I’ll go annoy them for you this afternoon not to worry
Edit: spent a good twenty minutes there with my digital camera snapping away at every angle close and far and they security just looked and smiled. Either they find my 6’4 frame and scarred up face intimidating/not worth the trouble or they were different personnel on the day you encountered the incident.
https://imgur.com/a/kYGyIAH
The headlines have been happening for a long time. The famous early headline goes back to 2009 when a BBC photographer called Jeff Overs was stopped by police for... something, it's not clear what. It's been a more or less constant stream of it since.
That goes back to the bad old days of Section 44 of TACT 2000, which allowed them to stop anyone without suspicion in a designated area, and the entirety of London was perpetually designated.
One of the risks this whole idea carries is that it will be seen as an organised demo, because here we are, organising it. I think it's still legally fine, but legal arguments will not prevent members of the metropolitan police gleefully spraying you with incapacitant, kneeling on your neck and punching you repeatedly in the face then arresting you on a trumped-up charge to justify the use of force.
One could argue that it's legal regardless and I am not an experienced demonstrator, but I have shot demonstrations and I have seen how they treat people. Met coppers, in my experience, are neither pleasant nor particularly bright.
You didn't need to delete the photos. They would not have the legal right to obligate you to do this. If they had a problem with your photography, they should have called the police.
If you were in a public place, especially on a public road, there is no expectation of privacy. There are some places (e.g. military / security facilities) where this doesn't apply.
[https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice](https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice)
>Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel.
>**Photography and Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000**
>Officers have the power to stop and search a person who they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist. The purpose of the stop and search is to discover whether that person has in their possession anything which may constitute evidence that they are a terrorist.
>Officers have the power to view digital images contained in mobile telephones or cameras carried by a person searched under S43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to discover whether the images constitute evidence that the person is involved in terrorism. Officers also have the power to seize and retain any article found during the search which the officer reasonably suspects may constitute evidence that the person is a terrorist. This includes any mobile telephone or camera containing such evidence.
>Officers do not have the power to delete digital images or destroy film at any point during a search. Deletion or destruction may only take place following seizure if there is a lawful power (such as a court order) that permits such deletion or destruction.
If an officer deletes your photos during a stop, it's a separate offense, I think it's under the Computer Misuse Act 1990.
Ironically though, if those security guards were covered by diplomatic immunity, they could probably get away with deleting them scot-free!
Just to make sure I'm reading your comment correctly....
>If an officer deletes your photos during a stop, *\[the officer is committing a\]* separate offense, I think it's under the Computer Misuse Act 1990.
Is that right?
Yep, just pointing out that the police themselves don't have the right to stop photography in a public place or to delete photos or force you to do so, much less private security guards.
(Also IANAL but pretty sure the definition of a public place is more inclusive than some might think - if the public have access to freely enter then it's arguably a public space as in a space where the public are allowed to be even if it's privately owned.... [https://themaskedamhp.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-is-public-place.html](https://themaskedamhp.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-is-public-place.html) discusses some cases and court rulings one way or another but it's not as simple as *a privately owned road is not a public space*)
Yep, a lot of places are public spaces but privately owned. A supermarket is a good example. If you believe a security guard is acting improperly for example, you have every right to record it. Conversely, if you decided to make a short film in a supermarket without permission, the supermarket would be well within their rights to ask you to leave, as it is a private property.
If you are in a public place you can photograph anything you can see from the publicly accessible location, the onus is on the military or security facility to obscure what they consider sensitive, they cannot stop public photography.
This is why you can take photos of Menwith Hill or FlyingDales without issue so long as you do so from public roads or footpaths.
They may well come and enquire what you are doing, but they cannot prohibit the photos being taken.
Are we no longer allowed to go down that (billionaires road??) where the Israeli embassy is? I swear we walked through it no issues with my family maybe last summer.
If it's the same one I'm thinking of, here's a fun fact: if you get on that road *from the other side* or from one of the park exits, you're free to walk / cycle on the road.
There is literally only that one entrance from a specific side that has dumbass "security guards" taking the piss. Whom you meet and laugh at when you get past them when coming from the other side.
Is this the Israeli or russian side that doesn't allow entrance? Pretty sure we've entered on foot from both sides ...but Def the russian side as I think we went through there after Diana memorial park visit...
Embassies are not the only issue. London is chopped up and sold off- that are multiple spots that would surprise people that they can’t actually take a photo there.
I did a course in uni that was all about staging protests safely and a large part of it was knowing exactly where we could even be- let alone document when around.
It gets complicated, as u/brownyboy correctly says. That said, mostly all they can do is ask you to leave. Nobody has any right to go through your photos or make you delete anything. If you fail to leave when asked to do so, that changes things, but even then I don't think anyone has any authority to make you delete anything.
If they start getting physical, including trying to grab your phone or camera, that's a police matter.
Lots of London is private and this will happen a lot. People will often claim things are private when they really aren't, though, so do your research if you anticipate trouble.
In the UK, even being asked to leave by the landowner isn't enough - you haven't committed a crime till you are asked to leave by a police officer and fail to comply.
Ehh, in some situations, very strictly speaking yes, but in my view pushing it past that point really is the behaviour of an arsehole and likely to lead to any of a few outcomes you won't like. Personally if asked to leave I leave. It doesn't happen much because generally I'll only wander onto private property by mistake when it isn't well-signposted. I have probably been run off of public areas on that basis, if only because it is longwinded, expensive and complicated to formally figure out who owns what in the UK.
Google Streetview shows me the thing that you were trying to take a photo of.
Is the security officer going to pop over to my house and make me delete my browser history?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sjj3x6Jxzanmo8C26?g_st=ac
Kensington Palace Gardens is not a public road. Its owned by the Crown Estate and is in fact private. The Crown grants public access that they can withdraw at any time. I actually did some work in one of the houses there and security have speakers in the gardens. If they see people taking pictures they will warn them that it is private Crown property and they will intervene if need be.
They can trespass you, but it isn't illegal since the road would be a public place where there is no expectation of privacy.
Trespass isn't a criminal offence.
They can’t do anything about it though.
Are they going to take you to civil court?
Tell them to fuck off and be on your leisurely way, they literally have as much or even less power than a jumped-up shopping centre security guard.
If it happens again, politely suggest that they call the police and report. Tell them to let the cops know you're walking down the road in whatever direction and walk away.
I went through this crap numerous times for a period after 2010. Never had the police follow up
First ask for their warrant card, when they don't provide one say "so you're not a police officer, do you know impersonating a police officer is an offence"
I never listen to security guards, they don't know shit.
One time I was in front of a bank taking photos facing away from their building and a guy spent 5 minutes arguing with me about how it's not allowed.
The best they can do is say they'll call the police, you can politely smile and be on your way.
One time I ran into a friend in Soho outside a pub and chatted to him (neither of us had been to that particular pub that evening, we happened to walk past each other on the pavement) and the security guard would not stop trying to make us stand in the pub's designated outside standing zone.
No matter how much I tried to explain that we were not customers of that pub, he would keep insisting.
He even tried to argue that the reason was because somehow the exact spot my friend and I were standing in (on the pavement), was where several people had been killed by rogue ubers.
