Land owner's permission?
There is no law of trespass in the UK. And landOWNERS are actually freehold owners who have the right to fence a piece of land and work that land. They do not own the land - they own what they put on the land. For proof of this, look at the hoops and licences that landowners go through to get extraction rights.
Ultimately the only land owner is the Crown. But if you enter the physical property that someone owns on a piece of land, without their permission, then you have committed an offence.
Very good book on the subject available through Amazon "Who Owns Britain ?".
There is an 18th century law which can be applied : if the landowner asks you 3 times to leave the land and you don't, they are able to call the police and ask for your removal. If you still failed to leave you would be arrested for any number of offences, but not trespass.
And there's nothing to stop the landowner/freehold owner pursuing you for damage to their property - crops, fences, animals etc - if they have the evidence that you caused such damage.
"An Englishman's home is his castle" is about as truthful as "the camera never lies" - of course entering his actual castle without his permission is an offence. But landing on one of his paddocks isn't.
Ultimately the only land owner is the Crown. But if you enter the physical property that someone owns on a piece of land, without their permission, then you have committed an offence.
Very good book on the subject available through Amazon "Who Owns Britain ?".
There is an 18th century law which can be applied : if the landowner asks you 3 times to leave the land and you don't, they are able to call the police and ask for your removal. If you still failed to leave you would be arrested for any number of offences, but not trespass.
And there's nothing to stop the landowner/freehold owner pursuing you for damage to their property - crops, fences, animals etc - if they have the evidence that you caused such damage.
"An Englishman's home is his castle" is about as truthful as "the camera never lies" - of course entering his actual castle without his permission is an offence. But landing on one of his paddocks isn't.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever happened to the old rule that "An English[/wo]man's home is his[/her] castle"?
And before someone wisecracks, I believe that incorporates the land as well as the house...
And before someone wisecracks, I believe that incorporates the land as well as the house...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim Ball, I beg to differ. trespass is a common law and civil offense, it is not arrestable, and thbe police most certainly won't come to arrest anyone no matter how many times you've asked them to leave - they cant, civil offences are not arrestable. You, as the landowner (tenant has same right) may use as much reasonable force as is necessary to evict a trespasser. If they have caused damage you may seek redress in the civil court, but not otherwise.
Clearly if you land in someones field without permission they have the right to evict you, which could make your return to the helo problematic...
Glider pilots sometimes have problems with bolshie farmers damanding high fees to allow access to recover gliders after field landings.
Clearly you do need landowners permission if you are to avoid costly ransom demands to get your machine back.
Clearly if you land in someones field without permission they have the right to evict you, which could make your return to the helo problematic...
Glider pilots sometimes have problems with bolshie farmers damanding high fees to allow access to recover gliders after field landings.
Clearly you do need landowners permission if you are to avoid costly ransom demands to get your machine back.
AB: beg as much as you like, there's no escaping the Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994! They can more than feel your collar......
Extract: Power to remove trespassers on land.
61.—(1) If the senior police officer present at the scene reasonably believes that two or more persons are trespassing on land and are present there with the common purpose of residing there for any period, that reasonable steps have been taken by or on behalf of the occupier to ask them to leave and —
(a) that any of those persons has caused damage to the land or to property on the land or used threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour towards the occupier, a member of his family or an employee or agent of his,
or
(b) that those persons have between them six or more vehicles on the land, he may direct those persons, or any of them, to leave the land and to remove any vehicles or other property they have with them on the land.
(2) Where the persons in question are reasonably believed by the senior police officer to be persons who were not originally trespassers but have become trespassers on the land, the officer must reasonably believe that the other conditions specified in subsection (1) are satisfied after those persons became trespassers before he can exercise the power conferred by that subsection.
(3) A direction under subsection (1) above, if not communicated to the persons referred to in subsection (1) by the police officer giving the direction, may be communicated to them by any constable at the scene.
(4) If a person knowing that a direction under subsection (1) above has been given which applies to him —
(a) fails to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable, or
(b) having left again enters the land as a trespasser within the period of three months beginning with the day on which the direction was given,he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.
(5) A constable in uniform who reasonably suspects that a person is committing an offence under this section may arrest him without a warrant.
Extract: Power to remove trespassers on land.
