Caught On Camera: The Dos And Don’ts Of Security Camera Installation For Electrical Contractors 

Security cameras are becoming an increasingly common feature for homes and businesses – but what can and can’t you do when it comes to installation and surveillance? We spoke with Matt Heath, Lead Access Control Technician at John Barnes Group, about the things you need to be aware of when installing security cameras.  

Key takeaways for electrical contractors 

• Australia does not have a single national law governing where security cameras can point, and state rules differ. 

• Audio and video surveillance are regulated differently, with audio subject to tighter restrictions. 

• Camera placement should be designed around the required coverage rather than simply the capabilities of the product. 

• Privacy masking, disabling unnecessary audio and carefully positioning cameras can help reduce potential issues. 

• Contractors should consider neighbouring properties, footage security and any building, body corporate, council or lease requirements 

What are some of the considerations about security cameras that contractors should be aware of?  

There’s no single national camera law, which catches most people out. The rules vary by state. New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory all regulate video surveillance in their surveillance devices legislation. Queensland, Tasmania and the ACT cover audio devices only. Queensland has nothing at all on the books about where a camera can point, so “it’s legal here” tells a customer almost nothing about whether they’re exposed.  

The significant recent change is federal. Since 10 June 2025, the Privacy Act has given individuals the right to sue another person for a serious invasion of privacy, where the invasion was deliberate or reckless. It’s actionable without proof of financial loss, which is unusual and worth understanding. That fills the gap the state legislation leaves open, and it matters most in the states with no video provisions.  

Running alongside it is ‘nuisance’, which is well established and covers interference with someone’s use and enjoyment of their own home. Courts have applied it to camera owners since Raciti v Hughes in 1995, where a camera and floodlights triggered every time the neighbours stepped into their own backyard.  

The trap that catches people in every state is audio. Recording a private conversation you’re not party to is an offence nationally, and in some states is an offence even if you are party to it – and that can apply to a conversation caught on your security camera.   

Of course, I’m not a lawyer, so it’s essential you get the right information specific to your state to have those informed conversations with customers.  

What are some of the common misconceptions around security cameras?  

The big one is “it’s my property, so I can point it wherever I like”. Where the camera is mounted is not the issue. What matters is what it captures and who it affects.  

The second is assuming the Privacy Act protects a homeowner from a neighbour’s camera. For a camera an individual operates domestically, it generally doesn’t apply, so a complaint to the OAIC won’t get far. Commercial premises are a different matter once turnover exceeds $3 million.  

The third is treating audio and video as the same issue. They’re regulated very differently, and audio is by some margin the tighter of the two.  

The fourth is the belief that if the footage is never reviewed, no harm is done. The harm is the neighbour’s sense of being watched, and that exists whether anyone opens the app.  

What practical advice would you give to help people remain compliant?  

Design from the coverage requirement out, not from the product spec in. Establish what needs protecting, then select the lens and mounting position to match. Wide-angle units mounted high are the usual culprit. A lower mount angled down at the threshold gives you a more usable face capture anyway.  

Beyond that:  

• Configure privacy masking at commissioning. Nearly every current IP camera and NVR support it, so a neighbour’s yard is never recorded in the first place. Screenshot the config and keep it on file.  

• Disable audio unless there’s a documented reason to run it.  

• Avoid PTZ (pan, tilt and zoom) units near a boundary.  

• Aim motion floodlights away from neighbouring bedrooms. Light complaints are easier to establish than surveillance complaints, and they’re usually what starts the dispute.  

• Keep the install overt. Cameras in plain sight, signage at the entry. Concealed systems are what land people in trouble.  

• Talk to the neighbours before you install and offer to show them the live view. That heads off most disputes before they start.  

• Treat the footage as data. Unique credentials, two-factor authentication, current firmware, sensible retention limits, restricted access, and nothing posted to community social media.  

• Check what applies to the building. Body corporate approval, council requirements, and the lease terms if the customer is renting.  

For installers, you’re the last line of defence on placement. The customer specifies where they want coverage, but you’re the one who knows what that lens will actually see once it’s on the wall. Raising it at quoting stage costs nothing and saves the callback.  

Is there a moral obligation beyond the legislation?  

Yes, and in a state with no video surveillance legislation the gap is wide enough that compliance is a poor guide to conduct.  

The consent runs one way. Your customer chose the camera. The neighbour didn’t, can’t opt out, and can’t relocate their pool or their bedroom window. One party takes the benefit and the other carries the cost.  

The effect is also felt well before anyone reviews a recording. A family that stops using the back deck, or parents who shift bath night, are bearing the cost of a system the owner may never check. That’s why the restraint must be designed into the install, because there’s no later point at which it can be undone. 

And the owner becomes the custodian of footage of people who never agreed to be recorded, often on hardware that hasn’t seen a firmware update in years. A breach, or a clip posted to a suburb Facebook page, can do considerably more damage than the recording ever prevented.  

The test we put to customers is this: If that same camera were on your neighbour’s eave pointing back at your yard, would you be comfortable with it? And would you be comfortable telling them exactly what it can see?  

If the answer to either is no, you need to get back to the drawing board. 

Frequently asked questions about security camera installation