Sentry Mode works

[pjuk]

Then they smash the window to steal the USB stick that has recorded it

I’d recommend hiding/or routing the cable out of sight. On the MX there is a nice run of rubber matting that you can tuck a drive way back under the dash. The only issue is retrieving it with ease :/ hopefully they’ll add an option to view and delete footage from the car remotely.

I did also see somewhere in the menu that there is the option to upload sentry footage on the event of an alarm to Elon’s personal computer or something like that...

Also I guess you could leave a note on the dash saying that you are being recorded but this could encourage trouble.

 

[Bezza4]

Then they smash the window to steal the USB stick that has recorded it

Was thinking this earlier. Whilst Sentry is great to capture things like this. If anyone is aware of how the videos are captured, anyone breaking in will just take the USB. In the same way Sentry isn’t any use if the car is stolen.

Would be so much better if the videos were automatically uploaded to the cloud and video alerts could be sent to the app in real time (although that may drive you mad in busy car parks)

 

[ThrustSSC]

My excess is not exactly small so depending on the estimate for the work I might not pursue the claim.

You know who he is, and likely know where he lives. You can prove his liability. Hit him with a claim for the repair work, including all your time and expenses to identify him and pursue him.

He won't pay immediately, in all likelihood. But you can then send in the bailiffs.

A few years ago it gave me immense satisfaction dealing with a scrote this way. It dragged on, but in the particular circumstances I had nothing to lose. Eventually I sent in the guys from the TV programme. I got my money. They got an undoubtedly-not-insignificant fee. The Court got their fee. The scrote got a lesson.

 

[MrBadger]

Many years ago I got hit by an uninsured driver. Got legal involved, won the case, bailiffs sent in, found he owned nothing that could be proven to be his. Waste of ...

 

[Palros]

Ok, So just thinking about this. How does this work with GDPR. It could be argued that Sentry mode is CCTV, and while it protects your property, it is also filming people and there property.

I just read this
https://www.dataprotection.ie/sites...dance for Drivers on the use of Dash Cams.pdf

Seems to be the closest thing i could find

 

[Daverh]

He must be a day-1 reservation holder who's yet to receive his car

Re: GDPR I'm not sure but it made my home CCTV installation a little less trouble. I no longer need to register with the ICO as a data handler and IIRC recording a public place is less of an issue.
Guidance on the use of domestic CCTV

Domestic CCTV systems - guidance for people using CCTV

Many dashcams record continuously, including the one in my current car and I've never given it a second thought in terms of data protection.

Re: dashcams recording to the cloud: Blackvue have some cameras that can store clips in the cloud although I'm not sure what prompts them to be uploaded Cloud Plans - Overview - BlackVue

 

[Palros]

Good guess

GDPR would apply if you were using sentry mode in a public car park. Somebody in theory could request any footage you have of them. Now realistically, this is highly unlikely to happen.

I just thought it was an interesting point.

 

[MrBadger]

Interesting topic which I had not given much thought to as so far I am only on the receiving end...

So I find this interesting looking at this from the perspective of the person being recorded...

What are my rights?
If you are filmed on someone’s domestic CCTV system, which is capturing images outside the boundary of their home, the data protection laws give you several rights.

In particular, you have the following rights:

• To be told that a home CCTV system is being used. The CCTV user must let people know they have CCTV. Signs are the most common way of doing this. They must be clearly visible and legible.
• To ask for a copy of the information that is held about you. This is known as making a subject access request. You can ask verbally or in writing for copies of any footage where your image is identifiable. The CCTV user must respond to this request within one month. Bear in mind that if they regularly delete footage they no longer need, they might not hold your images.
• To ask the CCTV user to erase any personal data they hold about you.
• To ask that the CCTV user does not capture any footage of you in future. However, the nature of CCTV systems may make this very difficult and it might not be possible for the user to do this.

The first one may require a small sign on the car. Second and third would be covered by regularly deleting footage and not uploading to a wider audience. Final point is probably covered by CCTV user not being able to discriminate between users.