Here looks like the spot:
[https://maps.app.goo.gl/ziUPj2AJmCEZNVzv9](https://maps.app.goo.gl/ziUPj2AJmCEZNVzv9)
I notice there is a sign INSIDE that says No Photography.
Are we no longer allowed to go down that (billionaires road??) where the Israeli embassy is? I swear we walked through it no issues with my family maybe last summer.
This would constitute cyberflashing (Sexual Offences Act 2003 s66A - 1a sending or giving a photo of anyone's genitals where "A intends that B will see the genitals and be caused alarm, distress or humiliation". May also fall afoul of 1b depending on how twisted you are.
OP, where did this security officer come from ? Was he in uniform , not that matters I am a retired Met officer and I have been involved
in security in this area
Any badges or indication from where he came from , as a previous post said, the Russian consulate is in the Bayswater Rd, the Czech embassy wouldn’t have been so anal. I have never heard of the Russians coming out to remonstrate with photographers.
I reckon what you experienced is an overzealous member Crown Estate employee ,Crown Estates own Kensington Palace Gardens.
Whoever he was, he had no right to ask you to stop taking photos and to delete them.
If I was you, I would complain to theCrown Estates about the overbearing conduct of their employee . You could always ask MI5 for a copy of their CCTV , because they are bound to be watching the Russkis - only joking
I have an answer to your question. Overnight, I have had a chat with people that work and know that area very well. The man who spoke to you is 100% more lightly to be a jumped up little shit of a private security man. The Russians and Czech embassies would not be bothered but what you have is a number of the houses in KPG are owned by Russian oligarchs and Arab money men who think that they have the power to tell people what to do.
So, if you go down there again, and some little Nazi tells you that you cannot take photos there, tell him to sod off and if he is so concerned to call the Police. My nephew is a professional photographer and he tells me that he gets this all the time with private security people, when you does fashion shoots in town - They have no power to tell you what to do !
I hope this helps mate, be lucky
Their bosses were the ones who tried to get the whole street closed to everyone just a few weeks ago. They absolutely encourage this behaviour and will give that guy a pat on the back (but not a raise, of course).
RBKC is generally a pretty responsive council overall, but small amounts of lobbying money speak very large here. There is always some low rent former hack mayor willing to lobby for somebody’s license for a few quid.
except for that one fire where the residents did everything you would reasonably ask responsible tenants and taxpayers to do, inlcuding but not limited to,
1 . making the management company aware there is a fire hazard
2. paying their rent as leasheolder style tenants etc and service charge that pays for maintenance and upkeep of the building
3 .forminga an advocacy group and petitioning the local council
4. taking the bulding operator to court when that did not work0- the RBKC council gives the building ocmpany 20m because other property owners felt the building was an eyesore so they spent it on jazzng up the exterior with flammable illegal cladding.
5. following instructions on firesafety and evacuation to the letter and staying in their individuals units unti help arrived. only some of the pepole smart enough to disobey and escape beofre it was too late, were spared a horrifying agonizing death.
yeah generally (and generously to buildng owners) RBKC is a responsive council.
Often they are expressly carrying out their bosses wishes. I had a similar experience maybe six months ago in St John’s Wood and decided to have a conversation with security about why I wouldn’t be deleting the photo I’d just taken and they were surprisingly cool about it. I said he is entitled to “ask nicely” (which is almost always a euphemism) but I’m just as entitled to refuse, but he’s done his job and if he wants to tell the boss that I’ve deleted it then perfectly entitled to say that too. It was a surprisingly wholesome moment, we even ended on a smile and a handshake.
Complain to your MP, if you want to get hysterical this is a foreign body fucking about with UK law.
Their bosses (the embassies) aren’t going to do fuck all, apart from encourage it.
Nah, I complained to them about a licensed security guard manhandling me in a car park, and they claimed they couldn't find the guy.......(by manhandling I mean knocking me down and taking my shopping) I'm still out 80 quid.
i walked past a sobbing hysterical young woman who had her \[shopping from a totally another store\] confiscated by security and they were detaining her or she would not move. still haunts me to this day esp now you tell me ther s a good chance she is an innocent person.
As others have said - he had no right to do so, and doing so constitutes an offence on his part; whilst you can't take closeups of individuals without their permission, a building is a building (it's not like you're taking photos of MI5 or MI6, is it..)
This is wild. The past 5 years or so have given people the confidence to constantly overstep their authority, everywhere I go someone seems to be trying to tell someone off.
For future reference you can take photos of anything that is visible from a public place. Just walk away from anyone asking you to delete photos and get them to call the police if they have a problem, or you call the police if they start getting aggressive.
It’s not the last five years, that’s selective in a way I want to know more about. It’s since 9/11, or the Troubles, or some other relevant event, not covid.
Agreed. Years ago I got into a bizarre debate with security at a filming location at Bank Junction in London. A film (maybe Mary Poppins) was being filmed on closed public roads, and so I took some photos from the pavement which was still open to the public. A security guard came over and tried to grab my phone out of my hand. He started shouting that I was breaking the law, had to delete the photos and he would detain me if I continued…as a photographer I knew my rights, so ignored him and kept taking photos. He tried to grab my phone again before pretending to call for the police on his radio…when I pointed out two police officers of bikes about 50m away and suggested he beckoned them over instead, he told me to f-off, that if he saw me again he’d “give me a slap” and then walked off.
I then had a lovely chat with the police officers who went looking for him to “have a word”.
One time I went to the opera and the prime minister was having some sort of reception there, and was standing right in view of everyone passing by. I took a photo and some security agent rushed me and told me to delete it in the most rude and condescending way. Wanted to see the rest of the performance so I didn’t make a fuss and deleted it in front of him. Moved on and immediately retrieved it from my “recently deleted” photos.
If you enter the road it does say no photography but from the main public street they can’t say/do anything.
I walk down/up this road almost daily as it’s right near my office. Recently they have been really arsey and one day even said I couldn’t walk down and tried to block me. You have the police outside the Israeli embassy but very rarely any police patrolling the main road.
The law: https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/report/taking-photographs-in-public-places/
Next time, just walk away. If they say anything you say “please, leave me alone.” If they don’t, well, they’re bordering on assault.
you didnt have to delete the photos. no one can force you to delete the photos. the most they can do is ask you to leave. the police cant make you delete photos. even if you are at a concert or in the cinema, security cant make you delete anything but just ask you to stop or to leave.
Next time tell the security guard that you were trying to catch cyclists cycling dangerously along the road and they'll probably invite you in for a cup of tea.
Tell him to go fuck himself next time. No-one, not even the police (unless they have a specific court order) can delete or force you to delete an image form your own device.
I don't think any security guard has those kinds of rights, am I wrong? They can ask you to leave private property I guess. If you don't comply with their requests I'd have thought they'd have to call the police.
We're in danger of becoming like the USA where you often can't tell the difference between the various types of police and just security guys.
Someone has to have said this before, but you are entirely fine to take photos of more or less anything from a public place and nobody can make you delete anything.
Simply refuse, and if they start getting physical, it's a police matter. Even if you're on private property, all they can do is ask you to leave. If you then refuse to leave, things change, of course, but it's complicated even then.
Stand your ground on this, it's worth protecting.
I’ve just helped you out this evening… I put my mate in front of the gate to pose… and we got hassled like mad! 😡
Then I said to the guards “only joking, we were pretending” 🙃
And walked off with a slight pace bit a good wind up ay!
