In message , TonyB
writes
Unless he is watching it live, constantly, there is little point in having
a
low quality CCTV. The recordings will not be of evidence quality, so the
Police won't be interested in them.

I used a standard home video camera connected to a domestic recorder set to
run in long play. That gave me 8 hours of good quality tape and enabled the
police to nick the old b*****r that was vandalising my car on a public
highway. The tapes went through the police and several solicitors and at no
time did anyone say I shouldn't have been filming.

To round the story off, the old boy ( 70+ yrs old! ) was arrested and
marched off to the nick. CPS decided that there was insufficient evidence to
prosecute ( !! ) despite the fact that you could hear the key on the metal
for several seconds and see the bloke - who admitted it was he - but he
denied scratching the car and the video did not actually pick up his hand
against the bodywork.

The insurance co started proceedings against him and after 2 years of
letters the old boy stopped replying. At that point the NU dropped the case.
I could sue him privately to get my £120 excess back but to be honest it
isn't worth the hassle. I don't think he'll do it again.

So, not really a result then

--
geoff