Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

House Items going missing

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    dubrov wrote: »
    I'd say they said it was not a criminal matter. Expect a massive legal bill if you are caught videotaping licensees without their knowledge

    The only legal bill would be for the licensee when they get landed with costs for the home owner and their own legal team. A licensee wouldnzero grounds to take a case against the home owner for placing cameras in common areas of the house (which is what I was suggesting). What offence are you suggesting they committed?
    bubblypop wrote: »
    You're legal advice is terrible nox.
    No-one has a right to privacy in a public place & true you can be on CCTV anywhere.
    The same does not exist for your dwelling or even private areas.
    You need to be informed if you will be on CCTV in a private area.
    Every see the signs? Shops, private areas of estates? .

    Firstly I was not giving legal advise. You need to go away and do some research, you do not have to inform someone of recording in your private house. A shop, hotel etc is totally different, in a private house you can do what you want in the common areas anyway, it may cross over into something else if the cameras were in a bedroom or bathroom but you would be looking at a very different type of offence.

    Loads of people have cameras in their home that record people who don’t know it, I have cameras in the house and visitors or people working in the house don’t know they are their. They may see them but they may not, they certainly is no signs as it’s not a requirement for private dwellings. Have you never heard of a nanny cam? That’s the type of thing I’m suggesting for the op to do.
    davindub wrote: »
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/landlord-who-spied-on-his-tenants-jailed-1.354920%3fmode=amp

    I was mistaken in my post last night (plenty of drink on board). The thread I was thinking off did not have camera it was that they suspected there were cameras. I would be as surprised as anyone if a LL having camera anywhere would not be an offence (and rightly so bar maybe common areas in an apartment block) but a private dwelling is very different.


  • Options
    #63
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    haydeyhi wrote: »
    My guess would be one of them came home some evening scuttered and fell into them and hid the evidence.

    That was my first thought too.


  • Options
    #64
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,945 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    fran38 wrote: »
    Im so sorry for the late reply. Firstly thank you all for the thoughtful replies ( And yes that includes the replies that were way off kilter lol). The vase was in fact in her room. She took it a few weeks ago and just held onto it. No harm done there. The poster issue is another issue altogether. I spoke to both lodgers in the kitchen two nights ago. They were aghast that someone would do such a thing One of them and i dont know which one,i suspect is a superb actor. They denied all knowledge of knowing anyone that could have taken it. No friends of theirs woild stoop so low as to take another persons belongings.
    A lot of tooing and froing. A lot of threats to throw them out on their ear if it didnt turn up etc
    But what did i do?.,I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. I think it may have been taken by one of their pals unknownst (spelling?) to them. Such was their amazement and disgust at such a thing happening. However i did say this is it, anymore **** like this and out ye go.
    Ill get mauled and ridiculed by spme posters, bring it on ****wits lol But there you go.

    That's the best way to deal with it. If anything else goes missing just kick them both out.


  • Options
    #65
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    You can do what ever you want in your own home. You can place a camera where ever the hell you want, please don’t spread nonsense ideas that you can’t as someone might believe it.

    You do not need consent to record someone one your private property or in a public place for that matter.

    There was even a thread here recently where a LL had hidden cameras in a tenants property and the guards said it’s nothing whatsoever to do with them, not a legal matter.


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    The only legal bill would be for the licensee when they get landed with costs for the home owner and their own legal team. A licensee wouldnzero grounds to take a case against the home owner for placing cameras in common areas of the house (which is what I was suggesting). What offence are you suggesting they committed?



    Firstly I was not giving legal advise. You need to go away and do some research, you do not have to inform someone of recording in your private house. A shop, hotel etc is totally different, in a private house you can do what you want in the common areas anyway, it may cross over into something else if the cameras were in a bedroom or bathroom but you would be looking at a very different type of offence.

    Nox you have changed from cameras “wherever the hell you want” to common areas

    That is a huge difference and also why you were quoted multiple times

    Putting cameras wherever you want may get a person classified as a sexual deviant


  • Options
    #66
    dubrov
    Registered Users Posts: 3,559 ✭✭✭dubrov


    mikemac2 wrote:
    Nox you have changed from cameras “wherever the hell you want†to common areas

    Even common areas is shaky ground. It would have a detrimental impact to the licensee's right to privacy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    dubrov wrote: »
    Even common areas is shaky ground. It would have a detrimental impact to the licensee's right to privacy.

    They have no right to privacy in common areas.


  • Options
    #68
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    I'd check Adverts and eBay for the poster.

    It didn't walk off the wall. Sorry, I wouldn't let that go.


  • Options
    #69
    James 007
    Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭James 007


    This is why I'd prefer a set of rules/guidelines set out from the start with a lodger. They may never be needed but in the event of something happening/conflict all is plain to see & written down. Since seeing this thread, I have added an additional three, 11,12,13. I have linked the thread should anyone want to use/refer to it.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=112753200#post112753200

    Please only post on the above, thread, within the thread, thanks.