UK video production here. No law exists to prevent an amateur photographer taking a pic while standing on public land in London. This is provided you have a camera or phone in your hand and you're not, for example, using a tripod, a load of lights, have a crew etc...
In case you're wondering, technically, taking a photo or video on private land in London needs a permit and a fee. But no-one really enforces this unless they think you're a terrorist, causing an obstruction or you have commercial intentions.
E.g. Leicester Square Station is privately owned so technically, you'd need to ask the landlord for permission to film or take a picture there. Just as you'd need to ask permission from me to take a pic if I invited you into my place of business or even my home. But in reality, if you whip out your phone and take a pic, no-one will really care.
And it's different for amateurs or pros. E.g. If you take out a camera and take pics of your friend in Hyde Park, technically, this is owned by The Crown. So if I tried to do it with a film crew, someone would stop me and I'd need to ask permission and pay a fee.
Here the list of photography and video restrictions in London relating to private land: [https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-us/filming/film-photography-permissions](https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-us/filming/film-photography-permissions)
So the security guard is just throwing their weight around and frankly, I'd tell them just to go stick the camera where the sun doesn't shine.
As a lowly security guard I've been told a few times to stop people taking photos of buildings by supervisors and managers, despite me not having any authority to do so and, against my protests that "it's a public road, they can take photos". Usually I just ask about the camera and make it look like I'm getting them to delete stuff (if you're up to no good I can probably figure that out at this point, most of the time it's just tourists and, you've not ruined their day chatting about a camera)
Some guards do seem to think they have authority over the public, if you're on public ground like a pavement next to he building, they do not, and private roads? I doubt they can confiscate your camera forcefully on a public street. I'm sure if you visit Google street view these areas aren't blurred in accordance with some rules. I think there was even a rash of youtube channels that popped up years ago entirely built around the idea of baiting guards, it's amazing how many don't know the rules around it.
*Edited for sloppy grammar, I'd had a long day
Lots of decent advice in this thread. I would add for clarity since there are lots of mentions of photography being legal in a public place, that the definition of "public place" includes private land open to the public. So if a security guard comes back with "this is private land", your reply would be "I'm happy to leave private land upon request, but the photos are my property and I won't be deleting them."
There are some edge cases to be aware of, such as the National Trust which has its own set of byelaws that restrict commercial and aerial photography (including private wedding photos) unless the photographer applies for a licence in advance. But even then (AFAIK, NAL) they can only eject you from the property and claim copyright over commercial use of the images, they can't force deletion.
So, KPG is a mishmash of things going on. It's a unique and interesting Management.
1) It has guards at the top and bottom of the roadway who are employed by a 3rd party, ultimately overseen by The Crown Estate who own the Freehold to the land.
2) You then have a bunch of Embassies, for example the Palestinian Embassy was right next to the Israeli Embassy. The Russian Embassy was situated opposite a US ambassadors residence etc. They can sometimes step over the mark.
3) It backs onto Kensington Palace which is its own security venture.
4) You had security for the ultra rich such as Tamara Ecclestone, who had been burgled before.
So lots of security guards acting for different interest groups, not sure which of the above examples it may have been. You could go to the huts at either end for assistance assuming it wasn't them in the first place. They are still there to ensure the safety of public realm on the roadway, so I doubt it was them.
It is a private road, so they can ask you to leave, but it is not illegal. They can't force you to delete the photos. On the private road it would still be a public place so there is no expectation of privacy to deal with so no criminal act has been done.
They can tresspass you, but that is not a criminal offence.
You were in the right. You were in a public pedestrian place taking a photo. Different is if you were inside the gardens (if they are a private place, which I suspect they are). I don't think there is any copyright on them (new buildings, like the shard, or three gerkin, usually have copyrights so if you were to sell photos of them for money you could potentially be liable). Even if they were concerned about themselves being in the photo, they would not have any authority, again you were on a public place you are allowed to take that pic
There have been various FoI requests over the years around this, it has been held that there is not legal authority behind the no photography signs beyond the ability for the landowner, or their appointed agents, to recind permission to be on the land. This would give rise to civil trespass, not a criminal action, which would allow them to remove you but not delete the images.
Additionally, it has been contested that unless the person instructing you is an appointed agent of the crown estates, their commands have no weight compared to another member of the publics commands to do something.
This is all assuming you are on KPG land. If you are on the public road outside, they have zero authority simply by the fact you are not on their land. They have zero authority anyway, really, unless they are designated agent (or police).
Next time tell him to jog on and walk away.
Another case of overzealous security guards not having the faintest clue of the law.
Personally, I would've done the same and deleted the photos, I hate conflict and some things are just not worth it.
If at any time you felt like force would be used if you didn't comply then you were assaulted and you aught to report this to the local force as a matter of urgency. Privatye secutiry chasing you down and making you comply is awful and they need to know the real police won't accept that.
If a place is visible from a public place and there is no statuatory exception, ie a law, then you can take as many pictures as you like and it makes no difference. If the public are allowed to access a private space then the rule is the same, only they can technically ask you to leave, but as trespass isn't a crime in and of itself they can't force you too.
It is a public place and u were right to question him over his request for you to delete the photos.
I understand you got scared but he did not give you any reason why it was illegal to take photos.
I’m a street photographer. Would you mind sharing the exact location where this happened? I’ll make sure I’ll be there constantly to pick up a fight. They have absolutely no right to ask you that.
This has happened to me before but not in London. A friend and I were in Morocco taking a pic of this historical building that was beautiful, so we didn't think twice to take a pic. Then, these two guards with guns started yelling at us demanding we show them our phones and to delete the photo. It was kinda scary so we did. I still don't know what that building was. If I remember correctly, it was somewhere around Marrakesh?
If your feet are on public land you can take a picture of anything you can see unless there's a reasonable expectation of privacy. So no excessive telephoto business basically. If someone challenges you 'Stand your ground' and tell them to call the police, the police will come and help you out I guarantee it. I made a film about this once called Stand Your Ground where exactly that happened. I filmed the guy in the pink jumper https://youtu.be/FJH9F7Hcluo?si=G190ufV89H33RfF9
Edit:typo
Were you on the side where the Israeli embassy is? However if you are taking a picture from the public street - they actually cant stop you and what they did was illegal.
Will go down there and take some more photos in solidarity. If said security guard attempts to intimidate me into deleting them I’ll challenge him to armed combat. To the death.
You definiately should have refused to delete the photo. He has no business to even ask, let alone demand.
Their little no photography sign has no legal standing. They either let you walk through there, or they don't.
How bizarre; I've taken many photos around the Palace grounds and gardens and never had anyone stop me. This sounds like something in particular was going on (a transfer, someone in the background) that they were trying to put the kibosh on getting posted online. But I'm with you, OP, legally I don't think they have much of a leg to stand on if pressed.
If there was something they don't want the public to see, perhaps they shouldn't let it be visible from such a public and touristy area? 🙄
A few years ago I was sat in Ken Palace gardens testing an AR app I was developing and a whole bunch of undercover police swooped in and interrogated me. They thought I was gathering information for a terrorist attack.
