Leave them on but the ones you want off just put a cloth over them are you implying the landlord can view the videos from where he lives if that is correct that is disturbing I to have CCTV but not pointing into any rooms just for outside areas yes one looks over the pool but that’s purely a safety issue 

19 minutes ago, Salerno said:

We don't know that. it could be a standalone monitoring system or the cameras could by part of an integrated security system. Either way, they are there for security.

True potentially. But if an integrated part of security obviously the person in the UK is getting video and"notifications" etc and not the occupants. That makes it a voyeur situation more than security IMO.

9 hours ago, Salerno said:

It's bad enough with, in certain areas/countries, being constantly surveilled by government agencies in public places or businesses looking after their establishments (not saying that in the vast majority of those cases it isn't a result of legitimate concerns) but I'd certainly draw the line at some random spying on me in my "own" home.

I have no problem with constant surveillance. CCTV has helped so many cases of crime being solved. So I don't mind that. Recently a murder where i used to live (rare but happens). Because of cctv they have leads otherwise they would not have any.

 

Plus so far I havent heard of Dutch security agents abusing the CCTV.

3 minutes ago, Nojohndoe said:

True potentially. But if an integrated part of security obviously the person in the UK is getting video and"notifications" etc and not the occupants. That makes it a voyeur situation more than security IMO.

Which is what I said in my first post. No way I'd have any of them switched on if the landlord has access to the video.

5 minutes ago, crazykopite said:

are you implying the landlord can view the videos from where he lives if that is correct that is disturbing

Pretty sure he is and 'disturbing' ........................says it all...........................

 

1 minute ago, robblok said:

I have no problem with constant surveillance. CCTV has helped so many cases of crime being solved.

I have an issue with the fact it doesn't help stop crimes being committed in the first place. Get more cops on the beat (actually on the beat and not just driving around) instead of cost cutting and hoping to get a lead after the fact.

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

I have no problem with constant surveillance. CCTV has helped so many cases of crime being solved. So I don't mind that. Recently a murder where i used to live (rare but happens). Because of cctv they have leads otherwise they would not have any.

 

Plus so far I havent heard of Dutch security agents abusing the CCTV.

In the Public Domain is a totally different situation of remote observation of a domestic dwelling

Just noticed you stated the Landlord lives in the U.K. if that’s the case I doubt very much he would know if you had them on or not as for during you it would cost him more than 10 months rent he is talking BS ignore him and tape up the camera that is invading your privacy .

We had a supposed gold 'robbery' in our Moobaan (in the end it turned out to be a family member who pilfered granny's stash)...but the association was all up in arms and severl residents demanded cameras put up along every soi to catch these cretins. We live at the very end of the soi and have a very nice private garden, which I enjoy every day weather permitting...the last thing I need is a camera staring at me while I sit out in the afteroon, knowing the goofballs in the security booth are watching me all day (I'm retired so I'm often outside near the front side of the house). I told the GF to communicate to them...any camera would be seen as an invasion of privacy and it either get's disabled or I move back to Bangkok. There were some additional cameras installed near the front entrance of the MooBaan but nothing near me...hopefully she made my point with them with emphasis.

12 minutes ago, Salerno said:

I have an issue with the fact it doesn't help stop crimes being committed in the first place. Get more cops on the beat (actually on the beat and not just driving around) instead of cost cutting and hoping to get a lead after the fact.

That is your opinion, i disagree. I think its a great tool and yes it catches people afterwards. But if the chance to catch someone goes up less people cross the line. Also repeat offenders are taken out.

 

Though I do agree with more cops I don't see why more cops should cancel CCTV or the other way around.

 

 

Somewhere must be the cable of the cctv-system to the ADSL-Modem. Take it out and the security still works but the landlord cannot beep you!!!

Otherwise connect the lawyers of the Cosumer Protection Board and ask for their advise.

https://www.ocpb.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/ocpb_en/main.php?filename=index___EN

1 minute ago, robblok said:

That is your opinion, i disagree. I think its a great tool and yes it catches people afterwards. But if the chance to catch someone goes up less people cross the line. Also repeat offenders are taken out.

 

Though I do agree with more cops I don't see why more cops should cancel CCTV or the other way around.

 

 

Works hand in hand, a great tool without a shadow of doubt.....look at the clear up rate in the UK for example, without CCTV, far less convictions and every crime documentary one watches in the UK, CCTV pays a huge and an integral part in the investigation...........................this is a huge deterrent to would be criminals..............I'm a real fan of systems absolutely, but not if they impede on one's or third party's privacy..................................

