not be soooo sure

Trespass is a civil matter

Trespass causing alarm or with intent is criminal

Not sure if security have any 'right' - it is not their property

Even considering trespass on ones OWN property - one can only apply 'reasonable force' to remove someone.

That would mean not much more than touching their elbow and gently ushering them off the property. Anything above that will be assault

even that could be considered assault by some judges

The security are acting as the agents of the property owner an would have the authority to enforce their property rights. i.e. remove trespasser with reasonable force.

Secondly, reasonable force is not a static level of physical interaction.* It means force that is reasonable in the circumstances. If you are willing to go quietly then no force is reasonable. However, if you refuse to move then they can certainly pick you up and forcibly remove you. Once the force used is not disproportionate to that necessary to remove you then that is still reasonable force.

*If reasonable force the low-level constant that you suggest that how could it ever be used as the standard for pleas of self-defence?

Ken.

About the only thing I can suggest you do to remedy the situation is email/write to your local td and/or the minister for whatever department you're dealing with.

Mikros

jd80 wrote: »

As to physical removal - Assault is assault is assault

The only defence that I know of is in self defence

(self defence is a defence as uttered by a local Judge once)

If you are asked to leave private property and refuse you are then trespassing and can be lawfuly removed with no more than reasonable force if so required.

If you have a problem with some specific security - you need to take it up with the licence holder or owner of the premises. You also have the option of making a complaint to the PSA which you seem to have written off in favour of confronting individuals in person yourself. This is only going to escalate the situation and throwing around a few half baked legal terms isn't going to help you. Some friendly (non-legal!) advice would be to step back and take another look at how your approaching your grievance.

jd80

Mikros wrote: »

If you are asked to leave private property and refuse you are then trespassing and can be lawfuly removed with no more than reasonable force if so required.

If you have a problem with some specific security - you need to take it up with the licence holder or owner of the premises. You also have the option of making a complaint to the PSA which you seem to have written off in favour of confronting individuals in person yourself. This is only going to escalate the situation and throwing around a few half baked legal terms isn't going to help you. Some friendly (non-legal!) advice would be to step back and take another look at how your approaching your grievance.

I want him prosecuted.

I do not what law he has broke

If I acted as he did, I would be prosecuted. I am sure something would be found to charge me with.

Why should I accept being treated as a second class citizen

why should a different law apply to him?

The PSA will likely tell him to wear his badge the correct way around

The employer will do nothing

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

I want him prosecuted.

I do not what law he has broke

If I acted as he did, I would be prosecuted. I am sure something would be found to charge me with.

Why should I accept being treated as a second class citizen

why should a different law apply to him?

The PSA will likely tell him to wear his badge the correct way around

The employer will do nothing

So you are jot even sure if a law.was broken?

Here's the thing


You need to tell the WHOLE story from start to finish, no embelishments, no lies, no supposition just the whole true story. Explain what happened, why it happened and how it happened because otherwise people can/will only guess about the facts. FWIW i have worked security and i have come across many people who are unworthy of wearing a badge the same as i have met many "civilians" who can also be idiots. Tell the story and let pe9ple make up their own mi dsm

Homer

We'll only ever get one side of this story I think. You still haven't explained the circumstances surrounding your reason for being in the building in the first instance and your subsequent removal from it?
You had a coherent argument at the start but your last post makes it sound like the PSA member had good reason to want you off the property.

jd80

bumper234 wrote: »

So you are jot even sure if a law.was broken?

Correct, I am not.

I am trying to ascertain same. I cannot depend on AGS to investigate the matter in an great detail to ascertain if a law was broken

If I shout at someone in the street, surely I break a law.

Which one? Threatening, intimidating and insulting behaviour?

If a security gaurd shouts at me why should he be protected from the law?

bumper234 wrote: »

You need to tell the WHOLE story from start to finish, no embelishments, no lies, no supposition just the whole true story.

Well, by doing so I may give away my identity, if those who were present read this.

I did not really want to do that. However, I will consider it later.

There are no embellishments.

The people involved seem to glory in their intransigence and escalate any situation just to get rid of you.

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

Correct, I am not.

I am trying to ascertain same. I cannot depend on AGS to investigate the matter in an great detail to ascertain if a law was broken

You don't trust the guards to investigate but if a law has been broken you will trust them to prosecute?

If I shout at someone in the street, surely I break a law.

Not sure about that, the worse you might be doing is causing a disturbance. Unless of course you are right up in someones face shouting and acting in an aggressive manner but not sure if the law is being broken.