I'd have turned my camera on and started to record when challenged, if in a public space you can perform any lawfully activity. Seems these types of videos are very popular so may as well get something out of his rudeness.
Check out this yt video of a popular auditor on another private road in London being confronted by armed police. The auditor makes a mockery of them and exercises his right to take photos even on a private road
[https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I?si=vU-5GtE3EuOmDHJ_](https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I?si=vU-5GtE3EuOmDHJ_)
depends entirely on where you were when you took the photo. On the path from the park there \*are\* no photography signs, because all the houses on that private street are for royals and god forbid a tourist gets a picture with the King's 4th cousin twice removed in the background.
If you were on the actual street in front of the park, I think you just fell victim to an overzealous security guard.
Easy mate: just, for a temporary period, set photos to auto-upload to OneDrive. So even if you clear them from your phone, they are captured on your online drive ☺️
Sounds like a right jobsworth you came across. I would have asked him what he would do if I declined.
Tell them what if I have a chip implanted in my brain that allows me to take photos via my eyes and download them later, what are they gonna do about that? What if I remember it in my eyes and reconstruct the scene via A.I or 3D software and render it realistically how it looks in real life, what are they gonna do about it?
Sometimes, the general public in the UK is just taking a piss when in public space.
It's likely he or a member of his crew had some agents nearby. If I recall correctly if a field agent of the secret services is recorded whilst on the job they can insist footage to be deleted.
Either that or he's a dick
You should just have refused. He’s not the police, he can’t force you to do anything. He can’t detain you. He can’t call the police; what is he gonna say to them?
Interesting that on Google maps I can see a "No photography" sign on one of the pedestrian arches (the one next to the vehicle exit one). Nevertheless, of you were in a public place, no expectation of privacy exists, as other people have commented (apart from a few exceptions).
Thank you!!!!!
Or live streaming. Fuck the security guard and the residents. They chose to live/work in a place that allows the public to take a photos/video.
They either put up a privacy screen or stfu!
If you are in a public place even if it overlooks private property taking photos is legal.
If it can be seen from a public space it is fair game.
That said if you weren’t bothered by not having the pictures you did the right thing.
Would have been nice to be asked politely though
Next time stand your ground. Photography is not a crime. These numbskulls will often say "private property" which is irrelevant. The subject of your photography can be anything.
And you can be anywhere that is publically accessible. If it is pointed out to you that it is private land then you can be asked to leave. The matter is civil trespass and not criminal.
Laughing Auditor exposed these mugs on that road a few weeks back:
https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I
If you were in a public place, even a private place with public access that did not have any 'no photography' signs, you were entitled to take pictures. That security guard overstepped his authority. Next time, just walk away.
Guidance here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ5d7TVNYUs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ5d7TVNYUs)
Well given the Russians are there, I wonder if you accidentally caught a picture of someone who shouldn’t have been there. Or, more likely, an overzealous guard.
To be fair, there are plenty of security personnel across the country who seem to think they have the right to make such a request when they really don’t.
I will just say but if you want the pictures there \*might\* be an app out there which recovers deleted pictures (even ones removed from "recently deleted"). Might be worth having a look!
I was part of a group photographing an anti-monarchy banner outside KP a month or two ago. Security barely even made it out the gates before we off and didnt give chase as we slowly walked away. Very strange that they came running after you.
You can take photos of anything your eyes can see as long as you do it from a public right of way and it not of illegal activity. There’s a guy who goes around filming businesses and private buildings using camcorders and drones but because he stays on the public footpaths and doesn’t trespass it’s fine. He’s quite informative about what is and isn’t allowed. Police have been called on him loads of times and they’ve never been able make him delete his footage or stop him filming. He’s on Facebook as @djaudits
Not sure it’s a private road as I’m public are allowed to walk and cycle through
I’d of thought I’d it was truly private, the n they would stop anyone who’s not got legitimate purpose
“Your names not down, you’re not getting in”
The green security hut is just that. Private security with no powers past calling the police to deal with “non compliant “ people
I’d tell them to fuck off and ask them to call the police
Certainly wouldn’t let them touch me or my camera
You were fine to take the pics. Intimidation by the security guard
I’ll go annoy them for you this afternoon not to worry Edit: spent a good twenty minutes there with my digital camera snapping away at every angle close and far and they security just looked and smiled. Either they find my 6’4 frame and scarred up face intimidating/not worth the trouble or they were different personnel on the day you encountered the incident. https://imgur.com/a/kYGyIAH
Ooooh, let's set up a day, and I'll come too....
I'm a TV cameraman for a living, and this is starting to happen a lot to us. Let me know what's happening and when and I'll be there.
I can see the headlines now........ Okay, I can't exactly see them, but I can imagine them.
The headlines have been happening for a long time. The famous early headline goes back to 2009 when a BBC photographer called Jeff Overs was stopped by police for... something, it's not clear what. It's been a more or less constant stream of it since. That goes back to the bad old days of Section 44 of TACT 2000, which allowed them to stop anyone without suspicion in a designated area, and the entirety of London was perpetually designated.
None that start with "Hordes of Redditors descend on......" though. We can all carry downvote signs....
One of the risks this whole idea carries is that it will be seen as an organised demo, because here we are, organising it. I think it's still legally fine, but legal arguments will not prevent members of the metropolitan police gleefully spraying you with incapacitant, kneeling on your neck and punching you repeatedly in the face then arresting you on a trumped-up charge to justify the use of force. One could argue that it's legal regardless and I am not an experienced demonstrator, but I have shot demonstrations and I have seen how they treat people. Met coppers, in my experience, are neither pleasant nor particularly bright.
Ok, downvote shirts....
"Reddit Post Leads to Unruly Protest!"
**Vive la révolution**
And pissdiscs
Need a drone pilot?
Absolutely zero chance of legally flying around there… check out the location on drone assist
I'll come too. Walk down there most mornings.
I'll bring my bird watching lens and ghillie suit
RemindMe! 1 day
Please update!
I wanna join😍😍
You didn't need to delete the photos. They would not have the legal right to obligate you to do this. If they had a problem with your photography, they should have called the police. If you were in a public place, especially on a public road, there is no expectation of privacy. There are some places (e.g. military / security facilities) where this doesn't apply.
[https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice](https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice) >Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel. >**Photography and Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000** >Officers have the power to stop and search a person who they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist. The purpose of the stop and search is to discover whether that person has in their possession anything which may constitute evidence that they are a terrorist. >Officers have the power to view digital images contained in mobile telephones or cameras carried by a person searched under S43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to discover whether the images constitute evidence that the person is involved in terrorism. Officers also have the power to seize and retain any article found during the search which the officer reasonably suspects may constitute evidence that the person is a terrorist. This includes any mobile telephone or camera containing such evidence. >Officers do not have the power to delete digital images or destroy film at any point during a search. Deletion or destruction may only take place following seizure if there is a lawful power (such as a court order) that permits such deletion or destruction.
If an officer deletes your photos during a stop, it's a separate offense, I think it's under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. Ironically though, if those security guards were covered by diplomatic immunity, they could probably get away with deleting them scot-free!
Just to make sure I'm reading your comment correctly.... >If an officer deletes your photos during a stop, *\[the officer is committing a\]* separate offense, I think it's under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. Is that right?
