Xunta municipal albergues cameras do not work (another stolen phone incident)

[JSwalker134]

I understand this forum isn't the place to report every crime, I'm not just making a crime report, but to tell people the Xunta de Galicia albergues do not have working cameras

After my unfortunate experience in Fisterra I did a few more caminos and wound up in Santiago again, stayed in the Xunta albergue in San Lazaro. A teenage female Spanish pilgrim in a scout group had her iphone stolen from her bed as it was charging, I was in the same dormitorio but was out when it happened. I can imagine that ruined her camino experience, she seemed very distraught, all of the scout group seemed quite upset actually, and her parents actually drove to Santiago from somewhere faraway in Spain to comfort her. But anyway, the issue is that the Xunta albergues generally have cameras, so you'd think it's a chance to get the thieves, who will almost certainly be known to local police. (No cameras in the dormitorio, there were in the entrance and the common areas). But no...

According to the hospitalero the cameras didn't work because the Xunta did not renew the contract with the private security company to monitor them, they had a contract, didn't make the payments and the contract expired. I cannot verify this, however he explained in Spanish to the leader of the scout group, he was asking about the cameras as well. I think this needs to be shared and publicised, because the Xunta run albergues should be run to a higher standard than private ones because they are a larger organisation. Someone needs to start making formal complaints. I have stayed in Xunta run albergues before and felt they had a better security because of the cameras, and the (admittedly disliked) nightly curfew

The night before it was stolen, I noticed two youngish men who looked quite shifty prowling around in the communal area of the albergue, they didn't look like pilgrims and they didn't respond to my greetings of Hola when they entered the communal area, they seemed to spend a lot of time walking around and scanning the tables and power outlets. I didn't really think about it at the time because I was tired rom walking, also im kinda non judgmental and thought maybe they are Spanish pilgrims with no English just don't want to socialise and were simply looking for a place to charge their own phones. I felt they were kinda suspicious though, but there is no information about reporting suspicious people, the hospitalero had left and I had no idea if they were actually staying or not. And I also believed that the functioning (lol) cameras were a deterrent enough, that basically to steal something in a room with cameras would be very stupid.

Just a shoutout that even if your albergue has cameras, half the time they don't work. Both cases of crime, my incident and this other recent one, there were cameras, but they were not work. And PSA, do not leave your possessions anywhere out of sight, even charging them. Don't even go to the toilet and leave them! It's also advisable to get a powerbank to have as a reserve battery, charge that in public area and charge your phone from it while you are walking. and as a general regard to levels of crime on the camino, in the space of just over a month walking caminos (with some rest days) I've 2 direct experiences of phones/valuables being stolen, as well as other people saying things like that have happened to them.

 

[Elena peregrina]

Personally I would never stay in an albergue that had cameras in the dorms. A dormitory is a private place where people get changed and sleep and it is not appropriate for this to be monitored or filmed. I feel sympathy for this pilgrim, but it is the responsibility of individual pilgrims, not the albergue, to keep their valuables safe.

 

[Pathfinder075]

There should be functional cameras in corridors, but not dorms. As Elena states, it is the responsibility of pilgrims to secure their own property.

Saying that, if you own a $1000+ iphone, I wouldn't take it on Camino. Buy a cheaper iphone, several version older, for a price that if it was stolen you wouldn't be crying for weeks. Back everything up to the cloud, regularly and keep an eye on it never the less. Also buy a white powerbank and write your name on it with a permanent marker in big letters, then charge that up if you want to leave it on charge, then use it to charge your phone. Same goes with the phone, etch your name, house number and post code / zip code on the inside of the phone and the outside case. Thieves don't like traceable items and will ignore something with a name on it, or etched with details. Keep a copy of your IMEI number in your rucksack and give that to the police when you report it (and if you have Find My Phone enabled, use it to remotely wipe the phone).