  • Options
    #70
    This is it
    Registered Users Posts: 5,302 ✭✭✭This is it


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    The only legal bill would be for the licensee when they get landed with costs for the home owner and their own legal team. A licensee wouldnzero grounds to take a case against the home owner for placing cameras in common areas of the house (which is what I was suggesting). What offence are you suggesting they committed?



    Firstly I was not giving legal advise. You need to go away and do some research, you do not have to inform someone of recording in your private house. A shop, hotel etc is totally different, in a private house you can do what you want in the common areas anyway, it may cross over into something else if the cameras were in a bedroom or bathroom but you would be looking at a very different type of offence.

    Loads of people have cameras in their home that record people who don’t know it, I have cameras in the house and visitors or people working in the house don’t know they are their. They may see them but they may not, they certainly is no signs as it’s not a requirement for private dwellings. Have you never heard of a nanny cam? That’s the type of thing I’m suggesting for the op to do.



    I was mistaken in my post last night (plenty of drink on board). The thread I was thinking off did not have camera it was that they suspected there were cameras. I would be as surprised as anyone if a LL having camera anywhere would not be an offence (and rightly so bar maybe common areas in an apartment block) but a private dwelling is very different.

    Has there been plenty of drink on board the entire time you've been posting here? That'd at least make sense.


  • Options
    #71
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    You handled it well. Hopefully harmony will be restored.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    fran38
    Registered Users Posts: 524 ✭✭✭fran38


    Mods, can ye please lock this thread now. Its served its use. Thank you all.


  • Options
    #73
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,237 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    They have no right to privacy in common areas.

    You are right under the law as it currently stands; however, when the Harrassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offnces Bill becomes law, that landlord would be advised to remove the cameras for fear that it would record an “intimate image” of a lodger rendering the landlord liable for a prison sentence and subsequent registration as a sex offender.


  • Options
    #74
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    fran38 wrote: »
    Mods, can ye please lock this thread now. Its served its use. Thank you all.

    I hate this, lock the thread stuff. How about let people enjoy the debates that are happening in it?
    Marcusm wrote: »
    You are right under the law as it currently stands; however, when the Harrassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offnces Bill becomes law, that landlord would be advised to remove the cameras for fear that it would record an “intimate image” of a lodger rendering the landlord liable for a prison sentence and subsequent registration as a sex offender.

    If it was a LL I’d agree. But home owner with licensees, fair game.


  • Options
    #75
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    I hate this, lock the thread stuff. How about let people enjoy the debates that are happening in it?

    Do you still think cameras should be allowed "wherever the hell you want" ?

    Your words, not mine.

    Where do you draw the line? Maybe you don't. Sounds perverted tbh


  • Options
    #76
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    mikemac2 wrote: »
    Do you still think cameras should be allowed "wherever the hell you want" ?

    Your words, not mine.

    Where do you draw the line? Maybe you don't. Sounds perverted tbh

    Common areas are 100% fair game. Anywhere else I still would think the house owner would have a very strong case of being allowed to have them where he wants in his own home.

    I would personally have no interest whatsoever in having cameras in bathrooms or bedrooms but common areas and outside the house I would see cameras as the norm now.


  • Options
    #77
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,712 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Evict both of them. Yes that means one innocent party getting the door but for you it also means you’re definitely getting rid of the thief. Chances are the next two will be honest but put something better in place before they move in.


  • Options
    #78
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    Legal this legal that, where do people get these ideas in their head.

    You can do what ever you want in your own home. You can place a camera where ever the hell you want, please don’t spread nonsense ideas that you can’t as someone might believe it.

    You do not need consent to record someone one your private property or in a public place for that matter.

    There was even a thread here recently where a LL had hidden cameras in a tenants property and the guards said it’s nothing whatsoever to do with them, not a legal matter.
    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    I would personally have no interest whatsoever in having cameras in bathrooms or bedrooms

    Your posts don't match

    Mod Note

    Do not attack the poster.
    Consider this an on thread warning.

    The phrasing you are using is uncivil and against the forum charter.


  • Options
    #79
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,712 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The campaign a few users have against this nox poster because they have a drink (heaven forbid) is disgusting and needs to be stamped out once and for all. It’s bordering on harassment, especially with the language used by this ‘person’ quoted.