The biggest obstacle I can see seems to be how to let an individual know how to contact the CCTV user (ie car owner) to exercise their rights. Presumably, there is something more specific to dashcam somewhere? But CCTV seems more relevant to sentry which is simply mobile car mounted CCTV. So I would be interested to see how that bit works, even though footage would be regularly deleted.

Which brings up the point of, how/when is sentry mode footage overwritten? I think if footage was deleted within a month, then a recorded users potential requests would be automatically complied with.

And the other point, what is the boundary of domestic - does a company owned/financed car fit within domestic use?

 

[interbear]

I'm pretty sure that in the scenario outlined by the OP the law would come down on the side of the Tesla owner. At least in my world it would.

Scumbag - "But you didn't have permission to record me on camera, GDPR, blah"

The Law - "I don't care. F*** GDPR. Did you have permission to damage the car? No, I didn't think so. So f*** you as well."

As I write this I'm doing so in an intimidating Taggart-esque accent and the perp is being dragged down a Glasgow alley for a good battering. I think I need a coffee

 

[davidmc]

Interesting topic which I had not given much thought to as so far I am only on the receiving end...

So I find this interesting looking at this from the perspective of the person being recorded...



The first one may require a small sign on the car. Second and third would be covered by regularly deleting footage and not uploading to a wider audience. Final point is probably covered by CCTV user not being able to discriminate between users.

The biggest obstacle I can see seems to be how to let an individual know how to contact the CCTV user (ie car owner) to exercise their rights. Presumably, there is something more specific to dashcam somewhere? But CCTV seems more relevant to sentry which is simply mobile car mounted CCTV. So I would be interested to see how that bit works, even though footage would be regularly deleted.

Which brings up the point of, how/when is sentry mode footage overwritten? I think if footage was deleted within a month, then a recorded users potential requests would be automatically complied with.

And the other point, what is the boundary of domestic - does a company owned/financed car fit within domestic use?

Thx and very interesting!

Also i noticed this regards Dashcams etc:

"If you share your car as a part of a company scheme, for example, you must inform those you share it with of the dash cam's installation. This is because most dash cams record sound, while others even video record the inside of the vehicle.

If someone else who has use of your car is unaware they are being recorded, that is a serious breach of privacy. It's up to you to let them know.

This goes doubly for those in the taxi industry. Cabbies, minicab drivers, coach drivers and the like who choose to use a dash cam must inform every passenger who enters their vehicle that a dash cam is in use, or face potentially harsh legal consequences."

And Last one which i didnt know about until now:

There is a website that links to police forces (If signed up) that you upload your dashcam evidence:

Submit Dash Cam Footage To Your Local Police Force | Nextbase

 

[jimmymc]

Sorry to hear this @Jez013. While it won’t protect a really deep keying, I’m seriously considering PPF myself when my Model 3 dares to arrive. Why don’t people like others to have nice things.

I’m also in Bromley by the way.. quite a bunch of us have cropped up on here and the FB Owners Group!

 

[MrBadger]

The catch 22 with video is that the police will say do not put it on social media since it will predudice the public and may prevent a production. But if you dont chances are they will not find anyone to prosecute in the first place.

There was a video post on here a few months ago of some idiotic driving, it was forwarded to the police, they said they would prosecute and asked for O/P to take the video down (on social media) ... so maybe posting, originally, doesn't prejudice that.

I’VE PUT MY FOOTAGE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, ISN’T THAT ACCEPTABLE?

Please remove the footage from social media. Crown Prosecution Service advice is that your footage should not be in the public domain as this may adversely affect subsequent proceedings.

I think someone has to take the initiative to create a UK wide forum or thread for Sentry mode clips to help owners track these crimes and help victims report them to relevant authorities.

The previously mentioned NextBase portal seems to cover this Submit Dash Cam Footage To Your Local Police Force | Nextbase

 

[Rooster6655]

Regarding posting original footage, I get that people want to identify the people in the videos but the best course of action might be to submit the footage and if the police can't identify the perp then they can release the footage or advise you to put in on social media because at that point you would have nothing to lose if they can't be identified. I am not sure if you could just take a screenshot of the video as to whether this would still effect original footage.