 

[Friend from Barquinha]

Quote: "[I think this needs to be shared and publicised,] because the Xunta run albergues should be run to a higher standard than private ones because they are a larger organisation."

A Xunta is the equivalent of a local regional government. Their provision of an albergue is a favour to the pilgrim travellers that frequent it, and very little to the residents of that area.

It, I suppose, indirectly benefits the local businesses who get business from peregrinos. But overall, it is a cost to local taxpayers who have much other local infrastructure to fund. To expect them to "be run to a higher standard than private ones" (who are doing this as a business) is not right.

 

[good_old_shoes]

Why should there be cameras at all? It's an albergue for tired pilgrims, not a prison.

If you decide to bring expensive electronics or huge amounts of cash money, it's your own responsibility to keep it in a safe place (which, usually, is on your body at all times, and in a waterproof bag next to you in the shower).

If you want to leave your valuables unattended without worry, there are private rooms in hotels where you can lock your door.

 

[dick bird]

Xunta run albergues should be run to a higher standard than private ones because they are a larger organisation."

Not sure what the size of the organisation has to do with it. The last time I saw figures for the cost of running Xunta albergues (in 2019, Voz de Galicia) compared to the revenue generated by fees charged to pilgrims, it emerged that pilgrim fees equated to about 62.5% or 5/8 of the running costs. Fees have gone up since then but I strongly suspect pilgrims are still being handsomely subsidised by the tax payers of Galicia. It is establishments being run for profit that should be run to a higher standard. Putting a video camera on the door is one thing, but putting the entire albergue under video surveillance is not acceptable - it is an invasion of privacy.

 

[thejoker]

I wrote a post that was deleted for 'apparently' being 'rude' to the OP, but hang it, I'm going to write a similar point again.
If the OP is so concerned, despite basic common sense to just conceal and guard appropriately, money or belongings of value such as a phone, then why not gather together other like-minded worrits and draw lots to select a time for a vigilante form of dorm patrol. I think the OP might just find he/she is in the minority in terms of being overly concerned beyond the obvious precautions.

 

[JSwalker134]

Not sure what the size of the organisation has to do with it. The last time I saw figures for the cost of running Xunta albergues (in 2019, Voz de Galicia) compared to the revenue generated by fees charged to pilgrims, it emerged that pilgrim fees equated to about 62.5% or 5/8 of the running costs. Fees have gone up since then but I strongly suspect pilgrims are still being handsomely subsidised by the tax payers of Galicia. It is establishments being run for profit that should be run to a higher standard. Putting a video camera on the door is one thing, but putting the entire albergue under video surveillance is not acceptable - it is an invasion of privacy.

I never proposed such a thing, just cameras at reception and in places like where entry/exit points to the albergue are. I don't know why people are saying im proposing cameras in the bedroom....im not.

 

[JSwalker134]

I wrote a post that was deleted for 'apparently' being 'rude' to the OP, but hang it, I'm going to write a similar point again.
If the OP is so concerned, despite basic common sense to just conceal and guard appropriately, money or belongings of value such as a phone, then why not gather together other like-minded worrits and draw lots to select a time for a vigilante form of dorm patrol. I think the OP might just find he/she is in the minority in terms of being overly concerned beyond the obvious precautions.

I don't consider that rude enough to warrant a deletion, but it's not helpful. I think the isssue though is an albergue having lots of cameras,- giving a sense of security, when they are not working. And really the Xunta should either make it known they don't work or take them down, or pay to get them working again.

Secondly, it was not my phone stolen in this incident. The girl charged her phone while out with the Spanish scout group. Maybe she or her scout leader assumed that the albergue was safe because of the cameras.

 

[thejoker]

I don't consider that rude enough to warrant a deletion, but it's not helpful. I think the isssue though is an albergue having lots of cameras,- giving a sense of security, when they are not working. And really the Xunta should either make it known they don't work or take them down, or pay to get them working again.

