大廈閉路電視影象款項

Sorry about what happened.

The answer is no - you are responsible for the amount.

You have made several major legal problems:

1. Responsibility to safeguard

As CCTV footage is a key evidence, once the police requests it, the security company has no choice but have to safeguard the evidence. Otherwise, the security may have violated perverting the course of justice, which the company can face criminal prosecution from the HKSAR Government and civil claims by you.

So what you have worried will never happen

2. Chain of custody

You have contaminated the chain of custody of the evidence. The video obtained by you may not be admissible.





2014-06-16 04:12:12 補充：
1. You said the police will pay for it. But it takes time. So in that case, your owners' corporation did not shift the cost to you.

You volunteer to pay for it.

2. Unfortuantely, yes. Can you use the same theory if your passport get stolen and you tell Immigration Department not to charge you?

其實成件事就岩哂程序,首先大廈係唔可以收集錄影資料,所以就交左比保安公司去做,就涉及一個要比錢既問題.

咁好簡單,你如果跌左野落升降機槽底,咁又係好急好需要執番出黎,於是大廈就call電梯工程公司黎幫手,咁張單緊係自己埋啦,點可能要公家幫你比.

2014-06-14 13:31:17 補充：
警方可以出數,但時間耐,但我可以話你知,如果呢單係謀殺案,差大哥唔使你講佢地都會開自動波,明冇?

2014-06-16 10:35:23 補充：
其實我完全明白你所指出不合理既地方,但我亦係講事實,而我相信你都最希望知道真相,而唔係希望有人附和你,所以你都要明白體諒.

第一,錄影同收集資料係2個層次既問題,簡單黎講,錄影但唔留底,私隱條例係唔會理,所以因此亦出現左以上問題,就係管理處比唔出影片,而要再向第三方索取.

第二,由第三方提供資料,基本上只有法庭授權先可以咁做,即使下一次你以個人理由並付款要求提供,對方係可以一句抱歉,而今次要比錢,冇錯,係要比錢.

第三,邊個比既問題,以你描述應該由大廈支付,咁就要睇番公契,到底有冇授權,因為出數其實都有一個範圍,所謂咩係包咩係唔包,係應該寫死左.

2014-06-16 10:35:34 補充：
第四,你另一個睇法,就係請左看更都比人入屋,仲要自己貼錢攪,有冇攪錯.咁呢樣野就要睇管理公司有冇疏忽,假設佢地在合理既情況下已經盡其最大能力,亦係冇問題,法律上係冇話明要包生仔.

可嘗試搵律師問下得5得,如果佢地堅持要收錢既話可以查下佢地咁樣會5會犯法,如果冇犯法就唯有自己民事向管理處索償,但需時唔會短..