61.—(1) If the senior police officer present at the scene reasonably believes that two or more persons are trespassing on land and are present there with the common purpose of residing there for any period, that reasonable steps have been taken by or on behalf of the occupier to ask them to leave and —
(a) that any of those persons has caused damage to the land or to property on the land or used threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour towards the occupier, a member of his family or an employee or agent of his,
or
(b) that those persons have between them six or more vehicles on the land, he may direct those persons, or any of them, to leave the land and to remove any vehicles or other property they have with them on the land.
(2) Where the persons in question are reasonably believed by the senior police officer to be persons who were not originally trespassers but have become trespassers on the land, the officer must reasonably believe that the other conditions specified in subsection (1) are satisfied after those persons became trespassers before he can exercise the power conferred by that subsection.
(3) A direction under subsection (1) above, if not communicated to the persons referred to in subsection (1) by the police officer giving the direction, may be communicated to them by any constable at the scene.
(4) If a person knowing that a direction under subsection (1) above has been given which applies to him —
(a) fails to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable, or
(b) having left again enters the land as a trespasser within the period of three months beginning with the day on which the direction was given,he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.
(5) A constable in uniform who reasonably suspects that a person is committing an offence under this section may arrest him without a warrant.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JimBall is correct.
In England & Wales, a mere trespass is not a criminal offence.
The "Trespassers will be prosecuted" signs with which anyone who lives or has lived in the countryside will be familiar are meaningless - but probably effective because most people don't know they are meaningless.
Some here may be old enough to remember the 1982 incident when an intruder got into Buckingham Palace during the night and sat on the Queen's bed chatting to her. He wasn't prosecuted - he hadn't committed any offence.
The law started changing in 1994 to deal with certain specific problems but, even it's current form, simply going onto someone else's property is not a criminal offence.
Trespass is a tort, and the victim of a trespass is entitled to sue for damages to compensate him for any loss/damage he has suffered and, where appropriate, an injunction will be granted to prevent trespass continuing.
FL
In England & Wales, a mere trespass is not a criminal offence.
The "Trespassers will be prosecuted" signs with which anyone who lives or has lived in the countryside will be familiar are meaningless - but probably effective because most people don't know they are meaningless.
Some here may be old enough to remember the 1982 incident when an intruder got into Buckingham Palace during the night and sat on the Queen's bed chatting to her. He wasn't prosecuted - he hadn't committed any offence.
The law started changing in 1994 to deal with certain specific problems but, even it's current form, simply going onto someone else's property is not a criminal offence.
Trespass is a tort, and the victim of a trespass is entitled to sue for damages to compensate him for any loss/damage he has suffered and, where appropriate, an injunction will be granted to prevent trespass continuing.
FL
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: INBOUND
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
scottish law
my 2p worth, there never was a law of tresspass in scotland- so the new right to roam law means nothing- but , has given certain groups the confidence to roam wherever whenever. if they walk, or fly in ,does it make any difference? if you break the 500ft rule it might? if they disturb wildstock it may, if they endanger someone it will, but who,s going to enforce it?
PPR is a courtesy,good manners keep the peace kind of bag.
mk10
PPR is a courtesy,good manners keep the peace kind of bag.
mk10
Last edited by MK10; 11th Dec 2006 at 15:08.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So if someone decides to land in my field, and rolls over because it is marsh, I guess it will be my fault for not putting up a sign saying so!
If someone "roams " on your land and hurts themself in the process whos fault is it?
If someone "roams " on your land and hurts themself in the process whos fault is it?
If someone "roams " on your land and hurts themself in the process whos fault is it?
We once tried to protect ourselves from scrotes by erecting a fence with a razor wire top. Two things come into play: (1) the height of the fence - the razor wire must not be within reach of someone standing next to the fence (2) the signs - there must be regular signs around the fence warning of the dangers. Needless to say, we abandoned the project.
To answer your question, the "fault" will be determined by the judge on the day. If you can prove that you took all reasonable precautions (undefined) to make sure that your land was safe, then you would not be at fault. Disclaimer notices around the place would help at all normal entrances and a marked path (using fence arrows) would indicate the safe routes. If someone decides to go "freeform" that's their problem.
In some circumstances, it may be advisable to produce (God forbid) a Risk Assessment. Sign it, date it, have it co-signed by a Notary and keep it on file.It shows responsible custodianship.
And always remember: the drink you are about to consume is hot.