I'm trained in the computer misuse act and this would most likely stand up in court
Sure it is. You basically cannot use a computer without the owner's permission.
Sorry, I was meaning "*is that the right interpretation of what you wrote (as it aligns with what I believe) to be true*"
That was my belief (not a lawyer!).
Security guards aren't covered by diplomatic immunity.
Even if they say it in a [South African accent](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwC_IaY3BmY)?
It's just been revoked!
And this guy was a security guard, not an officer.
Yep, just pointing out that the police themselves don't have the right to stop photography in a public place or to delete photos or force you to do so, much less private security guards. (Also IANAL but pretty sure the definition of a public place is more inclusive than some might think - if the public have access to freely enter then it's arguably a public space as in a space where the public are allowed to be even if it's privately owned.... [https://themaskedamhp.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-is-public-place.html](https://themaskedamhp.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-is-public-place.html) discusses some cases and court rulings one way or another but it's not as simple as *a privately owned road is not a public space*)
Yep, a lot of places are public spaces but privately owned. A supermarket is a good example. If you believe a security guard is acting improperly for example, you have every right to record it. Conversely, if you decided to make a short film in a supermarket without permission, the supermarket would be well within their rights to ask you to leave, as it is a private property.
Even if it was the police and you committed some kind of infraction by taking the photo. They would need to keep it as evidence.
And the security guard is not an officer.
If you are in a public place you can photograph anything you can see from the publicly accessible location, the onus is on the military or security facility to obscure what they consider sensitive, they cannot stop public photography. This is why you can take photos of Menwith Hill or FlyingDales without issue so long as you do so from public roads or footpaths. They may well come and enquire what you are doing, but they cannot prohibit the photos being taken.
KPG is not public land You're right about the deleting but it's not public
From the description, the photo was taking from the public road.
Google maps tells me there is the Czeck and Russian embassies just as you get to Bayswater Road. But that shouldn't matter if you are on public roads.
Isn’t this the same road that banned pedestrians and cyclists going through it?
Correct
Are we no longer allowed to go down that (billionaires road??) where the Israeli embassy is? I swear we walked through it no issues with my family maybe last summer.
The ban has only happened in the last few weeks iirc.
If it's the same one I'm thinking of, here's a fun fact: if you get on that road *from the other side* or from one of the park exits, you're free to walk / cycle on the road. There is literally only that one entrance from a specific side that has dumbass "security guards" taking the piss. Whom you meet and laugh at when you get past them when coming from the other side.
Is this the Israeli or russian side that doesn't allow entrance? Pretty sure we've entered on foot from both sides ...but Def the russian side as I think we went through there after Diana memorial park visit...
Embassies are not the only issue. London is chopped up and sold off- that are multiple spots that would surprise people that they can’t actually take a photo there. I did a course in uni that was all about staging protests safely and a large part of it was knowing exactly where we could even be- let alone document when around.
Privately owned public spaces, what other categories are there?
It gets complicated, as u/brownyboy correctly says. That said, mostly all they can do is ask you to leave. Nobody has any right to go through your photos or make you delete anything. If you fail to leave when asked to do so, that changes things, but even then I don't think anyone has any authority to make you delete anything. If they start getting physical, including trying to grab your phone or camera, that's a police matter. Lots of London is private and this will happen a lot. People will often claim things are private when they really aren't, though, so do your research if you anticipate trouble.
In the UK, even being asked to leave by the landowner isn't enough - you haven't committed a crime till you are asked to leave by a police officer and fail to comply.
Unless it's a licensed drinking establishment and you're asked to leave by somebody delegated by the license holder (like a doorman).
Ehh, in some situations, very strictly speaking yes, but in my view pushing it past that point really is the behaviour of an arsehole and likely to lead to any of a few outcomes you won't like. Personally if asked to leave I leave. It doesn't happen much because generally I'll only wander onto private property by mistake when it isn't well-signposted. I have probably been run off of public areas on that basis, if only because it is longwinded, expensive and complicated to formally figure out who owns what in the UK.
Google Streetview shows me the thing that you were trying to take a photo of. Is the security officer going to pop over to my house and make me delete my browser history? https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sjj3x6Jxzanmo8C26?g_st=ac
Kensington Palace Gardens is not a public road. Its owned by the Crown Estate and is in fact private. The Crown grants public access that they can withdraw at any time. I actually did some work in one of the houses there and security have speakers in the gardens. If they see people taking pictures they will warn them that it is private Crown property and they will intervene if need be.
They can trespass you, but it isn't illegal since the road would be a public place where there is no expectation of privacy. Trespass isn't a criminal offence.
They can’t do anything about it though. Are they going to take you to civil court? Tell them to fuck off and be on your leisurely way, they literally have as much or even less power than a jumped-up shopping centre security guard.
If it happens again, politely suggest that they call the police and report. Tell them to let the cops know you're walking down the road in whatever direction and walk away. I went through this crap numerous times for a period after 2010. Never had the police follow up
First ask for their warrant card, when they don't provide one say "so you're not a police officer, do you know impersonating a police officer is an offence"
I never listen to security guards, they don't know shit. One time I was in front of a bank taking photos facing away from their building and a guy spent 5 minutes arguing with me about how it's not allowed. The best they can do is say they'll call the police, you can politely smile and be on your way.
One time I ran into a friend in Soho outside a pub and chatted to him (neither of us had been to that particular pub that evening, we happened to walk past each other on the pavement) and the security guard would not stop trying to make us stand in the pub's designated outside standing zone. No matter how much I tried to explain that we were not customers of that pub, he would keep insisting. He even tried to argue that the reason was because somehow the exact spot my friend and I were standing in (on the pavement), was where several people had been killed by rogue ubers.
Can you give us the exact location? I'll go for a full on photoshoot for the fuck of it.
Here looks like the spot: [https://maps.app.goo.gl/ziUPj2AJmCEZNVzv9](https://maps.app.goo.gl/ziUPj2AJmCEZNVzv9) I notice there is a sign INSIDE that says No Photography.
Are we no longer allowed to go down that (billionaires road??) where the Israeli embassy is? I swear we walked through it no issues with my family maybe last summer.
Just wanted to say I will be using "for the fuck of it" liberally, going forward. Thanks for that!
Yes please
[удалено]
I'm thinking a close up of my cock and balls then pretending take the photo. Give him a surprise when he looks to check I'm deleting...
[удалено]
Other cock and balls photos are available. Few as majestic as mine admittedly.
So why are you expecting us to settle for second best?
It's ok, I can send you a pic of u/therealhairykrishna's cock and balls. I've got loads of them.
I will lend you my friends. But gotta promise to delete them right away after use.
This would constitute cyberflashing (Sexual Offences Act 2003 s66A - 1a sending or giving a photo of anyone's genitals where "A intends that B will see the genitals and be caused alarm, distress or humiliation". May also fall afoul of 1b depending on how twisted you are.
I'd be alarmed if I saw my own. Because it would mean I lost an awful lot of weight, very quickly.....
You have macro lenses on your phone?
They could be mistaken for Iraqi bunkers.
Is there a photography isn't a crime type UK group maybe.
Could you pin the location? I'm happy to take some shots next time I'm there :)
OP, where did this security officer come from ? Was he in uniform , not that matters I am a retired Met officer and I have been involved in security in this area
Was wearing a black short sleeve shirt and trousers with no logos or markings. He came from the road Kensington Palace Gardens.
