Instructing on a class 2 medical
 

Does anyone know what the restrictions are on reward for instructing on a class 2 medical?

I know you can't take monetary payment but can you take payment in kind(eg a couple of hours hire) or must there be no possible form of payment seen ?

18.

No CPL, then no remuneration. That means no payments in kind allowed.

Of course depends on how hire and reward is defined, this is a very grey area. As hire and reward could include having expenses paid, renewals/medicals paid, and free flying.

I have also heard rumours of a couple of instructors holding a UK BCPL but unable to hold a class 1 medical, instructing for cash on a class 2, afterall up until the late eighties you could instruct for money on a PPL and class 3 uk medical, equivallent to a JAA class 2!

Money for old rope
 

Anthonite

Hire and reward has been tested and defined many times. Reward, to put it simply, will be any payment or favour that exceeds your actual out of pocket expenses. Don't kid your self it's anything else.

I don't remember being able to instruct on a class 3 medical, variously a Class 2, Class 1 (restricted) and Class 1 as now.

Homeguard now I think about it, your right, instruction on a PPL prior to the BCPL was a class two.

Reqarding hire and reward, if an part instructor is being paid say £25.00 an hour, but at the end of the financial year his expenses (renewals, medicals, travelling expenses) exceed the income, ie he/she has made a financial loss, is this hire and reward?

Secondly, if a Instructor (PPL qualified) works for a club, and is rewarded by free flying hours is this reward?

Interested to know your thoughts on this?

Compare with the glider tug pilots' deals. Some of them get free accom. plus a wage as the caretaker, so long as they do all the tugging as well.

Is there anything to stop the PPL FI charging for ground school, and insisting that each flying hour must be tied to an hour of ground school?

18greens, check your pm's

Valuable consideration is the term used by the CAA. Here's the definitation from the ANO:

[section 1, part 14, p27]

If you are in business and your income exceeds your outgoings then you have made a profit.

If you are in business and your income equals your outgoings then you have broken even.

If you are in business and your income is less than your outgoings you have made a loss.

Note in the above 3 statements the word income has been used.

Income being something you get in return for doing work / providing a service.

The only way to look at PPLs providing instruction for SEP / SSEA flight training is that they are doing it as part of their hobby. Being a hobby, they pay for it's costs out of taxed income and just like you can't claim for the expense of travelling to your golf club or the cost of green fees.

Which leads me on to;

Glider towing and parachute dropping have their own specific legislation and requirements.

There is nothing stopping anyone from charging for the provision of groundschool. They wil of course have to declare that income for tax purposes etc.

If their hobby just happens to involve providing flight instruction for free then they can not deduct the expenses involved in the hobby part from the income of the business part before tax.

The hobby / profession boundaries could be tested if you do something like;

"Free flight training provided you pay £5,000 for PPL groundschool"

Since it is clear that 5000 is too much for PPL groundschool and too close the the total PPL training costs.

Overall, the biggest problem at present is the number of organisations calling themselves "flying club" when in fact they are a "flying business".

A not-for profit flying club with member instructors providing free instruction to other members will never fall foul of the requirements........even if the club members assist other members in obtaining their FI rating. Volunteer instrucrors teaching other members of their club would be no different to volunteer instructors teaching say scouts / girl guides and in terms of the oganisation making a profit / the expenses given to memer volunteers etc then such organisations would be a good example of how it can be done.

A flying school employing a PPL to teach lesons for profit is the opposite end of the scale.

In between are various shades of grey.

Regards,

DFC

Value
 

Anthonite. Put in simple terms.

You spend your whole day instructing for nowt. The recipients consider you to be a good bloke. Takes you to the greasy spoon down the road and buys you a mug of tea and an 'all day breakfast', total cost £4.20. Not considered a 'valuable consideration' for it is modest and you do have to eat, we all do, so not a profit.

You spend your whole day instructing for nowt. The recipients consider you to be a good bloke. Takes you to the Grand Palace Hotel which does the business. Pate' de Foi' Gras , Line caught wild Salmon, Best scottish hung Fillet with fresh Russian Caviar on the side, all washed down with the finest Nuit St George and topped with a vintage Cognac served with home made chocolates. Total cost £420.00. Without doubt a valuable consideration and illegal.

Well for some it is illegal, that is, until you show that such a dinner is quite normal to you, an every day experience and you wouldn't be seen dead in a greasy spoon. No case to answer if you really could show that - few could. Its all subjective you must understand.

You have a free caravan as your home and you cut the grass, run the bar and kitchen at night and help yourself to grub etc as an accepted norm. For doing this the club pays you £5,000 a year wage, which is below the tax threshold, so free of tax. Thats the deal. When your not busy with the above, you graciously give up your free time to instructing student PPLs throughout the day but without payment. Where's the problem, the training is cheap, there isn't one for you do a good job and everybody goes home happy.

A CAA Class 2 medical was all that was needed for the R/BCPL for paid instruction.

When the CAA rushed to embrace JAR-FCL in its indecent haste, they made the following changes without any consultation:

To instruct as a R/BCPL/FI you needed a JAA Class 1, not a CAA Class 2. Vastly more expensive and impossible for some FIs to achieve. When I asked the CAA about this, they merely said that they'd made the change 'because it was easier to have one system of medicals with 2 levels than another system with 3'. When I pointed out that the CAA Class 2 still existed for balloonists, the person I asked moved on to another topic....:hmm:

The CAA also doubled the cost of maintaining the R/BCPL by reducing the validity period from 10 to 5 years 'to bring it in line'....:mad:

Now they are prepared to see it disappear altogether under the madness that is EASA Part FCL.

Homeguard,

Leaving money out of the equation, if you run a business and a person who is not self employed works for you in that business, would you say that they are employed?

Regards,

DFC