WHO IS HARASSING WHO WITH HARASSMENT??
Derbyshire Constabulary finally solve the mystery over who has been harassing who
during the past 18 months of neighbourhood dispute and apprehend the suspect -
A TORCH!!
For almost a year, 15 homes and gardens has been under constant surveillance by CCTV recording equipment installed by Rayden Engineering to "protect" his industrial premises and the floodplain land he stole and developed without planning permission. Any movement within our private properties has been monitored and recorded as identifiable images on surveillance tapes monitored by unlicensed and unregistered individuals who are not listed on the Data Controller Register and has not paid for or is in possession of the relevant license required to operate this equipment.
When venturing out in the summer to sit in the garden, albeit at 10.30pm on a Saturday night when Rayden employees have finally gone home to prepare for the Sunday morning dawn chorus, in winter to access the dustbin or shed, a pair of red eyes has swivelled round to focus on and record our every movement whilst on OUR OWN property.
Any complaints the residents have made to the police over harassment with the constant Rayden Engineering provoking and taunting during the past 18 months, fell on deaf ears as "It was a civil matter", even the criminal damage to 15 homes was a civil matter and nothing Derbyshire Constabulary could involve themselves with, despite now having visited the residents over 25 times to investigate complaints made by Rayden Engineering when every time the civil matter then turned into a criminal matter requiring the full attention of Derbyshire Constabulary.
On the 12th of March 2008 Derbyshire Constabulary visited our home for the 20th time
to investigate YET ANOTHER allegation made by Rayden Engineering of criminal damage
to his property and attempting to shoot one of his employees a whole 23 days earlier.
However, we have now been downgraded from 6 allegations of owning and using firearms
to shoot Rayden employees to attempting to shoot them with a catapult instead -
Despite Rayden Engineering having informed the same police force that his unregistered
and uncontrolled surveillance equipment was not covertly recording his residential
neighbours, he then produced surveillance recordings which proves he had been doing
precisely what he had already stated to the police he hadn't been doing!! The "evidence"
was extremely damning, a covert recording had been shown to the police of the perpetrator
of the crime walking down his garden path to the gate and back again -
On the 14th of March 2008 Derbyshire Constabulary spent 4 hours with Rayden Engineering watching his covert recordings. On the same day a neighbour was cautioned and threatened with arrest for failing to exercise due control of his torch which was interfering with the unregistered and uncontrolled covert surveillance equipment. Our neighbour had to sign a declaration he was not given a copy of, that he would not shine his torch at the camera that is watching us but isn't watching us but is watching us after all. Any more trigger happy finger with the torch button and he would be arrested and charged with....and wait for it.....HARASSMENT!!!
These covert surveillance recordings taken of residents inside their own properties infringes the right to privacy and respect for family life. As we do not have the assurance of knowing whether the individuals watching these tapes are CRB checked, questions arise over how video recordings of young children playing in garden paddling pools in summer can actually assist Rayden Engineering to maintain security over the land they stole. Who watches these images and for what purpose? Where are these images stored and for how long? What assurances do the residents have that these illicitly stolen images of their private family lives are not electronically transmitted and used elsewhere?
DID THE POLICE NOT STOP TO THINK BEFORE WASTING YET MORE MAN HOURS AND PAPER WORK INVESTIGATING YET ANOTHER SPURIOUS ALLEGATION THAT IT WAS HIGHLY UNLIKELY A “KNOWN OFFENDER” WOULD WEAR BRIGHT YELLOW FLUORESCENT HIGH VISIBILITY WORK CLOTHING AND STAND UNDER SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT KNOWING HE WAS BEING RECORDED AND BE STUPID ENOUGH TO COMMIT A CRIME?
PC Plod then went on to inspect OUR garden to check we had no lights inside OUR own garden that could be interfering with Rayden Engineering’s uncontrolled and unregistered surveillance equipment that is covertly monitoring and recording inside OUR own property! No we had no garden lights in March but have several solar lights installed during the Summer. Another midnight arrest complete with police escort?
WARNING!!
SUMMER ‘IN THE NIGHT GARDEN’
CAN DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH.
“The CCTV cameras were installed following advice from the police” and “as directed by Mr Ian Brailsford Derbyshire Constabulary Business Crime Prevention Advisor.” “The cameras do not impinge on privacy, but are a justifiable and legitimate security measure. The CCTV cameras conform to the applicable rules in all respects.”
RAYDEN ENGINEERING
1: “It appears that Rayden Engineering has failed to comply with Principle 1 in this case.”
2: “It appears that Rayden Engineering has failed to comply with principle 3 in this case. When a CCTV system is installed for the prevention and detection of crime it is likely to be considered excessive to also be used for another purpose.”
3: “It appears that Rayden Engineering has failed to comply with the requirements of principle 6 in this case.”
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER DECEMBER 2008
“In the light of this it is my assessment that it is unlikely that Rayden Engineering has complied with the Data Protection Act in this case. Rayden Engineering should take steps to bring their processing into compliance with the Act in this case.”
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER DECEMBER 2008
WAS THIS THE
CATAPULT
MR HAYDEN??
Thus far Mr Hayden has stated that the police has advised him to erect trespassing security fencing above the legal height limit requiring planning consent around flood land not in his legal ownership and which also required planning consent for a change of use. Mr Hayden has stated that the police also “advised” and “directed” the installation of unregistered and uncontrolled CCTV equipment in breach of The Data Protection Act. In addition, Mr Hayden now states that Derbyshire Constabulary also advised him to write a letter to The Information Commissioner which contains libellous and unfounded allegations of criminal activity.
The 18th of February 2008 Rayden Engineering CCTV “evidence” of the “known offender” putting rubbish in the dustbin!
“The private gardens are blacked out by the (CCTV) system ...which incorporates a mechanism for ‘blacking out’ any areas where the camera might pick up images of neighbouring private properties.” RAYDEN ENGINEERING MAY 08 & JAN 09
MY PRIVATE GARDEN
“The CCTV cameras conform to the applicable rules in all respects. The cameras do not infringe on privacy, but are a justifiable and legitimate security measure, the need for which has been prompted by the unpredictable behaviour of the Respondent’s husband.”
RAYDEN ENGINEERING DECEMBER 08
RAYDEN ENGINEERING
CCTV RECORDING
COMMENT: Very “unpredictable behaviour” to randomly put household rubbish in one’s own dustbin when one’s pedal bin is full!
Did the police fail to notice during these 4 hours watching the CCTV tapes that despite yet more allegations of bullets, missiles or peas bouncing off employees arms to break a toughened HGV windscreen glass, the employees in the same CCTV tape carried on working as normal until the end of the shift instead of running for cover!!
Hope the solar lights inside our garden are not disturbing you too much Mr Hayden!!