Which one? Threatening, intimidating and insulting behaviour?

If a security gaurd shouts at me why should he be protected from the law?

Shouting at someone is not breaking the law afaik but again you have not said WHY he was shouting at you.

Well, by doing so I may give away my identity, if those who were present read this.

How would telling us what happened give away your identity? Are you Bruce Wayne?

I did not really want to do that. However, I will consider it later.

There are no embellishments.

The people involved seem to glory in their intransigence and escalate any situation just to get rid of you.

Again without knowing what happened no one can really comment because we don't know why they were trying to "get rid of you"

gavindublin

If I shout at someone in the street, surely I break a law.

And here lies the reason why our names were taken off view and why badges are hidden. I think its time to suck it up.

Victor

jd80 wrote: »

Not sure if security have any 'right' - it is not their property

It is their employer's property. The security guard is acting vicariously for the employer, not on their own behalf.

Even considering trespass on ones OWN property - one can only apply 'reasonable force' to remove someone.

That would mean not much more than touching their elbow and gently ushering them off the property. Anything above that will be assault

even that could be considered assault by some judges

Your understanding of 'reasonable' would appear to be insufficient. If a staff member was being stabbed to death, do you think the same "touching their elbow and gently ushering them off the property" would apply?

Mikros

jd80 wrote: »

The people involved seem to glory in their intransigence and escalate any situation just to get rid of you.

I don't understand why this is an ongoing issue for you. Is it the case that you are repeatedly turning up at this location to air some grievance? Even if the security are less than professional in their attitude (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here) it is not a legal issue. What exactly are you hoping to achieve here? If you are getting escorted off a premises again and again I would be taking another look at where the problem lies.

Carawaystick

It would be fairly simple to record audio of any interaction with staff and agents of a govt dept.
A FOI would give details of any security company working for the govt dept, and the terms of the contract.

A photo would escalate the situation and potentially give evidence of non-compliance with the psa regulations

jd80

Carawaystick wrote: »

It would be fairly simple to record audio of any interaction with staff and agents of a govt dept.

Yes. In the past, I have done this with AGS.

It was successfully used in a Civil action against them

Just have a 'newish' phone from Adverts with which I am presently unfamiliar.

Carawaystick wrote: »

A FOI would give details of any security company working for the govt dept, and the terms of the contract.

Indeed, a good tip. I forgot about same.

I will attempt to obtain same via a formal complaint first.

I expect awkwardness

Carawaystick wrote: »

A photo would escalate the situation and potentially give evidence of non-compliance with the psa regulations

Indeed, an escalation would probably be unavoidable.

However, apart from an independent witness, I see no other method of proof other than said photo.

Whilst not being disparaging, the public generally are indifferent to becoming involved as witnesses.

Generally, other staff cannot be relied on as witnesses due to indifference or the ramifications of being considered a 'grass' or 'whistleblower' etc.

gavindublin

Civil action, grass and whistleblower.
Terms all used because someone raised their voice at you. You need an extra layer of cotton wool.

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

Civil action, grass and whistleblower.
Terms all used because someone raised their voice at you. You need an extra layer of cotton wool.

So tell me what you know about my successful Civil Action against An Garda Sicohana, wise one.

Whilst that matter is off topic, I suspect you have no idea.



Why should I not be treated with dignity in a Government office?

What is the reason not to be?

It is quite clear that the supposed (as no ID) security guard thought and thinks he could and can act in a bravado manner - partly to impress the female staff, which he seems to spend plenty of time interacting with.



I can guarantee that shouting would not be done to a member of AGS without repercussions.

Countless times, I have seen people been convicted of threatening, insulting and abusive behaviour towards Gardai over nothing.

Funny, I never hear the various DC Judges telling AGs to wrap up in wool ...

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

So tell me what you know about my successful Civil Action against An Garda Sicohana, wise one.

Whilst that matter is off topic, I suspect you have no idea.



Why should I not be treated with dignity in a Government office?

What is the reason not to be?

It is quite clear that the supposed (as no ID) security guard thought and thinks he could and can act in a bravado manner - partly to impress the female staff, which he seems to spend plenty of time interacting with.



I can guarantee that shouting would not be done to a member of AGS without repercussions.

Countless times, I have seen people been convicted of threatening, insulting and abusive behaviour towards Gardai over nothing.

Funny, I never hear the various DC Judges telling AGs to wrap up in wool ...

Link?

gavindublin

Successful actions, no I have no interest.