Welcome to the modern world.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Newcastle, South Africa
Age: 58
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember asking my instructor about this, and he said that wether the law exists or not it can be surprising how many times you could have a temperature or pressure that you are not happy about and need to check. This will get you out of all or any trouble should you land in any. ( xcuse the pun )
cromptonS, careful with that one. Serial offenders get caught out eventually. Plus remember the machine you are flying has a tail number/reg/company stickers (effectively flying bilboard).
*N.B. We've all done the cheeky landing to pick up the blonde with curves in the right place.
*N.B. We've all done the cheeky landing to pick up the blonde with curves in the right place.
landing without permission...
When I was doing my flight training (a long time ago!), we were told 'land anywhere in the UK with the land-owners permission (and as a professional courtesy, inform Plod)'.
I have since been told that this is not (no longer) the case. You can land anywhere, and as long as you leave immediately when asked (and have not damaged anything or broken any other rules) - you are perfectly legal.
Would love to know if this is now the case (as it seems strange).
Safe flights, Sam.
I have since been told that this is not (no longer) the case. You can land anywhere, and as long as you leave immediately when asked (and have not damaged anything or broken any other rules) - you are perfectly legal.
Would love to know if this is now the case (as it seems strange).
Safe flights, Sam.
Sam
Who told you that was no longer the case and where are you?
If you're in England, I think your source is getting confused between the CAA Act and the laws of Trespass. Even then however, you would not be immune from prosecution by simply leaving someone else's property when asked, even if you hadn't damaged anything. This is a huge and complex subject, but the bottom line is that you can't just land anywhere you feel like it (without the owner's permission) without also risking a claim being made against you, either by the CAA or the land owner, or both.
TTB
Who told you that was no longer the case and where are you?
If you're in England, I think your source is getting confused between the CAA Act and the laws of Trespass. Even then however, you would not be immune from prosecution by simply leaving someone else's property when asked, even if you hadn't damaged anything. This is a huge and complex subject, but the bottom line is that you can't just land anywhere you feel like it (without the owner's permission) without also risking a claim being made against you, either by the CAA or the land owner, or both.
TTB
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always worth asking for permission. Doing so has meant that I now have a decent landing site near home that I can use anytime - but I always text or call the night before just to make sure; as nothing should be taken for granted.
Also, it avoids conflicts with other 'traffic' on the day.
Also, it avoids conflicts with other 'traffic' on the day.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since we threw Common Law out with the bathwater last year (or rather allowed the Republic of Ireland to hold a referendum on the matter and do it for us...) I doubt anyone knows the current EU law on Trespass, but previously, although the land owner in theorey could bring a private case ("prosecution" for trespass is a tortology, it was not a statutary offence) he'd have to prove you'd caused damage - and probably financial loss to gain any favourable result, and crushing a bit of grass wouldn't cut the mustard. Win a trespass case for landing in your field? Dream on! In reality pure Trespass virtually never came to court in UK in any shape or form, and wins were even rarer.
But of course you must obtain permission first, and quite agree that even a regularly used site informing the landowner is only courteous.
But inform the Police? Why?
In all the years I flew into sites all over the country with several different companies I don't think we ever thought this necessary, what's it to do with them?
Also, nothing to stop you landing anywhere (safe) for safety reasons, technical, weather etc.
But of course you must obtain permission first, and quite agree that even a regularly used site informing the landowner is only courteous.
But inform the Police? Why?
In all the years I flew into sites all over the country with several different companies I don't think we ever thought this necessary, what's it to do with them?
Also, nothing to stop you landing anywhere (safe) for safety reasons, technical, weather etc.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA would only get excited if your landing broke part of the Air Navigation Order. So landing on top of a multi-story car park would be right out for a single engined aircraft, for example.
Landing without permission and causing no damage - still difficult to see the cause of action for the landowner (I am a landowner, and occasionally have trouble with unauthorized camping).
Common sense says (other than in an emergency or for safety reasons) always seek landowner permission. That way we don't annoy too many people and risk the law being changed to "not off airfield" as in much of Europe.
Rambling - don't read on if you want to stay on topic:
Getting PPR does not always solve everything. Yesterday I had PPR to land at Dansefield House hotel (see Conference venue near London, meeting rooms, Hotel conference room ) between 1pm and 3pm for lunch. On approach from 1500 ft I could see a wedding party on the veranda, and in the grounds they were setting up archery and laser-clay rifles plus some other things. Having orbited I thought it would give them a chance to realise I was landing, as well as orientate myself. Wind from the North, I came in from the South but adjusted my track to avoid overflying a blue transit van.
