action against police/council

[hollsm]

Just wondering if any one knows if I am able to take action against the council for not fixing a cctv camera in a town centre..had the cctv been recording and working it would have recorded the agressive un prevoked attack on my partner (GBH sect 18) and been used as evidence?
Thanks

[leclerc]

Re: action against police/council

Will ask someone to take a look at this one.
[MENTION=15129]Crazy council[/MENTION] what do you think?

[Kati]

Re: action against police/council

tagging [MENTION=15129]Crazy council[/MENTION] xx

[Crazy council]

Re: action against police/council

Hi

Unless there is a breach in the service garuntee between the company that operate it and the council ( some have them for important locations ) , i would think it may be hard to put liability on them... but, it would be worth checking with shops and offices nearby, theres cctv everyware nowdays, police, council and highways, all have cameras around out town,

[hollsm]

Re: action against police/council

Thankyou crazy council, it's police owned cctb but maintained by the council, unfortunately due to the location of where it happened it's not caught by any shop/offices cctv. Iv had a complaint going with the police for a year now and on the 31st of December they admitted to negligence in investigating on several points and not treating my partner as a victim as the officers failed to report a crime. I'm guessing as convinetly for them the year deadline has passed (I have been told that it looks like they have done this om purpose) im unable to claim against them under the human rights act now?

[Crazy council]

Re: action against police/council

Ahaa , well, i do have a lot of experience with dealing with ther complaints system , the professional standards branch ( or self preservation society ), and they seem to just play for delays, only answer the parts of the questions that there not avoiding, unless really pressed. This is both with minor and serious issuse

If your not satisfied, push it to the IPCC ,,,,, BUT DONT AGREE TO LOCAL RESOLUTION, when asked. ( it just meens they give it back to the same officers, )., or, if they have admitted some negligence, put what details you can ( make sure no personal details ) , and some of the more experienced posters will tell you what steps you can take next.

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

Just wondering if any one knows if I am able to take action against the council for not fixing a cctv camera in a town centre..had the cctv been recording and working it would have recorded the agressive un prevoked attack on my partner (GBH sect 18) and been used as evidence?
Thanks

Ref: section 33, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:

"33 Effect of code(1) A relevant authority must have regard to the surveillance camera code when exercising any
functions to which the code relates.
(2) A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the surveillance
camera code does not of itself make that person liable to criminal or civil proceedings.
(3) The surveillance camera code is admissible in evidence in any such proceedings.
(4) A court or tribunal may, in particular, take into account a failure by a relevant authority to have
regard to the surveillance camera code in determining a question in any such proceedings.
(5) In this section “relevant authority” means—
(a) a local authority within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1972"

Surveillance Camera Code of Practice:
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...dePractice.pdf

NB: You can use this if you were to sue the council as it is admissible in civil courts.

[CLL1]

Re: action against police/council

Ref: section 33, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:

"33 Effect of code(1) A relevant authority must have regard to the surveillance camera code when exercising any
functions to which the code relates.
(2) A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with any provision of the surveillance
camera code does not of itself make that person liable to criminal or civil proceedings.
(3) The surveillance camera code is admissible in evidence in any such proceedings.
(4) A court or tribunal may, in particular, take into account a failure by a relevant authority to have
regard to the surveillance camera code in determining a question in any such proceedings.
(5) In this section “relevant authority” means—
(a) a local authority within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1972"

Surveillance Camera Code of Practice:
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...dePractice.pdf

NB: You can use this if you were to sue the council as it is admissible in civil courts.

Does this not regulate the use of CCTV? Rather than place any liability on LA in event of failing to maintain?

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

Does this not regulate the use of CCTV? Rather than place any liability on LA in event of failing to maintain?

The council must follow the statutory guidance which effectively is that the council(s) should/ must maintain CCTV. There was an omission by the council therefore and in consequence the GBH was not recorded. The guidance is admissible as evidence to help bring the claim against the council. However, the guidance alone does not make the council liable, and in any event the liability for omissions, I believe, is found in common law. The guidance may be useful to argue the council breached its duty by its omissions, in terms of evidence.

[CLL1]

Re: action against police/council

The council must follow the statutory guidance which effectively is that the council(s) should/ must maintain CCTV. There was an omission by the council therefore and in consequence the GBH was not recorded. The guidance is admissible as evidence to help bring the claim against the council. However, the guidance alone does not make the council liable, and in any event the liability for omissions, I believe, is found in common law. The guidance may be useful to argue the council breached its duty by its omissions, in terms of evidence.

I hadn't read the document you see (TL;DR) so was wondering.

Not entirely sure on what basis a claim would be founded, though. (In civil courts, anyway).

Thoughts?

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

I hadn't read the document you see (TL;DR) so was wondering.

Not entirely sure on what basis a claim would be founded, though. (In civil courts, anyway).

Thoughts?

The council does not have a duty (to be liable to or for others) for any omissions (should have done something but did not), except in some circumstances. Making a situation worse is one situation, ie were it not for the council not maintaining its CCTV systems the person is unlikely to have suffered the GBH. However, the counter argument by the council (causation test) is, those injuries would have happened so rapidly that even if there were CCTVs working the damage would have already been done. Unless the CCTV had integrated tannoy sytem with a voice saying, hey stop doing that now, the police have been dispatched'....where the perpetrator would likely have stopped the assault and left the scene, what good can CCTV do except alert people to the danger.

[CLL1]

Re: action against police/council

It's clear the council isn't liable under DOC, my Q was thoughts on cause of action.

Making situation worse and failing to make good could create criminal liability, but not in this case.

Fighting a losing battle I think.

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

Thankyou crazy council, it's police owned cctb but maintained by the council, unfortunately due to the location of where it happened it's not caught by any shop/offices cctv. Iv had a complaint going with the police for a year now and on the 31st of December they admitted to negligence in investigating on several points and not treating my partner as a victim as the officers failed to report a crime. I'm guessing as convinetly for them the year deadline has passed (I have been told that it looks like they have done this om purpose) im unable to claim against them under the human rights act now?

What about compensation from the Criminal Injuries' Board...have you exhausted this option yet?

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

It's clear the council isn't liable under DOC, my Q was thoughts on cause of action.

Making situation worse and failing to make good could create criminal liability, but not in this case.

Fighting a losing battle I think.

The guide comes from the statute..so it's not a statutory breach anyway. I agree it's not going to be easy to sue the council or the police, either or could be the tort-feasors. Public authorities have so many defences, ie lack of resources being one...however, the compensation and or the court action normally has positive effect, ie a deterrent so that others are not hurt by lack of not well maintained CCTV systems. The other defence is the floodgate argument, ie one claim will lead to many etc.

[Openlaw15]

Re: action against police/council

It's clear the council isn't liable under DOC, my Q was thoughts on cause of action.

Making situation worse and failing to make good could create criminal liability, but not in this case.

Fighting a losing battle I think.

You say 'could' create crim. liability, but not here. In your view, why not?