But I have visited government buildings on a regular basis. I have a working week divided, but added up to 70 hours which is based on general public interaction. And I have a healthy social life. These circumstances have been permanent for the last 10 years.

Yet I have never felt the need to try and find a reason to have someone charged over raising their voice, for whatever reason. Nor have I had someone try charge me for the same.

So yeah, I'd stand by my original idea of wrapping up tight!

jd80

bumper234 wrote: »

Link?

Circuit Court unreported - an action via plenary summons in the HC was cost prohibitive

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

Successful actions, no I have no interest.

Thought that

gavindublin wrote: »

.

Yet I have never felt the need to try and find a reason to have someone charged over raising their voice, for whatever reason. Nor have I had someone try charge me for the same.

Does not look like anyone could be charged.

I bet if I raised my voice at you, you'd do something about it - one way or another



It is not alone the raising of the voice.

It is the continual threatening demeanour of the person

It is him hovering around and listening in on conversations between staff and the public

It is him waltzing into a presentation and standing in the room, as if the participants were inmates from the 'Joy' (this was also commented on by another participant)

It is his interaction when not required - the bully boy tactics

It is the giving of false information to AGS (in this instance, they were called but nothing was done) - that he was assaulted and that staff were abused when that was not the case (CCTV to prove no assault)

It is his defamatory comments

It is the fact that despite being an external employee, he still knew my surname when in fact NEITHER my First name NOR Surname was uttered throughout my interaction with staff (item for Data Protection)

As if not bad enough that he had my name, I was then addressed as X. I requested to be called Mr. X to which the disparaging reply was akin to 'you're X' or such like


It is that I was not allowed to conduct my business. Where does this actually end? The next time when something does not in someway suit a staff member is the situation to be SKILFULLY escalated , security is called, and I possibly end up in Court on false testimony in order 'to teach me a lesson'?? even if it were to be dismissed, i still have to go through the somewhat stressful process .

There would seem to be a idea among security personnel that they can generally do what they like.

A bravado attitude that seemingly comes from authority 'gone to their head'

They also think that they will always be believed by AGS by displaying some kind of kinship with them.

They are after all, like their AGS counterparts, also guarding the peace are they not ?

If they do step out of line AND something is actually done about it, they will certainly attempt to claim it was reasonable in the circumstances. If they get away with it either because nothing is done or if something is done they have good Counsel, they then think they are invincible.

Hiding the ID badge and later claiming that it spun around by itself is another favourite to frustrate any complaint

The PAS is nothing more than a money generating quango. It does not guarantee that the calibre of security is any better than it was before its existence - maybe only with the exception that someone with convictions cannot be licenced.

Do they actually assess the myriad of training courses given?


Finally, I can guarantee that if I raised MY voice at HIM , a statement would have made that I was aggressive, abusive and threatening (given the office is actually a public building = place?) and I would have found myself in front of the DC the in the following week(s)

I want to be treated with dignity and not have to be fearful or apprehensive.

gavindublin

Post #16

"I am not against security"


Sure doesn't come across that way

jd80

gavindublin wrote: »

Post #16

"I am not against security"


Sure doesn't come across that way

I am not.

However, I have yet to meet a one yet whose perceived power has not gone to his head

Seemingly, you seem to be of the opinion it is totally acceptable to shout at people, make up false statements etc. etc.

I bet if someone shouted at you would do and have done something about it and then get out of it with a wink and nod as appropriate by referring to it 'reasonable'

Usually security are in twos or have non security staff to back up their claims of being 'reasonable'

gavindublin

My ma shouted at me. I sucked it up.

My teachers shouted alot. I sucked it up.

All thru my apprecticeship the foreman shouted alot. I sucked it up.

Working in nightclubs people constantly shout at me. I suck it up.

I rate real world problems a little higher on my scale.

But saying that, if there is someone falsifying statements then thats fraud. But if you know about statements, lies and cover ups then you must be more involved in this than you've lead us to believe.

bumper234

jd80 wrote: »

I am not.

However, I have yet to meet a one yet whose perceived power has not gone to his head

Seemingly, you seem to be of the opinion it is totally acceptable to shout at people, make up false statements etc. etc.

I bet if someone shouted at you would do and have done something about it and then get out of it with a wink and nod as appropriate by referring to it 'reasonable'

Usually security are in twos or have non security staff to back up their claims of being 'reasonable'

So ALL security are on a power trip and abuse their powers now? CT forum is thataway >>>

billy few mates

Working in nightclubs people constantly shout at me

Especially if you work behind the bar....