Is this an invasion of female tenants privacy??

[HeIenaDove]

twitter.com/Paradigm_tenant/status/1211425426297503747?s=20

Some housing associations have taken to photographing tenants in their homes. Apparently to counteract tenancy fraud.

belfastmediagroup.com/housing-body-takes-photographs-of-its-tenants-in-their-living-rooms/

However whats in the twitter link is a step too far IMO.

I did post this twitter link on the latest social housing thread but got the usual predictable response.

Are you sure? The photo on twitter looks like something taken with a spycam.

I can't open the first one, but I don't see the issue with the second. Having a photo of the tenant on the paperwork doesn't seem extreme to me.

As a tenant, no fucking way am I being photographed by a ll in the loungeroom I pay to call home.

I live in AU, the lack of rights and invasion of privacy is par for the course with being a tenant, but even here, they don't do that.

the first was an online story in sept 2015 which I have tried to find another article but cannot the second was something on twitter - sources????

& from what I gather the issue is that this is social housing & they have problems with people renting them out to other people which is not just illegal but immoral because it means that people who most need housing will not be able to get it but are cheated out of it & the cheating tenant makes money on something they don't have the right to-

@janeskettle My concern is how it would affect the mental health of someone who has suffered domestic abuse.

How would the images be stored?

Its funny but i was given a very hard time on the previous thread about doing too many c and ps

Villanomme Sun 02-Feb-20 11:41:33
I find Helenadove's posts helpful and easy to read

I used to but it's all become so repetitive, on every single post where the words Social housing is mentioned.

I wish she'd discuss more in her own words rather than the lengthy c&p jobs.

Helena I do get how passionate you are about this subject and that's admirable but maybe put it in your own words rather than cut and paste stuff.

Bookmark
Add message | Report | Message posterpaulinespeaksmanylanguages Sun 02-Feb-20 11:47:34
Some people may find acres of copy and paste easy to read but I imagine the majority just scroll on by.

I suspect if there was an "AIBU to copy and paste and make extraordinarily long posts" the voting would be something like 80-20 saying, yes you are being unreasonable.

So much better to paraphrase things succinctly-there is much more chance of people reading them.

Add message | Report | Message posterNewmetoday Sun 02-Feb-20 12:01:04
I never read the copy and paste. Kills a thread

I replied thus

f i just posted that developers are pulling down social housing and putting up less social housing it would be

a. thats just an anecdote Helena
b. wheres the proof of that Helena.
c. Link please Helena.
Its happened in the past. Thats why i do it like this.
I thought id simply pre empt the predictable tirade

This is weird and inappropriate as a thing to do to any tenants.

That's a strange one. The type of photo described on the article is very different to the Twitter one. That looks something more like the fraud reports I saw sometimes in work.

Social housing seems much better in regards to availablity and maintenance in NI (or least least east and west Belfast and parts of the north coast as that's what I know) compared to what I've read on Mumsnet about England.

It's difficult to make out what is in the photos on the Twitter feed as they are such poor quality- but if they are genuinely what is being claimed , and there is anything which makes the tenant identifiable, then the person who posted them is further invading the tenant's privacy as is OP by posting them here.

The second link doesn't seem to have anything to do with the twitter feed.

I am fairly sure this would contravene the right to a private life if tested in court tbh.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-8-respect-your-private-and-family-life

I don't think it would be viewed as 'proportional' response by a court.

If someone feels they are at risk of losing their home if they refuse, any consent given is technically also invalid.

That is an abuse of power and of someones privacy, how gross.

Some seem to think the ends justify the means, well no, thats gross too.

Its great that you have highlighted this Helena and yes, evidence and sources (so c&p) are essential for any claim of abuses of power or privacy like this.

You can't paraphrase others words and claim them as your own, even if it does make for quicker skimming. Without links or evidence of the original words noone can know how accurate a summary it is, or whether its biased or missed a main theme.

It's odd, some agents do take photos of tenants at start of tenancy as a record of the person because of subletting. But if they had never done this before and was having issues with fraud I can see why they did it. It would have been better if it had been their housing officer or property manager to see them. Any information like this should be kept on a secure file on their system.

Subletting causes huge amounts of problems as the person hasn't been checked to confirm they are suitable to live there, they have no ties to the building and often they're the ones that cause issues. Subletting can also mean they don't get all the safety information they need either like fire plans or issues with water as their details are not on file. It is important they know who is living in their buildings.

A passport is sufficient, and the legally appropriate and porportionate approach.

Yes, agreed everyone should know for their own safety, but fact is, they can't, this is life, and spying is illegal.

It contravenes a very basic human right.

Noone know who lives next door, down the road, sits in the hospital bed next to you, shares a public loo, lives above or below.

If the owner of a flat in a block lets it out, its noone elses business who its let to, despite it affecting the lives of all those around.

It is the landlord's business! They have legal responsibilities to their tenants and to the government. Having a photo of the tenant at the start of the tenancy is a way of fulfilling them. Why is this any worse than checking a passport (which many people do not have)?

I think it was clumsy to go round all the houses collecting the photos, and permission should have been sought ahead of time. A different process should have been in place for those who did not wish to give permission.

Noone needs to take photo id when they already have the most official one in the land, a passport, and probably driving licence too.

Its totally unnecessary and an invasion of privacy, without any legitimate basis.

I don't think you can guarantee a lot of the older residents have a passport or a driving license. My MIL didn't, and not many members of her extended family drive or go further than Ireland for holidays. Same probably for the older generation on my side in social housing.

You need to provide some form of photo id though right, and statements etc as proof of id, not expect someone to spy in your property and take covert images (with 'oh but ID' excuses)!!

TruthOnTrial
A passport is sufficient, and the legally appropriate and porportionate approach

They may well not have a passport.

Virtually no tenancies, private, social housing or local authority permit sub- letting.

Sub-letting happens. I have clients who are a large portfolio landlord in the private sector. Some of their tenancies are ancient with low regulated rents and no means of ending the tenancy as they are pre- 1988 Act. They know, because there have been complaints from other people in the block, that there are people occupying these flats who could not possibly be the original pre 1988 Act tenants as they weren't even born then.

It's not unreasonable for a landlord to check there is no subletting going on. Whether they need to take photos is questionable but not asking for proof that Joe or Josephine Bloggs on the lease is the person living there.

Noone needs to take photo id when they already have the most official one in the land, a passport, and probably driving licence too

There will be many people who have neither of these. Particularly in low rent/ social housing.

I very much doubt that photo on twitter was the type referred to in that online article though.

Yes, I don't see any problems with asking for photo ID of tenants in theory, I just suspect it wouldn't be that simple in practice.

TruthOnTrial do you not understand that the point of checking is that there are tenants who abuse the system?

Having got a tenancy they then illegally sub- let at a higher rent and pocket the difference. There are any number of reasons why the real tenant might not be living there- e.g elderly tenant moving in with family, younger tenant moving in with a partner.

And btw the way it is absolutely the landlords' right to know who is living in their property.

I very much doubt that photo on twitter was the type referred to in that online article though

I'm sure it wasn't.

But why is it guilty until proven innocent. Why is it always those lower down the socio economic scale who are all tarred with the same brush.

@RedToothBrush thanks for the link.