Secondly, it was not my phone stolen in this incident. The girl charged her phone while out with the Spanish scout group. Maybe she or her scout leader assumed that the albergue was safe because of the cameras.

Fair play. I've never consciously noticed cameras in places as I guess we are used to CCTV everywhere in life now. But I take the point that others may feel a false sense of security with non-working cameras.
Still, personal security should always be one's own priority, even when there are working cameras.

 

[peregrino_tom]

@JSwalker134 According to the internet China, USA and the UK have really significantly more CCTV usage than other countries. While people in those countries may well have become acclimatised (reluctantly or otherwise) to being watched on CCTV, lots of other peoples and countries haven't. And I don't think you should expect it to be their duty to do so.
CCTV doesn't equal 'safety'. And an absence of CCTV doesn't equal a failure of responsibility.

 

[Anniesantiago]

So then the cost of the cameras and monitoring service would get passed along to pilgrims.
No thanks.
Just don't take anything you can't afford to lose and don't walk away from your charging phone.
It's YOUR responsibility.
Problem solved.

 

[JSwalker134]

@JSwalker134 According to the internet China, USA and the UK have really significantly more CCTV usage than other countries. While people in those countries may well have become acclimatised (reluctantly or otherwise) to being watched on CCTV, lots of other peoples and countries haven't. And I don't think you should expect it to be their duty to do so.
CCTV doesn't equal 'safety'. And an absence of CCTV doesn't equal a failure of responsibility.

I don't think you miss the central point I'm trying to make.- There is CCTV in the building, it just doesn't work because the Xunta cancelled the contract with the security company. I made this thread partly as a PSA

This has happened twice in two albergues where thefts have happened, cameras exist but don't work

 

[Bradypus]

I don't think you miss the central point I'm trying to make.- There is CCTV in the building, it just doesn't work because the Xunta cancelled the contract with the security company. I made this thread partly as a PSA

Personally I would not change my own behaviour with regard to theft whether there were working cameras, non-working cameras, or no cameras at all. I do not believe that they are an adequate deterrent. Anything I cannot afford to lose stays with me at all times. To leave valuables unattended is unwise no matter how much video surveillance there is.

 

[Molly Cassidy]

And really the Xunta should either make it known they don't work or take them down

There is an argument that they still act as a deterrent if people think they work. I certainly wouldn't see a camera at the door as a reason to leave my belongings unattended.

 

[MightyFree]

Frustrating but good to know. It’s easy to get complacent after previous weeks of camaraderie and general trustworthiness but the more touristy areas undoubtedly carry more risk for such things.

 

[Sue Hedden]

Thank you for taking this time to keep us all informed. We will be more cautious now. Thank you!

 

[C clearly]

I don't think you miss the central point I'm trying to make.

I think you have made your point.

There is room for lots of argument and different opinions on how much security is necessary, how cameras can and should be used, the causes of crime, the nature of addiction, etc. We are not decision makers here on the forum, on those issues, so our arguments could go on forever.

You have pointed out what you see as a flaw. Others have pointed out some counter arguments. We are not likely to come to a consensus, and we are not in a position to make a decision or formulate a "forum policy", so maybe it is time to step back from continuing the arguments.

To some degree, you get what you pay for.

 

[trecile]

There is an argument that they still act as a deterrent if people think they work. I certainly wouldn't see a camera at the door as a reason to leave my belongings unattended.

I agree. And even if the cameras were working, was one pointing at the area where the pilgrim left their phone charging? And if they had captured the thief in the act what are the odds that the phone could be retrieved?

 

[Anniesantiago]

I don't think you miss the central point I'm trying to make.- There is CCTV in the building, it just doesn't work because the Xunta cancelled the contract with the security company. I made this thread partly as a PSA

This has happened twice in two albergues where thefts have happened, cameras exist but don't work

I have a solution.
Rent yourself a private room!

 

[dougfitz]

But anyway, the issue is that the Xunta albergues generally have cameras, so you'd think it's a chance to get the thieves, who will almost certainly be known to local police. (No cameras in the dormitorio, there were in the entrance and the common areas). But no...

