A key thing to remember with auditors is you only see the videos they choose to put up, the ones where they try to engineer a confrontation and get a 100% professional response that doesn’t escalate, they tend not to show. Also pay close attention to the timings - there was one last year near where I work, some ‘auditor’ picking a confrontation with a private security guard, whose behaviour was impeccable, and then he suddenly turned nasty. Only when you add in the ten seconds or so of video Mr Auditor has missed out of the final cut, where he made some really offensive racial/religious comments towards the security guard, it wasn’t quite so clear cut - their relationship with the truth is often sketchy. Again, as an officer, if I edited ten seconds out of a video and presented it as evidence, I’d rightly lose my job and go to prison, but this chump seemed to think it was okay for him to do it.
He was also making about £3,000 - £4,000 a month from all the advertising which went onto his videos, which he doesn’t mention to his ‘followers’. He’d also strangely forgotten to mention to the HMRC - he now owes them about twenty five grand in back tax, which is about a years salary for a freshly qualified nurse he’s depriving the local hospital of. It’s not some holy crusade to stop a dystopian future, it’s a way of making money.
If the police do f*ck up, which I’ve never said they don’t, make a complaint and go through a solicitor or the IOPC if need be, but auditor videos are a lot of selective, self-important hot air.
It may have escaped your notice, but Home Office decisions such as creating PCSO’s aren’t always greeted with universal delight in the ranks. However, we’ll work with what we’ve got.
We can’t generalise that all auditors are the same, but it’s fair to say many of them are like you suggest. However, in terms of their motives or any other illegal issues outside of their videos, that’s irrelevant to the matter as they’re still highlighting the failings of police officers. i.e. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
In terms of owing tax and it paying for a nurse, etc., I think we all know that’s not how our tax is distributed, and £25k is a drop in the ocean compared to other areas where public spending could be better handled, or other people and organisations can be paying more themselves, myself included if the cost of living wasn’t so high
Regardless of the above, it is still concerning to me that a lot of these videos result in the Police mentioning the “current climate”, “holding a camera”, and “hostile reconnaissance” for filming from a public place as grounds to reasonably suspect that person is a terrorist or has items that could be involved in such activities and search them under Section 43. It doesn’t matter that Section 43 is only a stop and search and not an offence; they still have to reasonably suspect someone to be a terrorist or have applicable items, which should require far more grounds than the types of examples I gave. I’m aware that the number of times these powers are used is still low, but they should be lower than they are. Given that the NPCC had to release additional guidance on dealing with these auditors specifically, better training is always a positive, but it highlights that it’s being perceived as an issue by the police forces.
Anyway, I am rambling I neither agree nor disagree with auditors if they’re acting lawfully, but people should take everything they see online with a pinch of salt and a healthy dose of critical thinking to go with it!
When I got my mini 2 last year I contacted all my neighbours and told them I would be flying from my garden and that I would not be taking photos only practicing my skills. They all where happy to let me fly with no issues. I think being proactive and telling people what you plan to do and how you are going to fly saves a lot of hassle.
Yep, totally agree. There’s a difference between being lawfully allowed to do something and just having some common sense and helping to alleviate the worries of others before you do it.
As an example, I went to a Police station today and flew my drone over it to take some pictures for Google. Guess what happened!?..absolutely nothing beacause I spoke with an officer beforehand, without having to give any of my details or explain the purpose of my recording. I even had a chat later with a guy from the police’s drone team and they were very pleasant.
haha no :D. I used to just go around with my handheld camera but now the drone has given me another view point to share online which is really fun!
Yeh you don’t get paid for any of it. You do get some “rewards” but nothing really worthwhile to be honest. The main reason I do it is because I like to go out and explore either walking or on my bike so I normally just do it whilst i’m at it as a secondary gain, if that makes sense.
I’m a level 8 guide, they sent a 10% voucher a while ago for the Google store. My wife & I both have the Google rewards app, she’s not a local guide and doesn’t write reviews. We are usually together when we are out and I’m offered far more opportunities for rewards, £345.08 to date and over twice that my wife has had. Maybe that’s an indirect impact of being a guide.
I recently discovered that Hastings Borough Council has a blanket ban on all drones in, on or over “their” ie our parks. So I’ve been looking up the legality of such a ban. It’s a minefield!
But I was interested by this man - my apologies if it’s old hat. It made me wonder whether this Club might consider finding and offering a legal specialist to challenge such bans on our behalf?
Any opinions?
