Police to be charged to view Bus CCTV

[Mojo]

Met chiefs in South London - responsible for patrolling many of the capital's most crime-plagued bus routes - are said to be "furious" and fear the cost of routine investigations will soar.

Transport for London (TfL) chiefs stunned senior officers when they tabled the proposals on behalf of bus companies including Go Ahead, Arriva and Metroline at a behind closed-doors meeting.

A highly-placed Met source told the South London Press: "It's absolutely outrageous.When it was brought up at a public meeting we couldn't believe our ears.

"We already spend vast amounts of taxpayers' money policing the buses and protecting passengers.

"CCTV is a vital part of that because it gives us compelling evidence to put before a jury - evidence that helps put thugs,violent criminals and vandals behind bars.

"It beggars belief that these profit-making firms now want to send us the bill for protecting their customers."

High-quality CCTV footage is seen as a vital weapon in the drive to identify offenders and stem crime on and around buses.

It helped convict deranged killer Peter Kelly, 28, who stabbed Bartosz Dlugowszewski in front of horrified passengers on a double-decker in Bermondsey.

And the 14-year-old knifeman pictured, above right, on a bus in Kennington was caught when a reader shopped him the day after this crystal-clear image was printed in the South London Press.

Cops have to study every possible CCTV sequence available because, without it, defence lawyers can accuse them of not exhausting all possible lines of inquiry.

Go Ahead - which operates buses from nine garages in central and South London - argued it was reasonable to bill police £50 an hour for collecting footage in a "small number of cases".

The firm said it processed 3,700 segments a year for the Met, with each download taking about 45 minutes.

Andrew Smith, Go Ahead risk and safety manager, said: "Where the police require CCTV from a number of buses for one investigation we may have to make a charge to the police due to staff having to be diverted from other duties to provide the evidence."

Speaking for other bus firms in South London, a TfL spokesman said the Met had agreed in principle to the need for a charge.

He said: "Some of the bus operating companies have been bearing the costs of responding to out-ofhours and particularly time consuming requests from police for the retrieval of CCTV footage.

"Others have already set out a charging policy for such requests."

Glen Smyth, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, branded bus firms' demands "unreasonable".

He said: "They have a duty to assist the police and I would have thought it was in their commercial interest to do everything possible to ensure the safety of passengers.

"At the end of the day we can seize footage anyway in the same way we would seize someone's computer if we felt it contained evidence.

"But we should be working together - not against each other."

 

[Coxster]

I think I agree with the police on this one.

 

[eos]

I can understand where they are coming from.....I would question the fact police say they police bus's.... not in my experience, unless they are called to attend. On a parallel , if you ask police to 'police' a football match, they charge an extraordinary amount, so why not charge police to use their CCTV footage..

 

[Coxster]

so why not charge police to use their CCTV footage..

Why should they pay to get criminals/dangerous people off the street? It would be a different story is the bus driver was attacked...

 

[Mojo]

I can understand where they are coming from.....I would question the fact police say they police bus's.... not in my experience, unless they are called to attend. On a parallel , if you ask police to 'police' a football match, they charge an extraordinary amount, so why not charge police to use their CCTV footage..

I never knew that the Police charged Football clubs for their services, and I'm glad they do - Football is the cause of lots of violence, noise and other things, I always thought it unfair that certain clubs were making loads of profit, the taxpayer had to pay for the police response.

So if someone gets mugged on a bus, or something, the police should have to pay to get the tape to see if they could work out who did it?

 

[David]

If that's the case, then the police will have to go through the courts, and get them to release the CCTV footage.

That way, the film has to be released (at no charge), or TfL will be in contempt of court.

 

[Tom B]

CCTV? We have it on a few services, but half the time the tapes are missing or if anything does happen they can't be bothered to retreive the tape. Though it does apparently become a source of great amusement after crashes and the like, watching drivers reactions.

 

[TheSlash]

I can see both sides of a discussion here.
If the bus companies announced they were putting fares up to pay for etra staff to download CCTV tapes for police, there would be an outcry
But at the sametime, if the Government announced tax increases to pay for Police staff to download CCTV, there would be a similar outcry
Perhaps bus companies need to look at less labour intensive ways of collecting CCTV records

 

[Tom B]

Alternatively, take it out the profits. It may take 45 mins to download a tape but all it should need is someone to start the process off and put the kettle on.

 

[Mojo]

Someone on another group who is a former bus driver and now looks after CCTV for Travel West Midlands at a bus depot (or as they call them - Bus Garages), giving evidence to the police is part of the normal work and they don't get paid any extra for it, so where is the additional cost to the bus operators?

 

[asopu10]

I'm with the police, unless the bus companies pay for private security they should be greatful to the police for trying to reduce vanderlism on theier services. Also the police should'nt have to pay to protect the public. Outrages! On the downside the police are so slow to respond to anything its a waste of time them comming half the time.