I think it is clear that most people who have responded think that the real issue is that a pilgrim failed to take adequate measures to secure their own property. It is possible that their youth and inexperience contributed to that, but the lesson most of us are taking from this is that it is our responsibility to take care or our own possessions, and we shouldn't rely on security measures that might not be intended for the protection of pilgrims.

According to the hospitalero the cameras didn't work because the Xunta did not renew the contract with the private security company to monitor them, they had a contract, didn't make the payments and the contract expired.

My limited experience with security systems is that:

• there will be a mix of cameras and motion sensors. Their locations will be determined by what they are intended to detect. If they are barrier systems, they will be located outside and inside the building to detect movement leading to locations with more valuable assets that the management wants to protect. Dormitories are, in my view, unlikely to be covered if that is the case. When there aren't people in the albergue, these areas are going to be empty, and presumably won't be considered a place where someone breaking in will find anything valuable. The office and common areas might be assessed as needing more protection than the dormitories.
  • I personally think it unlikely that there will be internal monitoring of the dormitories, etc, such as one might find in a retail store, which requires almost continuous monitoring, with perhaps a combination of on-site monitoring when there are staff on site, and off-site monitoring otherwise.
• Any sensors (cameras and motion sensors) have both on-site storage as well as off-site monitoring. It seems odd to me that if there were cameras, the on-site record wouldn't have been available should that have been required by the police. That doesn't mean that every hospitalero/a has access to that record, or is even going to be aware of its existence. This is a redundancy measure against the loss of any communications link external to the building, and it is difficult to imagine any reasonable security system installation not addressing that possibility.
• installation of camera systems in places where people are likely to be partially or completely undressed would be a clear contravention of privacy provisions for individuals where I come from, as I expect it would be in Spain. It seems this was the case here, and cameras weren't installed in the dormitories, but it is worth pointing out that it is unrealistic to expect that to happen.
• Even if motion sensors were installed in the dormitories, I think they would have been 'zoned' so that any detections could be ignored and would not create an alarm once the albergue has been opened until the albergue staff have cleaned and vacated the dormitory the next day. Even in the quiet hours, having an alarm triggered anytime someone wanted, for example, to visit the toilet, would just be stupid.
  • I repeat my earlier comment, that I suspect this would have been considered, and a decision made not to put any sensors inside the dormitories. This would not preclude there being sensors on the outside walls of any dormitory as a barrier detection arrangement.

It seems to me, @JSwalker134, that your expectations of what an albergue security system will provide verge on being completely unrealistic, not just for the reasons I have outlined, but for reasons others have suggested as well. I know that it has taken a longer post to explain why I think that, but I think it is important for you and others to realize why I think that, and to support those who already appreciate that the security of one's personal belongings is a personal responsibility.

edit: and I hope you can move on to sharing your more positive pilgrimage experiences.

 

[dick bird]

the Xunta should .... make it known they don't work

I don´t think that would be a very good idea. Video cameras are supposed to be a deterrent, even when they don´t work - the thieves have no way of knowing if they are working or not unless somebody tells them.

Incidentally, can anyone on the forum corroborate this? Could someone in Galicia ask the Xunta or one of the hospis what is happening about the video cameras? How many albergues have video cameras?

 

[JSwalker134]

I think it is clear that most people who have responded think that the real issue is that a pilgrim failed to take adequate measures to secure their own property. It is possible that their youth and inexperience contributed to that, but the lesson most of us are taking from this is that it is our responsibility to take care or our own possessions, and we shouldn't rely on security measures that might not be intended for the protection of pilgrims.

