I received a question in the mail about CCTV and liability. Interestingly enough, a similar question and answer was posted on SecurityInfoWatch about a year ago. It's so close that it fits perfectly in answering the reader's question.
QUESTION:
"One of our clients is reluctant to install cameras because they believe it increases liability. Our experience is a camera system decreases liability since the owner is taking steps to provide a secure facility.
But if the system is not monitored live does this give the occupant a false sense of security? Have you ever heard where an owner is liable for cameras that are not monitored live or liable for systems that do not have complete coverage of parking areas?
And does an owner legally have to post signs stating area has surveillance cameras and/or is being recorded?"
ANSWER:
For the answer, we turn to SecurityInfoWatch "Legal Side" columnist Ken Kirschenbaum, Esq., a New York-license lawyer practicing with Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum PC (a Long Island legal firm with a rich history of assisting clients in security and alarm-related matters).
No comments:
Post a Comment