Land owner's permission?
 

With respect to the land owner's permission rule for landing, if a friend rents his house, do we need to speak to the Landlord to get permission from him before we can land? I assume the "land owner" part of the rule is indeed just that, but for a farmer or similar renting acres of land?
Apologies to those who will now remind me that I am stupid because I have answered my own question.

No doubt there will be lots of answers on this, the permission bit gets discussed a bit in this thread, but from the point of view of a residential landlord.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ner+permission

V.

There was a thread a while back where IIRC Flying Lawyer stated that he could not find anywhere the legal basis for the requirement to obtain landowner's permission before landing on his or her property.

it was mentioned in this thread

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/236...al-divide.html

i think this rule is a myth and doesnt actually exist in law

Thanks Veeany, we were typing at the same time. Having read through that thread again, I see that my memory was correct, and PPR is not a legal requirement in this situation, just a courtesy and a sensible thing to do.

cue the Flying Lawyer:}

I've posted this before, but I can't remember the thread:

In UK, the owner of a piece of land does not need special permission to use it as a Helicopter Landing Site provided it is not in a congested area (ANO), and it is only for private or business use, that of any employees, or people specifically visiting for social or business purposes (non ANO). No structure must be erected in connection with its use for helicopters, aside from temporary ones (such as windsocks), otherwise the Planning Permission (Zoning) people will become interested - there's no need to notify them of anything unless the land is to be used as a helipad on more than 28 days in any year. In fact, current planning regulations allow a helicopter to be used for personal, business and leisure uses "as many people use a private car" from the owner's dwelling house without limitation, making it exempt from planning control, provided the use is incidental, or ancillary to, the principal use of the land.

If you rent any house or land, you are usually the "landowner" for this purpose for the duration of your rental, so permission from the real landowner may not be required, but you would naturally need to check any leases or covenants that you may have signed that may negate this.

Phil

Colonal Mustard

Rattle: Could you supply the rule to which you refer ? It's not in any of my docs.

here's my thinking:

in regards to whether or not the landowner's permission rule exists, i would assume that it's trespassing to land on one's property without permission, just like driving down a private road would be.

but, since a rentee/leasee can invite you into the house (give you permission to be on the property), they can give you permission to land on the property that they are renting, as long as their contract with the owner does not prohibit that.

Trespassing?
Like walking up the private path to someone's front door without prior permission? :confused:

Here's a hint:

Land OWNER.

:}

It differs from Country to Country. So which country are we talking about?

UK. No permission needed
USA. Permission needed

France. Written permission needed
Austria. Written permission needed
Germany. Written permission needed
The Netherlands. Written permission needed

Hiller Bee
Looks like it only differs in the UK! :confused:

well, it's tricky. walking to the front door is one thing, as you're going to speak to the land owner.

but, say you walked on the private path, made a right, and walked into their backyard when they weren't home. that's trespassing. just like driving down a private road is, if they don't want you there. being on someone's property without their permission (if they don't want you there) is trespassing, and i can't imagine why landing an aircraft on it would be any different.

You've brought in another factor - "if they don't want you there".

There had to be one...
But is seems from the general replies, it is legal in the UK. Thank you all.

My laymans understanding is that if there is no gate or fence to prevent you entering a property it is not trespassing.
However it becomes trespassing if you are asked to leave and you do not.

So perhaps landing without permission on a country estate that is completely walled with locked gates would get a less favourable result in court than landing without permission on a property without fences or with open gates.


Creaser

There is an implied permission in the UK for people to walk on property, because, after all, you want your letters and newspapers delivered, etc. However, you can specifically cancel that permission, such as the TV licence guys.

Bearing in mind that the "man on the Capham Omnibus" is used as a yardstick in English (not Scottish) law, meaning that judgements are applied according to what a reasonable person would think, I would suggest that landing a helicopter (unless in an emergency) on someone's property would be difficult to justify against walking up the garden path. The same would apply to opening a door having walked up said path.

Phil

i seem to remember reading somewhere that in the UK "trespassing" is not illegal, and all these "tresspassers will be prosecuted" signs were not enforcable by any law

any lawyers out there?

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.

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...

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.

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.

"2 or more persons"

sounds like you're OK if you're solo then!

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

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

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?

FL will enjoy this one!

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.

You mean like this?

http://www.electrocution.com/sharpedges.jpg

Phil

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.

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.

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

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.:ok:

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.

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

Wow, straight for the jugular from someone who clearly has a plod issue.

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.

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

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.