I can't think of anything worse than have a landlord watching your every move, it is an invasion of privacy !  and possibly illegal. Your living in a reality show no way, I'd be off to have a word with the local cops. sometimes they can help. 

Just now, brianthainess said:

Your living in a reality show

almost Truman show ish...........

7 minutes ago, snowgard said:

Somewhere must be the cable of the cctv-system to the ADSL-Modem. Take it out and the security still works but the landlord cannot beep you!!!

Otherwise connect the lawyers of the Cosumer Protection Board and ask for their advise.

https://www.ocpb.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/ocpb_en/main.php?filename=index___EN

Best answer so far.

28 minutes ago, wthnrsn said:

We were locked down in a red zone and could not fly to view the place in person. 

We had a video tour, then signed the lease and paid the deposit. 

 

On arrival, we questioned the housekeeper about the cameras. She was sympathetic and showed me how to turn it off, but made a point that the owner expects it on and if we turn it off, to do it briefly. 

 

We emailed the landlord that day (he's in the UK) to talk about the cameras. 

He's ignored a few emails, so then we decided to just turn them off when it best suited us. 

 

That's what finally got his attention. 

 

They both keep saying how all the other tenants were fine with the cameras... As if we're the one's being unreasonable here. 

However the agent did acknowledge our privacy concerns and has asked the owner if he'll compromise. 

We'll see where this will go. 

 

My only concern would be if he had grounds to kick us out if we kept turning them off

Is he an expat who is renting out the house to you? Not thai then that is a good starter. Just turn the cameras off, he can fly out and turn them on if he wants. 

14 hours ago, wthnrsn said:

I responded with a very reasonable message outlining why we turn them off. Expectation of privacy, uncomfortable being on camera when sunbathing etc. 

"Privacy" is not a word in the Thai dictionary, everybody knows everything about everybody...???? 

 

14 hours ago, wthnrsn said:

I'm having a hard time finding out anything about tenant rights and if we even have any in this situation?

The Thai Law for "Rent of Property'" in English translation is HERE.

 

Often the advice is, if you cannot agree with a landlord, simply to "move on".

33 minutes ago, robblok said:

Though I do agree with more cops I don't see why more cops should cancel CCTV or the other way around.

 

We're getting off topic - but I never said anything like they should cancel CCTV.

The problems of perversion, peeping toms and World Vision could be solved if nudity and the sex act in public spaces. were legalised

 

Invite Molly over for a week.

For sure, he will never more ask you to turn the cameras on.

Hubba hubba ????

30 minutes ago, Salerno said:

We're getting off topic - but I never said anything like they should cancel CCTV.

True and we are off topic. Anyway as i said i have two cameras in the house im renting. The guard can see them maybe the owner too. But they are directed at the gate and road. So no privacy issues. When the owner talked about CCTV i was worried it would be in the house but it was not. 

15 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Just tape a piece of paper on the camera, problem solved.

Better take spray, paper easy to remove.

Very simple, u leased the house, its temporary yours now. It's legally not his for the time being, nor is he allowed to enter it without notice. 

 

You can do what u want, including throwing out <deleted> you don't want, with the only condition that you have to restore it in its original form when you move out (minus wear off). Just throw it out.

 

Also as he's living in the UK and is thus not a thai tax resident, you need to withold 15% of his rent for taxes, it's now ur joint responsibility to pay this to the thai gov, hope you are aware of that... 

 

 

Src: https://duensingkippen.com/download/Taxation of personal rental income.pdf 

 

 

Shine laser light  powerful one into camera lens

So what happens if the place gets robbed after the OP turned off the cameras?  The OP will be complaining about lack of security.  Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is with these cameras.  The OP said himself the cameras were all outside.  Classic example of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Isn't the only way that the landlord in the UK can know if the cameras are off is if he is spying on you.

17 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

So what happens if the place gets robbed after the OP turned off the cameras?  The OP will be complaining about lack of security.  Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is with these cameras.  The OP said himself the cameras were all outside.  Classic example of making a mountain out of a molehill.

I think he only has an issue with the one pointing right at the pool, loungers. Would you want some falang in the UK flogging the dolphin to your wife in a bikini sitting by the pool? I hope the villas I stayed at didn't have cameras pointed at the pool with the stuff I got up to with the girlfriend.

Is the property listed for TM-30? 

6 minutes ago, Ohyesuare said:

I think he only has an issue with the one pointing right at the pool, loungers. Would you want some falang in the UK flogging the dolphin to your wife in a bikini sitting by the pool? I hope the villas I stayed at didn't have cameras pointed at the pool with the stuff I got up to with the girlfriend.

Too late now