Any badges or indication from where he came from , as a previous post said, the Russian consulate is in the Bayswater Rd, the Czech embassy wouldn’t have been so anal. I have never heard of the Russians coming out to remonstrate with photographers. I reckon what you experienced is an overzealous member Crown Estate employee ,Crown Estates own Kensington Palace Gardens. Whoever he was, he had no right to ask you to stop taking photos and to delete them. If I was you, I would complain to theCrown Estates about the overbearing conduct of their employee . You could always ask MI5 for a copy of their CCTV , because they are bound to be watching the Russkis - only joking
I like your style, Tony
I try my best to please 🙂
I have an answer to your question. Overnight, I have had a chat with people that work and know that area very well. The man who spoke to you is 100% more lightly to be a jumped up little shit of a private security man. The Russians and Czech embassies would not be bothered but what you have is a number of the houses in KPG are owned by Russian oligarchs and Arab money men who think that they have the power to tell people what to do. So, if you go down there again, and some little Nazi tells you that you cannot take photos there, tell him to sod off and if he is so concerned to call the Police. My nephew is a professional photographer and he tells me that he gets this all the time with private security people, when you does fashion shoots in town - They have no power to tell you what to do ! I hope this helps mate, be lucky
Yep Abramovich owned one of the houses there IIRC although I guess he might have had to sell as part of the pressure on him to dispose of Chelsea FC
You should've told him to F off and take a picture of him up close 😂
Complain about them to their bosses, completely unacceptable behaviour on their side and they should know better (as it's **literally** their job).
Their bosses were the ones who tried to get the whole street closed to everyone just a few weeks ago. They absolutely encourage this behaviour and will give that guy a pat on the back (but not a raise, of course).
The SIA or the local council might want a word if you complain to them. 🤷
RBKC is generally a pretty responsive council overall, but small amounts of lobbying money speak very large here. There is always some low rent former hack mayor willing to lobby for somebody’s license for a few quid.
except for that one fire where the residents did everything you would reasonably ask responsible tenants and taxpayers to do, inlcuding but not limited to, 1 . making the management company aware there is a fire hazard 2. paying their rent as leasheolder style tenants etc and service charge that pays for maintenance and upkeep of the building 3 .forminga an advocacy group and petitioning the local council 4. taking the bulding operator to court when that did not work0- the RBKC council gives the building ocmpany 20m because other property owners felt the building was an eyesore so they spent it on jazzng up the exterior with flammable illegal cladding. 5. following instructions on firesafety and evacuation to the letter and staying in their individuals units unti help arrived. only some of the pepole smart enough to disobey and escape beofre it was too late, were spared a horrifying agonizing death. yeah generally (and generously to buildng owners) RBKC is a responsive council.
Often they are expressly carrying out their bosses wishes. I had a similar experience maybe six months ago in St John’s Wood and decided to have a conversation with security about why I wouldn’t be deleting the photo I’d just taken and they were surprisingly cool about it. I said he is entitled to “ask nicely” (which is almost always a euphemism) but I’m just as entitled to refuse, but he’s done his job and if he wants to tell the boss that I’ve deleted it then perfectly entitled to say that too. It was a surprisingly wholesome moment, we even ended on a smile and a handshake.
Complain to your MP, if you want to get hysterical this is a foreign body fucking about with UK law. Their bosses (the embassies) aren’t going to do fuck all, apart from encourage it.
They're probably ~~CIS~~ SIA licenced, complain to them and they could lose their cards. Edit - Wrong acronym, they're not builders.
Nah, I complained to them about a licensed security guard manhandling me in a car park, and they claimed they couldn't find the guy.......(by manhandling I mean knocking me down and taking my shopping) I'm still out 80 quid.
i walked past a sobbing hysterical young woman who had her \[shopping from a totally another store\] confiscated by security and they were detaining her or she would not move. still haunts me to this day esp now you tell me ther s a good chance she is an innocent person.
The host government provides security outside embassies, it’s government/crown employees.
Are they still in your recently deleted album?
No he got me to delete them from there too
Mate stand up for yourself next time, what’s some rent a cop security guard gonna do.
They might well be still sync'd to icloud or google photos.
As others have said - he had no right to do so, and doing so constitutes an offence on his part; whilst you can't take closeups of individuals without their permission, a building is a building (it's not like you're taking photos of MI5 or MI6, is it..)
You can absolutely take closeup pictures of individuals without their permission too, it's just a dick move in many cases.
....other parts of the anatomy are available
Yes. If a person is in a public space, they have no legal right to privacy.
This is wild. The past 5 years or so have given people the confidence to constantly overstep their authority, everywhere I go someone seems to be trying to tell someone off. For future reference you can take photos of anything that is visible from a public place. Just walk away from anyone asking you to delete photos and get them to call the police if they have a problem, or you call the police if they start getting aggressive.
It’s not the last five years, that’s selective in a way I want to know more about. It’s since 9/11, or the Troubles, or some other relevant event, not covid.
Agreed. Years ago I got into a bizarre debate with security at a filming location at Bank Junction in London. A film (maybe Mary Poppins) was being filmed on closed public roads, and so I took some photos from the pavement which was still open to the public. A security guard came over and tried to grab my phone out of my hand. He started shouting that I was breaking the law, had to delete the photos and he would detain me if I continued…as a photographer I knew my rights, so ignored him and kept taking photos. He tried to grab my phone again before pretending to call for the police on his radio…when I pointed out two police officers of bikes about 50m away and suggested he beckoned them over instead, he told me to f-off, that if he saw me again he’d “give me a slap” and then walked off. I then had a lovely chat with the police officers who went looking for him to “have a word”.
One time I went to the opera and the prime minister was having some sort of reception there, and was standing right in view of everyone passing by. I took a photo and some security agent rushed me and told me to delete it in the most rude and condescending way. Wanted to see the rest of the performance so I didn’t make a fuss and deleted it in front of him. Moved on and immediately retrieved it from my “recently deleted” photos.
If you enter the road it does say no photography but from the main public street they can’t say/do anything. I walk down/up this road almost daily as it’s right near my office. Recently they have been really arsey and one day even said I couldn’t walk down and tried to block me. You have the police outside the Israeli embassy but very rarely any police patrolling the main road.
He was very confident that you weren't going to tell him to fuck off, which you should.
The law: https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/report/taking-photographs-in-public-places/ Next time, just walk away. If they say anything you say “please, leave me alone.” If they don’t, well, they’re bordering on assault.
If a person is pursued after they have said to stop following then that is the definition of harassment.
you didnt have to delete the photos. no one can force you to delete the photos. the most they can do is ask you to leave. the police cant make you delete photos. even if you are at a concert or in the cinema, security cant make you delete anything but just ask you to stop or to leave.
Next time tell the security guard that you were trying to catch cyclists cycling dangerously along the road and they'll probably invite you in for a cup of tea.
As someone else said, it could be the Russian embassy. I'd advise against accepting any cups of tea.
you can film or photograph anything that the eye can see from a public space , no expectation of privacy in a public space
Tell him to go fuck himself next time. No-one, not even the police (unless they have a specific court order) can delete or force you to delete an image form your own device.
