CCTV signs

[sc0ttie]

So, I havent done an awful lot of exploring, just a few sites I have stumbled upon or been shown by friends. I found an old house that is derelict, its also a grade 2 listed building, it is on the edge of some farm land and the drive way leading to it has metal gates but either side of the gates is a huge gap! there is a sign on the gates saying private and cctv in operation. Does this usually stop anyone here doing an explore in a place like this? Is it likely there is cctv there and not just a deterrent sign? Its pretty remote and the drive and beyond the gates its quite overgrown. This is a pic from October, would you explore that?

 

[mookster]

CCTV signs are 99 times out of 100 just a generic deterrent, very very rarely will a place have CCTV and even if it does have CCTV it's even rarer still that it's an actual monitored live feed, unless it sets off some kind of alert.

 

[smiler]

Would I explore it? Yes, If you do go for a nose don't carry anything that could be construed as going equipped, Good Luck

 

[Gromr]

Normally if its a wooded remote area with not much about, the CCTV signs are a bluff to scare people off. There might be some cases where certain places have had a particular problem with break ins etc where they will fork out to get CCTV fitted, but this is a rare case. These things cost money to buy, operate and monitor, most the time land owners just don't bother. Buying a few 'fake' warning signs is much cheaper and nearly as effective.

Judging from that picture, I'd go explore it in a heart beat. Just keep your eyes peeled just in case there are cameras dotted about.

 

[HughieD]

Hell yeah...go for it!

 

[sc0ttie]

Ok thanks, I had a feeling that the signs were just a deterrent, I did go in past the gates and had a look around the drive way, I don't think anyone has been in there for some time. The signs say Clearway security, cctv in operation. Clearway is a bona fide security company so I was inclined to believe it was watched.

 

[ironsky]

To me the signs looks newish so I would yes in this case it is been watched.

 

[Wyton]

Guys you seem to miss the point of CCTV..it doesnt need to be monitored 24/7.

Many cameras will have motion sensor settings,so say a cat wouldnt trigger recording but a person would,the chances of CCTV camera(s) onsite are 50/50 but if they are on site they will be recording to a DVR box and that is normaly accesible from off site remotely.

Lots of these places that have CCTV not to catch people looking about,but to cover themselves on health and saftey grounds,basicly so if you go and fall down an open man hole and try and sue the land owner (yes it happends) the CCTV shows the land owner has taken reasonable steps to secure the place,so innocents have not "wanderd in and got hurt".

Most cameras will Glow Red at night or have a seperate sensor which glows red..thats the infa red and will certainly be recording and even in pitch darkness be a clear picture.

 

[krela]

Guys you seem to miss the point of CCTV..it doesnt need to be monitored 24/7.

Many cameras will have motion sensor settings,so say a cat wouldnt trigger recording but a person would,the chances are the CCTV camera(s) are 50/50 but if they are on site they will be recording to a DVR box and that is normaly accesible from off site remotely.

Lots of these places that have CCTV not to catch people looking about,but to cover themselves on health and saftey grounds,basicly so if you go and fall down an open man hole and try and sue the land owner (yes it happends) the CCTV shows the land owner has taken reasonable steps to secure the place,so innocents have not "wanderd in and got hurt".

Most cameras will Glow Red at night or have a seperate sensor which glows red..thats the infa red and will certainly be recording and even in pitch darkness be a clear picture.

Not much of this is accurate tbh, the H&S part is particularly inaccurate. Correct signage outlining the dangers satisfies H&S requirements, CCTV does nothing to prove that a property is reasonably secured unless it provides a clear view of the entire perimeter. Whilst H&S can be a part reason for onsite security, cctv in that case is used for real time detection so security can then remove infiltrators, and is monitored 24/7. However the vast majority of CCTV is installed to protect property /investment and deter site thieves and vandals, or to provide evidence if they show up. Often it is installed while renovations take place to protect on-site tools and materials.

The question here isn't whether it needs to be monitored from the property owners POV, the question is is it monitored enough to make us visiting a place with cameras problematic, and whilst most active sites do send pictures off-site remotely even if they're not actively monitored, we're not talking about live sites we're talking about abandoned, usually derelict sites, and they rarely have power let alone any kind of network to provide off site access.

Also I'm yet to see a generic infra-red camera that is clear, they're usually grainy as crap unless you spend a fortune on them.

 

[Wyton]

Not much of this is accurate tbh, the H&S part is particularly inaccurate. Correct signage outlining the dangers satisfies H&S requirements, CCTV does nothing to prove that a property is reasonably secured unless it provides a clear view of the entire perimeter. Whilst H&S can be a part reason for onsite security, cctv in that case is used for real time detection so security can then remove infiltrators, and is monitored 24/7. However the vast majority of CCTV is installed to protect property /investment and deter site thieves and vandals, or to provide evidence if they show up. Often it is installed while renovations take place to protect on-site tools and materials.

