Neighbour set for £100k after doorbell cam privacy ruling
A COMPANY director could be awarded £100,000 after a judge ruled her neighbour’s smart doorbell camera breaches her privacy.
Jon Woodard’s Ring device breached data rules and “harassed” neighbour Dr Mary Fairhurst, a court ruled.
Audio-visual technician Mr Woodard, 45, insisted he fitted four devices, including two “dummies”, at his home in Thame, Oxfordshire, to protect his vehicles from thieves.
But healthcare company boss Dr Fairhurst told Oxford County Court that the devices placed her under “continuous visual surveillance”. She moved out, blaming them for being intrusive.
Dr Fairhurst claimed Mr Woodard was “aggressive” when she complained.
Judge Melissa Clarke ruled he breached the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK General Data Protection Regulation.
Dr Fairhurst is now entitled to compensation and is set to be paid more than £100,000.
The landmark court decision could spark thousands of future lawsuits.
The popular doorbells, owned by US giant Amazon, notify the absent homeowner via a smartphone when a visitor arrives at the door.
People can then use an app to watch and talk to the visitor.
Judge Clarke said the images and audio files of Dr Fairhurst captured on the devices were classed as her personal data. She found that Mr Woodard had failed to process her data in a “fair manner”.
Mr Woodard said: “I purchased a doorbell and motion-activated camera to protect my property and vehicles. To now be told these are harassment devices feels like a joke. “I wonder if the police will now still be able to appeal to the public to check their smart doorbells, to assist them solve crime?”
In response, Amazon-owned Ring asked customers to ensure guests know they are being captured on video.
A spokesman said: “We’ve put features in place across all our devices to ensure privacy, security and user control remain front and centre.”