My limited experience with security systems is that:

• there will be a mix of cameras and motion sensors. Their locations will be determined by what they are intended to detect. If they are barrier systems, they will be located outside and inside the building to detect movement leading to locations with more valuable assets that the management wants to protect. Dormitories are, in my view, unlikely to be covered if that is the case. When there aren't people in the albergue, these areas are going to be empty, and presumably won't be considered a place where someone breaking in will find anything valuable. The office and common areas might be assessed as needing more protection than the dormitories.
  • I personally think it unlikely that there will be internal monitoring of the dormitories, etc, such as one might find in a retail store, which requires almost continuous monitoring, with perhaps a combination of on-site monitoring when there are staff on site, and off-site monitoring otherwise.
• Any sensors (cameras and motion sensors) have both on-site storage as well as off-site monitoring. It seems odd to me that if there were cameras, the on-site record wouldn't have been available should that have been required by the police. That doesn't mean that every hospitalero/a has access to that record, or is even going to be aware of its existence. This is a redundancy measure against the loss of any communications link external to the building, and it is difficult to imagine any reasonable security system installation not addressing that possibility.
• installation of camera systems in places where people are likely to be partially or completely undressed would be a clear contravention of privacy provisions for individuals where I come from, as I expect it would be in Spain. It seems this was the case here, and cameras weren't installed in the dormitories, but it is worth pointing out that it is unrealistic to expect that to happen.
• Even if motion sensors were installed in the dormitories, I think they would have been 'zoned' so that any detections could be ignored and would not create an alarm once the albergue has been opened until the albergue staff have cleaned and vacated the dormitory the next day. Even in the quiet hours, having an alarm triggered anytime someone wanted, for example, to visit the toilet, would just be stupid.
  • I repeat my earlier comment, that I suspect this would have been considered, and a decision made not to put any sensors inside the dormitories. This would not preclude there being sensors on the outside walls of any dormitory as a barrier detection arrangement.

It seems to me, @JSwalker134, that your expectations of what an albergue security system will provide verge on being completely unrealistic, not just for the reasons I have outlined, but for reasons others have suggested as well. I know that it has taken a longer post to explain why I think that, but I think it is important for you and others to realize why I think that, and to support those who already appreciate that the security of one's personal belongings is a personal responsibility.

edit: and I hope you can move on to sharing your more positive pilgrimage experiences.

I haven't once said I wanted cameras in the bedrooms, or indeed areas like hallways outside the shower where people might be semi undressed. I do not want this!. Why do people keep saying this when I never said it? I am asking for cameras at the entry/exit points of the albergue.

 

[dick bird]

I am asking for cameras at the entry/exit points of the albergue.

I am afraid you are asking in the wrong place. We have absolutely no power or influence over the Xunta of Galicia. Can we give this a rest now? We all have our opinions and have had the chance to express them. This discussion is going nowhere.

 

[dougfitz]

I haven't once said I wanted cameras in the bedrooms, or indeed areas like hallways outside the shower where people might be semi undressed.

Let me apologize if I have misinterpreted your original narrative, where you said:

But anyway, the issue is that the Xunta albergues generally have cameras, so you'd think it's a chance to get the thieves, who will almost certainly be known to local police. (No cameras in the dormitorio, there were in the entrance and the common areas). But no...

I took that as a complaint that there weren't cameras in the dormitory. So not a request perhaps, but perhaps easily misunderstood to mean that you felt that this was a shortcoming that needed to be addressed.

 

[Kathar1na]

I took that as a complaint that there weren't cameras in the dormitory. So not a request perhaps, but perhaps easily misunderstood to mean that you felt that this was a shortcoming that needed to be addressed.

You are not the only reader who understood the comment "No cameras in the dormitorio, there were in the entrance and the common areas" as a complaint or a demand and not as an observation as it was immediately picked up and criticised in the first reply ("would never stay in an albergue that had cameras in the dorms") which then found the visible approval of several dozen readers.

I had remembered an earlier thread and thought that the OP had included this factual observation in his long opening post to make it clear that it was not about (fictional) cameras in the dormitories in order to prevent exactly the discussion that then ensued.

But such is the nature of online threads.