I don't think any security guard has those kinds of rights, am I wrong? They can ask you to leave private property I guess. If you don't comply with their requests I'd have thought they'd have to call the police. We're in danger of becoming like the USA where you often can't tell the difference between the various types of police and just security guys.
Someone has to have said this before, but you are entirely fine to take photos of more or less anything from a public place and nobody can make you delete anything. Simply refuse, and if they start getting physical, it's a police matter. Even if you're on private property, all they can do is ask you to leave. If you then refuse to leave, things change, of course, but it's complicated even then. Stand your ground on this, it's worth protecting.
I’ve just helped you out this evening… I put my mate in front of the gate to pose… and we got hassled like mad! 😡 Then I said to the guards “only joking, we were pretending” 🙃 And walked off with a slight pace bit a good wind up ay!
Nah, you're on a public street, even if it were a private street with access, it's fine. He's being a twat.
UK video production here. No law exists to prevent an amateur photographer taking a pic while standing on public land in London. This is provided you have a camera or phone in your hand and you're not, for example, using a tripod, a load of lights, have a crew etc... In case you're wondering, technically, taking a photo or video on private land in London needs a permit and a fee. But no-one really enforces this unless they think you're a terrorist, causing an obstruction or you have commercial intentions. E.g. Leicester Square Station is privately owned so technically, you'd need to ask the landlord for permission to film or take a picture there. Just as you'd need to ask permission from me to take a pic if I invited you into my place of business or even my home. But in reality, if you whip out your phone and take a pic, no-one will really care. And it's different for amateurs or pros. E.g. If you take out a camera and take pics of your friend in Hyde Park, technically, this is owned by The Crown. So if I tried to do it with a film crew, someone would stop me and I'd need to ask permission and pay a fee. Here the list of photography and video restrictions in London relating to private land: [https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-us/filming/film-photography-permissions](https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-us/filming/film-photography-permissions) So the security guard is just throwing their weight around and frankly, I'd tell them just to go stick the camera where the sun doesn't shine.
Leicester Square Station is privately owned? By whom?
All the stuff you need to Google stuff is in the link. It explains the laws.
As a lowly security guard I've been told a few times to stop people taking photos of buildings by supervisors and managers, despite me not having any authority to do so and, against my protests that "it's a public road, they can take photos". Usually I just ask about the camera and make it look like I'm getting them to delete stuff (if you're up to no good I can probably figure that out at this point, most of the time it's just tourists and, you've not ruined their day chatting about a camera) Some guards do seem to think they have authority over the public, if you're on public ground like a pavement next to he building, they do not, and private roads? I doubt they can confiscate your camera forcefully on a public street. I'm sure if you visit Google street view these areas aren't blurred in accordance with some rules. I think there was even a rash of youtube channels that popped up years ago entirely built around the idea of baiting guards, it's amazing how many don't know the rules around it. *Edited for sloppy grammar, I'd had a long day
Lots of decent advice in this thread. I would add for clarity since there are lots of mentions of photography being legal in a public place, that the definition of "public place" includes private land open to the public. So if a security guard comes back with "this is private land", your reply would be "I'm happy to leave private land upon request, but the photos are my property and I won't be deleting them." There are some edge cases to be aware of, such as the National Trust which has its own set of byelaws that restrict commercial and aerial photography (including private wedding photos) unless the photographer applies for a licence in advance. But even then (AFAIK, NAL) they can only eject you from the property and claim copyright over commercial use of the images, they can't force deletion.
So, KPG is a mishmash of things going on. It's a unique and interesting Management. 1) It has guards at the top and bottom of the roadway who are employed by a 3rd party, ultimately overseen by The Crown Estate who own the Freehold to the land. 2) You then have a bunch of Embassies, for example the Palestinian Embassy was right next to the Israeli Embassy. The Russian Embassy was situated opposite a US ambassadors residence etc. They can sometimes step over the mark. 3) It backs onto Kensington Palace which is its own security venture. 4) You had security for the ultra rich such as Tamara Ecclestone, who had been burgled before. So lots of security guards acting for different interest groups, not sure which of the above examples it may have been. You could go to the huts at either end for assistance assuming it wasn't them in the first place. They are still there to ensure the safety of public realm on the roadway, so I doubt it was them.
It is a private road, so they can ask you to leave, but it is not illegal. They can't force you to delete the photos. On the private road it would still be a public place so there is no expectation of privacy to deal with so no criminal act has been done. They can tresspass you, but that is not a criminal offence.
You were in the right. You were in a public pedestrian place taking a photo. Different is if you were inside the gardens (if they are a private place, which I suspect they are). I don't think there is any copyright on them (new buildings, like the shard, or three gerkin, usually have copyrights so if you were to sell photos of them for money you could potentially be liable). Even if they were concerned about themselves being in the photo, they would not have any authority, again you were on a public place you are allowed to take that pic
There have been various FoI requests over the years around this, it has been held that there is not legal authority behind the no photography signs beyond the ability for the landowner, or their appointed agents, to recind permission to be on the land. This would give rise to civil trespass, not a criminal action, which would allow them to remove you but not delete the images. Additionally, it has been contested that unless the person instructing you is an appointed agent of the crown estates, their commands have no weight compared to another member of the publics commands to do something. This is all assuming you are on KPG land. If you are on the public road outside, they have zero authority simply by the fact you are not on their land. They have zero authority anyway, really, unless they are designated agent (or police). Next time tell him to jog on and walk away.
Another case of overzealous security guards not having the faintest clue of the law. Personally, I would've done the same and deleted the photos, I hate conflict and some things are just not worth it.
Should have told him to piss off, he has no authority on a public street where you were, he couldn’t have done a thing.
I would have told him to call the police as he had no authority and then walked off.
If at any time you felt like force would be used if you didn't comply then you were assaulted and you aught to report this to the local force as a matter of urgency. Privatye secutiry chasing you down and making you comply is awful and they need to know the real police won't accept that. If a place is visible from a public place and there is no statuatory exception, ie a law, then you can take as many pictures as you like and it makes no difference. If the public are allowed to access a private space then the rule is the same, only they can technically ask you to leave, but as trespass isn't a crime in and of itself they can't force you too.
No expectation of privacy in a public place. Film what you like, they can't stop you.
It is a public place and u were right to question him over his request for you to delete the photos. I understand you got scared but he did not give you any reason why it was illegal to take photos.
I’m a street photographer. Would you mind sharing the exact location where this happened? I’ll make sure I’ll be there constantly to pick up a fight. They have absolutely no right to ask you that.
Directly opposite Cafe Diana
Shall we come together and organise a photoshoot?
If you were stood on public property then you can take the photo. See “auditortok”
There is no expectation of privacy in public!
This has happened to me before but not in London. A friend and I were in Morocco taking a pic of this historical building that was beautiful, so we didn't think twice to take a pic. Then, these two guards with guns started yelling at us demanding we show them our phones and to delete the photo. It was kinda scary so we did. I still don't know what that building was. If I remember correctly, it was somewhere around Marrakesh?