  • Options
    #80
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    Ah heyor, show me on this thread when I didn't quote correctly

    79 posts on this thread. If someone posted here it is because they wanted to. Everyone was quoted correctly


  • Options
    #81
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,712 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    mikemac2 wrote: »
    Ah heyor, show me on this thread when I didn't quote correctly

    79 posts on this thread. If someone posted here it is because they wanted to. Everyone was quoted correctly

    Why are you running an attacking personal campaign on a user because you disagree with something they said? There’s a good few of you in that little gang too. Scary when grown ups stoop to such levels.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    I've fourteen posts in accommodation forum in six months, a shade over two a month

    If that's an attacking personal campaign well it's a failure and if you think it's sustained it's in your own head, god bless

    What we have learned here according to noxx is if you have licensees place a camera "where ever the hell you want". If you learn of a Galwegian landlord who did just this and got jailed then claim drink taken


  • Options
    #83
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    mikemac2 wrote: »
    I've fourteen posts in accommodation forum in six months, a shade over two a month

    If that's an attacking personal campaign well it's a failure and if you think it's sustained it's in your own head, god bless

    What we have learned here according to noxx is if you have licensees place a camera "where ever the hell you want". If you learn of a Galwegian landlord who did just this and got jailed then claim drink taken

    I’ve no idea what you are on about to be honest. I made a comment about another thread last night, I acknowledged I made a mistake and that’s it.


  • Options
    #84
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    Common areas are 100% fair game. Anywhere else I still would think the house owner would have a very strong case of being allowed to have them where he wants in his own home.

    I would personally have no interest whatsoever in having cameras in bathrooms or bedrooms but common areas and outside the house I would see cameras as the norm now.

    What? In somebody’s bedroom? (Yes, it’s the owner’s bedroom but they’ve accepted money in exchange for use of that bedroom and a human being is using it) No, that would be a gross violation.


  • Options
    #85
    1874
    Registered Users Posts: 2,384 ✭✭✭1874


    Imo, I cant see how it didnt come up in posts since it was mentioned,but the person that took the vase would seem to be inclined that way, Id give her her marching orders, as I reckon that vase was about to dissapear but it was still in the house. Seems obvious to me who the crook is, reasonable grounds to throw them out,24 hrs notice,gone.


  • Options
    #86
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,772 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    What? In somebody’s bedroom? (Yes, it’s the owner’s bedroom but they’ve accepted money in exchange for use of that bedroom and a human being is using it) No, that would be a gross violation.

    The poster has stated in the post you quoted that he would have no interest in cctv in the bedrooms or bathrooms. Common areas only. Which is becoming quite the norm.


  • Options
    #87
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Gumbo wrote: »
    The poster has stated in the post you quoted that he would have no interest in cctv in the bedrooms or bathrooms. Common areas only. Which is becoming quite the norm.

    Aaah, look at the bolded bit:
    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    Common areas are 100% fair game. Anywhere else I still would think the house owner would have a very strong case of being allowed to have them where he wants in his own home.

    I would personally have no interest whatsoever in having cameras in bathrooms or bedrooms but common areas and outside the house I would see cameras as the norm now.

    And that was after saying he meant only common areas. He still says there is a case for cameras in places other than common areas. That’s very clear from his post. Did you read the post I quoted?

    As for cameras becoming “the norm” - do you mean in licensee situations? Well, in whatever situation, I hope the tenant/licensees/whatever are informed of their presence. I personally would have avoided a houseshare situation with common area cameras if at all possible, though it’s not something I ever came across. Maybe it’s becoming commonplace but I’d look dimly on any landlord who insisted on them, no matter how commonplace they become. It’s not something people have to be okay with.


  • Options
    #88
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,237 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    I hate this, lock the thread stuff. How about let people enjoy the debates that are happening in it?



    If it was a LL I’d agree. But home owner with licensees, fair game.

    It’s a very odd concept that you think that recording an intimate image of a person without their consent would only constitute a crime if the person did not also reside in the house. For your information, capturing such an image of your wife (or child) will also constitute a crime and they will no more be “fair game” than paying lodgers.


  • Options
    #89
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Marcusm wrote: »
    It’s a very odd concept that you think that recording an intimate image of a person without their consent would only constitute a crime if the person did not also reside in the house. For your information, capturing such an image of your wife (or child) will also constitute a crime and they will no more be “fair game” than paying lodgers.

    The fair game was in reference to common areas if you read the post correctly.


  • Options
    #90
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Sariyah Few Colon wrote: »
    The fair game was in reference to common areas if you read the post correctly.

    Well no, you still said you believed a homeowner would have a “very strong case” for having them in places other than the common areas. I can’t see anyone considering that at all reasonable. It’s a gross violation of privacy and, frankly, deeply creepy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Well no, you still said you believed a homeowner would have a “very strong case” for having them in places other than the common areas. I can’t see anyone considering that at all reasonable. It’s a gross violation of privacy and, frankly, deeply creepy.

    I'm not saying I'd do it nor agree with it but I would certainly say that in a private house where the owner placed the cameras and lives there it would be a fairly strong battle to actually win any case over them. You throw out words like violation of privacy or creepy (which in most cases would be correct) but you need to understand the extremely strong position a home home in their home home is in. It would not be the open and shut case that some would think.

    As an aside several pubs I frequent have cameras in the toilets.

    Anyway the discussion is about common areas which I have highlighted several times, even my original suggestion of setting the person up to steal something would quite clearly be in a common area. Continuing to snipe at my posts is just derailing the thread. I still think the setup would have been a very good idea too though now that they have been confronted they probably will not do it again/for a while.


Advertisement