Straight and level,
The JAR-FCL requirements have full legal standing in the UK since the date some years back when the CAA required all training to be completed in accordance with JAA requirements.
Yes, there has been the NPPL which has changed things slightly - but not for helicopters. JAR_FCL 2 is the law.
Microlights and gliders etc are outside the JAR requirements (according to the JARs)
If in advance, a person pays for a flight, which is known in advance not to qualify towards the issue of any licence or rating, then one can not claim to be completing an instructional flight.....it must be something else.
IMHO, to qualify as a legal "Trial Lesson", the flight time must be capable of being counted in full towards the issue of a PPL. Unless there is an RTF then the time won't count.
Would love to find out what the insurance company would think of a claim from the estate of a deceased who expired in the channel following an engine failure in a single enroute to Le Touquet on a "Trial Lesson".
Very few people these days that complete a trail lesson ever complete any further training - Christmas presents, Birthday presents etc and I agree with anyone that says the rules are bent slightly. However, the flights are legal by virtue of the fact that the organisation is a bonifide CAA/BMAA/BGA or whatever training organisation and the flight time counts towards the training requirement of the PPL or whatever.
As I said earlier, simply registering as an RTF costs nothing and solves most of the problem.
Finally, almost missed it but......there is also the requirement for this FI(R) to be supervised and the details of the supervision must be included on the RTF form.
Regards,
DFC