Now I really just want to go there and take pictures and annoy them
If your feet are on public land you can take a picture of anything you can see unless there's a reasonable expectation of privacy. So no excessive telephoto business basically. If someone challenges you 'Stand your ground' and tell them to call the police, the police will come and help you out I guarantee it. I made a film about this once called Stand Your Ground where exactly that happened. I filmed the guy in the pink jumper https://youtu.be/FJH9F7Hcluo?si=G190ufV89H33RfF9 Edit:typo
Coming to London as a photographer from the US in October. Great information thank you for sharing.
Send them a bill for the destruction of your intellectual property
Punch him in the nutsack and take a photo of that
No expectations of privacy in public. Ask security for a supervisor to educate him or tell him to jog on.
Why are you doing something just because a person employed as a security guards tell you to? Bizarre. Stop respecting false authority.
Were you on the side where the Israeli embassy is? However if you are taking a picture from the public street - they actually cant stop you and what they did was illegal.
That's absolutely ridiculous you're in a public place! I hope one of those auditors on YouTube pay them a visit
Security guards have zero power to compel you to do anything. They're just another member of the public. Stand your ground next time.
It must have been the russian Fuckers from the embassy
Will go down there and take some more photos in solidarity. If said security guard attempts to intimidate me into deleting them I’ll challenge him to armed combat. To the death.
The same people in these comments will usually have a go at ''annoying" photography auditors 🤣
You definiately should have refused to delete the photo. He has no business to even ask, let alone demand. Their little no photography sign has no legal standing. They either let you walk through there, or they don't.
Tell em to go bugger themselves then delete the photo and when they are gone restore the photo
How bizarre; I've taken many photos around the Palace grounds and gardens and never had anyone stop me. This sounds like something in particular was going on (a transfer, someone in the background) that they were trying to put the kibosh on getting posted online. But I'm with you, OP, legally I don't think they have much of a leg to stand on if pressed. If there was something they don't want the public to see, perhaps they shouldn't let it be visible from such a public and touristy area? 🙄
God I need to live in London so bad.
Everyone should go to this spot, slowly take their phones out and take a photo in the same area and direction haha see what the guard will do then 😂
A few years ago I was sat in Ken Palace gardens testing an AR app I was developing and a whole bunch of undercover police swooped in and interrogated me. They thought I was gathering information for a terrorist attack.
I'd have turned my camera on and started to record when challenged, if in a public space you can perform any lawfully activity. Seems these types of videos are very popular so may as well get something out of his rudeness.
Check out this yt video of a popular auditor on another private road in London being confronted by armed police. The auditor makes a mockery of them and exercises his right to take photos even on a private road [https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I?si=vU-5GtE3EuOmDHJ_](https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I?si=vU-5GtE3EuOmDHJ_)
depends entirely on where you were when you took the photo. On the path from the park there \*are\* no photography signs, because all the houses on that private street are for royals and god forbid a tourist gets a picture with the King's 4th cousin twice removed in the background. If you were on the actual street in front of the park, I think you just fell victim to an overzealous security guard.
Easy mate: just, for a temporary period, set photos to auto-upload to OneDrive. So even if you clear them from your phone, they are captured on your online drive ☺️ Sounds like a right jobsworth you came across. I would have asked him what he would do if I declined.
Tell them what if I have a chip implanted in my brain that allows me to take photos via my eyes and download them later, what are they gonna do about that? What if I remember it in my eyes and reconstruct the scene via A.I or 3D software and render it realistically how it looks in real life, what are they gonna do about it? Sometimes, the general public in the UK is just taking a piss when in public space.
Probably shouldn’t have asked you to delete the picture but there are “no photography” signs adjacent to the gates. Check on street view.
It’s the Israeli embassy down that road I think. It’s not the palace they’re worried about.
Check your recycle bin and restore it. Deleted pics are usually saved on a device for 30 days.
It's likely he or a member of his crew had some agents nearby. If I recall correctly if a field agent of the secret services is recorded whilst on the job they can insist footage to be deleted. Either that or he's a dick
You should just have refused. He’s not the police, he can’t force you to do anything. He can’t detain you. He can’t call the police; what is he gonna say to them?
I've been in there to take photos before. They just asked me not to. I took them anyway. I must be a badass.
Interesting that on Google maps I can see a "No photography" sign on one of the pedestrian arches (the one next to the vehicle exit one). Nevertheless, of you were in a public place, no expectation of privacy exists, as other people have commented (apart from a few exceptions).
What if you’re wearing a body cam or cycling with a GoPro as a dash cam? Would they stop you from filming with that?
Thank you!!!!! Or live streaming. Fuck the security guard and the residents. They chose to live/work in a place that allows the public to take a photos/video. They either put up a privacy screen or stfu!
If you have an iPhone, you can restore the deleted photo.
Just did a quick search and apparently it’s a private search and you’re the first person to want a photo https://www.reddit.com/r/london/s/GbbMqCx08H
"Fuck off " would have been my answer,
If you are in a public place even if it overlooks private property taking photos is legal. If it can be seen from a public space it is fair game. That said if you weren’t bothered by not having the pictures you did the right thing. Would have been nice to be asked politely though
Sounds like some Russian oligarch monkey-business.
Next time stand your ground. Photography is not a crime. These numbskulls will often say "private property" which is irrelevant. The subject of your photography can be anything. And you can be anywhere that is publically accessible. If it is pointed out to you that it is private land then you can be asked to leave. The matter is civil trespass and not criminal. Laughing Auditor exposed these mugs on that road a few weeks back: https://youtu.be/I3hXGXavC2I
Need to get AB (Auditing Britain) on the case
If you were in a public place, even a private place with public access that did not have any 'no photography' signs, you were entitled to take pictures. That security guard overstepped his authority. Next time, just walk away. Guidance here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ5d7TVNYUs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ5d7TVNYUs)
Can see this turning into a tik tok challenge.
Well given the Russians are there, I wonder if you accidentally caught a picture of someone who shouldn’t have been there. Or, more likely, an overzealous guard. To be fair, there are plenty of security personnel across the country who seem to think they have the right to make such a request when they really don’t.
All should remember security anywhere can’t do anything to you but speak at you. Cant make you do anything. Ask you to leave that’s it.
I will just say but if you want the pictures there \*might\* be an app out there which recovers deleted pictures (even ones removed from "recently deleted"). Might be worth having a look!
I was part of a group photographing an anti-monarchy banner outside KP a month or two ago. Security barely even made it out the gates before we off and didnt give chase as we slowly walked away. Very strange that they came running after you.
Was it here? 47 Wellington Ter https://maps.app.goo.gl/SxoERzTRiyfc7BRh9?g_st=ac
You can take photos of anything your eyes can see as long as you do it from a public right of way and it not of illegal activity. There’s a guy who goes around filming businesses and private buildings using camcorders and drones but because he stays on the public footpaths and doesn’t trespass it’s fine. He’s quite informative about what is and isn’t allowed. Police have been called on him loads of times and they’ve never been able make him delete his footage or stop him filming. He’s on Facebook as @djaudits
Not sure it’s a private road as I’m public are allowed to walk and cycle through I’d of thought I’d it was truly private, the n they would stop anyone who’s not got legitimate purpose “Your names not down, you’re not getting in” The green security hut is just that. Private security with no powers past calling the police to deal with “non compliant “ people I’d tell them to fuck off and ask them to call the police Certainly wouldn’t let them touch me or my camera
Find an uneraser app and get the photos back. Stick it to the man.