On landing and shutting down, a chap came over to (a) thank me for not overflying the van which contained 12 birds of prey and (b) to ask if I would speak to him before starting / departing to avoid frightening the birds.
He was not informed of the helicopter arrival & I was not informed of a falconry display. Being nice people, we sorted things out.
And the lunch was absolutely fantastic!
John
Landing without permission and causing no damage - still difficult to see the cause of action for the landowner (I am a landowner, and occasionally have trouble with unauthorized camping).
Common sense says (other than in an emergency or for safety reasons) always seek landowner permission. That way we don't annoy too many people and risk the law being changed to "not off airfield" as in much of Europe.
Rambling - don't read on if you want to stay on topic:
Getting PPR does not always solve everything. Yesterday I had PPR to land at Dansefield House hotel (see Conference venue near London, meeting rooms, Hotel conference room ) between 1pm and 3pm for lunch. On approach from 1500 ft I could see a wedding party on the veranda, and in the grounds they were setting up archery and laser-clay rifles plus some other things. Having orbited I thought it would give them a chance to realise I was landing, as well as orientate myself. Wind from the North, I came in from the South but adjusted my track to avoid overflying a blue transit van.
On landing and shutting down, a chap came over to (a) thank me for not overflying the van which contained 12 birds of prey and (b) to ask if I would speak to him before starting / departing to avoid frightening the birds.
He was not informed of the helicopter arrival & I was not informed of a falconry display. Being nice people, we sorted things out.
And the lunch was absolutely fantastic!
John
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
But inform the Police? Why?
In all the years I flew into sites all over the country with several different companies I don't think we ever thought this necessary, what's it to do with them?
In all the years I flew into sites all over the country with several different companies I don't think we ever thought this necessary, what's it to do with them?
If you calmed down and thought about it for a while, when Jo Public calls the plod and says they have just seen a helicopter go down in a field just off the Axx, "it sounded funny as it descended and its all gone quiet now".
Would you;
a. Expect plod to call out all the emergency services immediately, or
b. Expect plod to confirm with the caller that the heli has actually crashed or is simply landing, as they are aware of a landing taking place there today.
Of course, if it has actually crashed, having the information from the pilot beforehand would enable despatch to the correct grid square happen more efficiently. Rather going to the field just off the Axx where Jo Public thinks they saw it all happen, but Jo isn't from around here so isn't quite sure of the actual location. Oh and now they aren't answering their phone.
You could call it courtesy, or just making things easier, people on side, etc etc. Or the local neighbourhood plod could be a heli-buff or simply helpful and give you some form of 'hls cover', keeping the local yoof away as you try to land in their 'footy pitch'. The reasons begin to become endless.
Memo to Agaricus bisporus...Plod is not all bad.
Guest
Posts: n/a
This was discussed a few years ago. Can't find the thread.
I seem to remember "Flying Lawyer" posted something along the lines of....
- there is no such law as "trespassing". All those "will be prosecuted signs" are nonsense
- you don't LEGALLY need the landowners persmission to land, but obviously it's a good idea to get it
- but... landowners (or anyone) can bring a civil case against you if you damage anything with your heli, or the downwash, scaring horses, ruining crops, chipping cars etc
I seem to remember "Flying Lawyer" posted something along the lines of....
- there is no such law as "trespassing". All those "will be prosecuted signs" are nonsense
- you don't LEGALLY need the landowners persmission to land, but obviously it's a good idea to get it
- but... landowners (or anyone) can bring a civil case against you if you damage anything with your heli, or the downwash, scaring horses, ruining crops, chipping cars etc
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,605
Received 466 Likes
on
246 Posts
The CAA view appears to be that the landowner's permission must be obtained and that the local police must be informed.
At least, CAA permissions to land in a congested area that I have obtained (and I need these about three or four times a year) state both the above as a requirement of the permission. Regarding the police, I ring the local force control room and obtain an incident number.
At least, CAA permissions to land in a congested area that I have obtained (and I need these about three or four times a year) state both the above as a requirement of the permission. Regarding the police, I ring the local force control room and obtain an incident number.