I believe the reason for not letting footage go viral is incase a member of a jury sees the video before a trial which would jeopardise the proceedings (Could be wrong)

Secondly if for some reason the footage wouldn't allow a conviction due to something being compromised by sharing the footage there is always the possibility of taking civil action but this would assume the person has any money, looks like a scum bag who is broke.

I would always try and use quiet areas to park outside of main roads/pedestrians and preferable pay for a car park ideally monitored somehow as well.

 

[Daverh]

I'm pretty sure that in the scenario outlined by the OP the law would come down on the side of the Tesla owner. At least in my world it would.

Scumbag - "But you didn't have permission to record me on camera, GDPR, blah"

The Law - "I don't care. F*** GDPR. Did you have permission to damage the car? No, I didn't think so. So f*** you as well."

As I write this I'm doing so in an intimidating Taggart-esque accent and the perp is being dragged down a Glasgow alley for a good battering. I think I need a coffee

Each would be dealt with separately and being a pessimist I imagine something more like:
Scumbag "But your honoour I have an alcohol problem but I'm trying to turn my life around and can't go to prison again as my 4th kid is about to be born to addict mother who won't be responsible"

Judge "Ok, pay back £2000 costs at 50p/week"

You "Your honor, I was just trying to protect my property by recording it while in public. I only shared the footage to help the police..."

Judge "You embarassed this man on social media and are in breach of GDPR, and have interfered with an ongoing police invesitagation all over an insured posession. As you own a £50k car you obviously can afford to pay the relevant fines for data breaches, and compensation to this young man in full"

 

[interbear]

Each would be dealt with separately and being a pessimist I imagine something more like:
Scumbag "But your honoour I have an alcohol problem but I'm trying to turn my life around and can't go to prison again as my 4th kid is about to be born to addict mother who won't be responsible"

Judge "Ok, pay back £2000 costs at 50p/week"

You "Your honor, I was just trying to protect my property by recording it while in public. I only shared the footage to help the police..."

Judge "You embarassed this man on social media and are in breach of GDPR, and have interfered with an ongoing police invesitagation all over an insured posession. As you own a £50k car you obviously can afford to pay the relevant fines for data breaches, and compensation to this young man in full"

Unfortunately you may be spot on

 

[LukeT]

Many years ago I got hit by an uninsured driver. Got legal involved, won the case, bailiffs sent in, found he owned nothing that could be proven to be his. Waste of ...

Yup. A few years ago I ended up wasting my time going to court against someone who owed us a chunk of money. Court found in our favour very quickly, later the defendent (if that's the word) wrote a letter pleading poverty and was then told to pay back at buttons per month (despite renting a house for a sizeable 4 figure monthly rent). We never saw a penny.

 

[tess19]

Personally, I would put it on youtube and let it get viral. You will get more money from youtube than from the guy. Plus hopefully name and shame him.

 

[Daverh]

Yup. A few years ago I ended up wasting my time going to court against someone who owed us a chunk of money. Court found in our favour very quickly, later the defendent (if that's the word) wrote a letter pleading poverty and was then told to pay back at buttons per month (despite renting a house for a sizeable 4 figure monthly rent). We never saw a penny.

Similar story with a company that made me redundant - When the bailiffs turned up to they they had paperwork showing that one of their salesmen had bought the company and the registered address had changed from a 1000 occupant building to a single room on a short-term lease.
On the plus side the real directors were later found guilty of fraud, tax evasion etc. and barred from being a director for x years. The last I heard the main guy had gone from living in a £4million house with multiple exotic cars to living in a £500k house with only a single Range Rover. He's still wealthy but less-so now

 

[Fullerene]

Yay - ditch the FAT, ext4 supported, Tesla geek humour as well

1984 (TeslaCam with ext4 file system) : teslamotors

 

[Rooster6655]

Personally, I would put it on youtube and let it get viral. You will get more money from youtube than from the guy. Plus hopefully name and shame him.

Yep people are already sharing it online so would be better to do now