The question here isn't whether it needs to be monitored from the property owners POV, the question is is it monitored enough to make us visiting a place with cameras problematic, and whilst most active sites do send pictures off-site remotely even if they're not actively monitored, we're not talking about live sites we're talking about abandoned, usually derelict sites, and they rarely have power let alone any kind of network to provide off site access.

Also I'm yet to see a generic infra-red camera that is clear, they're usually grainy as crap unless you spend a fortune on them.

Ok how can i put this...this is my line of work and do daily H&S risk accesments.

No you misunderstand when i said CCTV is to cover land owner,i was refering to the evidence that someone has made there way onto/into a place they have no business being on or in,they removed wooden boarding etc and something happends to them and they sue the land owner for failing to reasonably guard against people gaining access,the CCTV proves said person has endangerd themselves by removing boarding (metal shutter/man hole covers etc ect the list is long).

The grainy pictures you speak of..maybe if you buy CCTV from Argos or the Poundshop then the picture will be crap..i can assure you and heck even give you a personal guided tour of the estate i look after and then play back your guided tour and show how clear infra-red camera are.

How many people assumed Houghton Grange had no power...yet it turns out power was on from the day the chickens left until the new security took over,thats 20 odd years of power left on and cameras working...one should never assume.

 

[ironsky]

I'm not up on the ins and outs of security or its equipment but when I have visited closed pubs with the estate agents they more often than not go in first to switch off the sensor system. When a pub shuts down within 24 hours most are boarded up with steel sheeting also sensors are fitted to the walls and the odd time their is cameras if someone does get in the footage can be handed over to the Police. Also I've noticed cameras in car parks this has to do with liability the owners don't want the responsibility of someone also property on their land plus they sometimes send out letters to regulars who use the car park without permission. I'm sure the same applies to properties.

 

[smiler]

FFS,Just go and take a look,

 

[krela]

Ok how can i put this...this is my line of work and do daily H&S risk accesments.

No you misunderstand when i said CCTV is to cover land owner,i was refering to the evidence that someone has made there way onto/into a place they have no business being on or in,they removed wooden boarding etc and something happends to them and they sue the land owner for failing to reasonably guard against people gaining access,the CCTV proves said person has endangerd themselves by removing boarding (metal shutter/man hole covers etc ect the list is long).

The grainy pictures you speak of..maybe if you buy CCTV from Argos or the Poundshop then the picture will be crap..i can assure you and heck even give you a personal guided tour of the estate i look after and then play back your guided tour and show how clear infra-red camera are.

How many people assumed Houghton Grange had no power...yet it turns out power was on from the day the chickens left until the new security took over,thats 20 odd years of power left on and cameras working...one should never assume.

Ah okay, if the estate you work on has it then that must be true of every other use of CCTV. My mistake, sorry. Evidently my experience is very different to yours.

Personally I reckon you're just trying to film people doing silly things so you can submit them to you've been framed and get £200.

 

[5t3tcv743]

Normally no! CCTV is often to scare you. Sometimes theyjust put the signs there to scare u! Anyways if you have your face covered you will be fine! Trust me!

 

[prettyvacant71]

Hmmmm some interesting replies lol...Id still give it a go it would be rude not to really. If you were in say South Africa I would shout NOOOO!!!! But here???

 

[jammy]

yeah get in...I sometimes take me dog, good cover story/ me dog came in whilst off lead....and always have me camera equipment out and visible/ handy when a pcso(pretend police) jumped out on me recently whilst on an explore...

 

[zombizza]

yeah get in...I sometimes take me dog, good cover story/ me dog came in whilst off lead....and always have me camera equipment out and visible/ handy when a pcso(pretend police) jumped out on me recently whilst on an explore...

Excellent,
I always thought a dog makes an excellent cover for this game. But now I have an idea, I don't have a dog, but I can buy a lead off ebay. Then I can be off hunting for my lost dog!

 

[smiler]

Excellent,
I always thought a dog makes an excellent cover for this game. But now I have an idea, I don't have a dog, but I can buy a lead off ebay. Then I can be off hunting for my lost dog!

Bit of a bugger when they offer to help you find it though,

 

[Dirus_Strictus]

Sorry Wyton; but your second paragraph is only valid and correct if the said CCTV captures the image of a subsequent claimant actually removing the manhole cover, fence palings etc. to gain access. In many of the cases I have been involved with, poor image quality was not the problem, poor sighting of the cameras was the main reason for failure - yes the intruders were caught on camera, but were not caught removing the fence palings or forcing the door - "We just found a gap in the fence / the doors open Your Honour and thought we'd take a gander"! Many land and property owners take the CCTV sign as a cheap means of site security and safety, which is something I abhor and am always glad when people like that come a cropper in the Courts over safety matters, for not providing proper fencing and locked doors etc. I have been involved with H & S for fifty odd years and have witnessed some horrendous things - many down to the outright stupidity of the injured party, but many more down to the wanton disregard of public or worker safety by property or business etc. owners.

 

[Potter]

Interesting stuff. I'd say just give it a try. I like the idea of a Poundshop CCTV camera. They do sell fake ones.