Mk8 ST line Reversing camera damage

[Jeffas]

Hi was leaving work today when I was stopped for a car Search, security guy fought with boot but couldn't figure out how to open it. I had to get out to open it for him. Wasn't till I got home and selected reverse that I spotted my reversing camera was pointing funny. 

Having looked at it appears to be pushed out of alignment. I've tried to pop it back into place but it doesn't seem to get seated correctly. Is it supposed to be a sealed unit as would hate to get water into it and cause damage. 

Already called and been fobbed off that it could have vibrated out! I'll be taking the fight up on Monday morning...not a happy bunny at the minute!

[Jeffas]

View of it back in but doesn't seem to fit centrally and I think it's pointing too far down. Anyone else care to take a pic of there's for comparison please. 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

Too dark outside here now  to get the camera (just had a monsoon!) but here is a shot of the screen view - yours seems OK to me (unless mine is wonky too!) 

[Jonro2009]

Really annoying when someone else breaks something of yours only to be fobbed off, some people have no respect of other people’s property 😡 

i can guarantee you are supposed to see the trim and a little bit of yellow plate in the screen view, recent thread on here about the same thing and confirmed by others and dealership.

as you say, it is a sealed unit to stop water ingress so I would be inclined to get a little bit of sealant around the outer circle of the lens in between the outer casing. 

[primus1960]

I would be inclined to take it to the dealers, get it repaired - replaced. then present the bill to the head of security. advising that if he doesn’t pay you will pursue the matter through the small claims track of the county court.

[Eric Bloodaxe]

Stopped raining so managed to get a shot of the camera itself! Could do with a clean! 

[Jonro2009]

1 hour ago, primus1960 said:

I would be inclined to take it to the dealers, get it repaired - replaced. then present the bill to the head of security. advising that if he doesn’t pay you will pursue the matter through the small claims track of the county court.

Very very unlikely to be successful, it will be his word against the security guys. There is no proof it wasn’t damaged before the car was searched. All that will happen is the OP will be left with a big repair bill, a headache and a target on his back when it comes to the security mob. 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

@primus1960 and @Jonro2009 both make very good points. Without knowing the situation in your workplace or what type of environment it is that necessitates vehicle searches, it''s difficult to advise a course of action. Years ago something fairly similar happened to me, when I had things stolen from my car (easy to do with an MG of the time, you just undid a couple of poppers on the hood and you were in with no damage!). It was parked in a secure car park at my place of work under the eyes of the security man who really was the only one who could have done it. I was given a bit of a sweetener and dissuaded from escalating the issue publicly, involving police etc, for "the sake of my career". The security man "resigned" shortly afterwards.

I assume from your OP  that the security man is employed by a contractor and the negative response came when you contacted his firm? If might still be worth raising the matter informally with whoever's responsible for placing the security contract within your own employer, just to see how the land lies. 

[Jeffas]

6 hours ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

@primus1960 and @Jonro2009 both make very good points. Without knowing the situation in your workplace or what type of environment it is that necessitates vehicle searches, it''s difficult to advise a course of action. Years ago something fairly similar happened to me, when I had things stolen from my car (easy to do with an MG of the time, you just undid a couple of poppers on the hood and you were in with no damage!). It was parked in a secure car park at my place of work under the eyes of the security man who really was the only one who could have done it. I was given a bit of a sweetener and dissuaded from escalating the issue publicly, involving police etc, for "the sake of my career". The security man "resigned" shortly afterwards.

I assume from your OP  that the security man is employed by a contractor and the negative response came when you contacted his firm? If might still be worth raising the matter informally with whoever's responsible for placing the security contract within your own employer, just to see how the land lies. 

Calmed down a bit now over the matter but will definitely raising it with the security contractor and also my employer who has the contract with them on Monday. 

I know it's his word against mine and I'll end up having  to sort it but I'll not take it lying down, as suggesting in a phone call that the damage was caused by vibration by driving is ludicrous. 

We are subject to random searches on leaving the secure car park, some guys  ask if they can open boot, some just open it, others ask you to do it, so there doesn't seem to be a set policy. I'll be asking to see what they are contracted to do and what the process is, as if they are supposed to ask or get us to open it, then he had no business man-handling my boot. I also need to speak to my colleague who was pulled in behind me and probably seen the whole event, to hear his story. 

I'll update on Monday. Thanks for the help. 

[Eric Bloodaxe]

Sounds like a plan. If it turns out the security is not following the contracted procedure, you're on firmer ground, even better if your colleague witnessed it. Best of luck!

[p.harv]

A number of years ago where I worked we were subjected to regular car searches on leaving the factory.

The security staff were allowed to look but not touch anything on or inside the car. 

If they required anything moving inside the car or the boot opening they would ask us to do it.

If we refused they would obviously have to call the police - which I don't think they ever had to.

As for security opening the boot - they could easily take something out there or even 'plant' something in there!!

Hope you get it sorted either way.

Paul.

[Jonro2009]

Good points there fellas! Thinking back to the times I went through control points if the guard searching wanted acces to the boot then they asked you to step out and observe them, they still opened it themselves though.

[Jeffas]

Well I finally got a response, but as expected they are taking no blame. 

Quote

 

The supervisor who received the telephone call has stated that due to the time lapse between the search being conducted and the time it was reported via the phone call he assumed there could have been other possible causes for the camera to become displaced.

The outcome is that although there is a probability that the camera could have been displaced during the vehicle search, there is no conclusive evidence and added that the issue was not raised by either the PSO of Jeff at the time the search was completed there remains an uncertainty how this occurred.

...

I have therefore produced a Temporary Memorandum as a means of refresher training and to give direction and guidance for all team members to adhere to when conducting future vehicle searches.

 

I have received a copy of the process documentation, which they are now adhering too and are not touching anyones cars.

I have spoken to my ford dealer who has said it should be ok as is the camera unit itself is sealed.

[Stoney871]

It is usually a standard industry procedure for Security to not touch cars due to risk of damage or planting items.
They are likely opening the boots themselves for expediency but shouldn't.
Did you have to sign a search register or provide your details for a search record?
If so then they should include a column for comments or observations in which you should be permitted to state you are not happy that they open boots themselves.
If they are NSI Gold or ISO9001 accredited then they should be observing robust administrative and documentary policies and are required to keep all records for one year.
Are the guards even search trained to start with or just told to get on with it by their managers?
If not trained then their managers are liable for any damage caused, if trained then it falls to the individual guards.
Either way they should have liability insurance.

Sent from my SM-G965F (S9+)

[primus1960]

I think in future if you are stopped again I would not let anyone touch the car , but open the boot, doors , bonnet yourself..