As long as you respect their private airspace. Here it is 100’ above the tallest structure any more is public airspace and subject to FAA rules.
Legality of someone photographing our propertry.
- Thread starter rjrupp
- Start date
As long as you respect their private airspace. Here it is 100’ above the tallest structure any more is public airspace and subject to FAA rules.
Citizen Flier
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 344
- Reactions
- 181
It seems odd that they would pay for a high tech soil survey if there wasn't SOME visual indication that there were soil issues. Is there disturbed earth that is visible on a walk through of the property? I agree that you should have the data examined by your attorney & soil experts. In most states I believe you are required to disclose known hazards on a property, but I believe that varies state to state. Hence the popularity of the phrase "Caveat Emptor". When I have considered property purchases, I hired an engineer to inspect the properties. S.O. P. And I was advised by a R.E. Broker that one property had a sink hole. legit concerns
AMann
Well-Known Member
The first amendment also protects people’s privacy rights, a photographer can’t take photos using telephoto lenses or ladders and other equipment to peer into areas were privacy is expected. Using a drone to penetrate the ground on someone’s personal property may also constitute an issue with privacy rights.
AMann
Well-Known Member
I agree, if you ever have to put in any type of power or sewer lines or any other type of groundwork, you could run into a big issue with that. The other issue is illegally dumped oil and other pollutants, that has to be carried away as hazardous waste for legal disposal.
bumper
Well-Known Member
I don't think so. The FAA already restricts manned aircraft to a minimum of 500' above people and structures in sparsely populated areas (except in an emergency). I agree, lots of FAA's restricted airspace starts, "from the surface up to XX altitude". The advent of drones have the rules in flux, the balance being somewhere between a person's right to privacy and the quiet enjoyment of their property, and the FAA's control of airspace in the support of avigation and those fearless aviators who wish to avail themselves of that airspace. Still, courts have protected the right of property owners to not have aircraft blowing the wash off rural clotheslines.
UAV's are treated differently than manned aircraft in many respects, so I only mention the above to show that the FAA does not necessarily have absolute control of airspace directly above ground level as they do on approach to airports. Some of that control is within the purview of state government. For instance, in NV, HOA's cannot prohibit drone overflight above 250' AGL, or below that for legitimate purpose, such as real estate photos. It is when local rules are more restrictive than FAA rules that you will more likely see a legal fuss.
twoheadlines
Well-Known Member
While I live in a completely different global neighbourhood, my thoughts around the issues being raised in this post have application pretty much anywhere in the world.
Ground penetrative radar has existed for a good many years. I am guessing a bit, but with miniaturisation which has inevitably occurred it may well be possible for large UAVs to lift such a payload. The software required to interpret any ground anomalies detected would need to be pretty "top shelf" in order to determine with sufficient clarity that any such anomaly is the result of a man made occurrence and not something else.
Most importantly, I believe that when you placed your property on the market for a given price, that action only sets up in legal terms an "offer to treat". The action of a prospective buyer is to then initiate a process of negotiation. 'Offer and acceptance' requires all parties to agree, before a contract can be entered into (there may be other T&Cs attached). If you cannot agree to the buyer's offer to purchase your property, there is no contract, and therefore no obligation on your part to accept any value or condition the purchaser is hoping to use to help manipulate acceptance of what they perceive the property to be worth to them.
It's all about fair value, so if the prospective buyer is making a claim the property is realistically worth less than you claim, then I believe their is an obligation for such information to be made known to all parties.
Good luck.
Happy and safe flying
KB9Radio
Well-Known Member
Sounds like a shakedown to me to get you to drop the price. I don't know what your market is out there right now, but I would tell them the price is what it is, and if they don't like it go "pound sand". I've done a lot of building and there is nothing wrong with burying certain construction materials. Concrete, stone, basement walls, and so on actually make excellent fill. Especially as dry as it is out in that area, it would be no problem and is just a negotiating ploy. As for legality, as you said, you do not own the airspace above your land so folks can probably fly over and scan it. But to use that to try to negotiate a lower price with you seems unethical at best. Let's face it, even a tree stump that was ground off at one time, would be a buried item that will rot away at some point 20 years from now, big deal,fill it in. It is definitely the first time I have heard of something like this.
It is likely a digital aerial infrared (IR) study which is used to identify and measure soil types and configurations, as well as their suitability for specific uses (e.g.: agriculture yields for specific crops). Different color soils indicate different mixtures or soil types, moisture content, nitrogen and nutrient load, etc.
There is no reason not to ask for a copy of the report, if the buyer is serious he should be more than willing to share it for your review and for you to refute it as you see fit.
There is no expectation of privacy with respect to ANY image capture of your property (as long as no people are in the shots).
There is no reason not to ask for a copy of the report, if the buyer is serious he should be more than willing to share it for your review and for you to refute it as you see fit.
There is no expectation of privacy with respect to ANY image capture of your property (as long as no people are in the shots).
Mossiback
Well-Known Member
The sticky point now is the seller cannot check a negative box. He has been informed of the fill but has not confirmed it. If the information is accurate and the owner can get details on place and depth it should be easy enough to dig a hole to verify.
apeel
Well-Known Member
I have always heard that you can legally photograph anything that is viewable / visible from public space. So IMO (not a lawyer) there was nothing wrong with them taking photos / videos of your property as it is visible from public space above your house (the space above your house is not private or owned by you).
The technology does exist. You would have to review the earnest money offer. Due dilligance would dictate that something like this is allowed. Talk to your attorney and discuss whether or not, they were given the right under the offer. Then certainly review the data and the bona fides ofvthe surveyor. A bore hole in the right spot will satisfy both parties to verify survey.
The only search results I got for (sonar-red or sonar red) were for Anon ski goggles. You may want to get a pair to see through the smoke being blown your direction.
As long as they didn't find any dead bodies, you should be in the clear! 
In the desert outside of Las Vegas, all sorts of dead bodies are buried!
They used to settle all disputes with a shovel! ?
The buyer was just doing his due diligence!
Ask to see the report, and go from there.
Why be concerned about their having flying over the property to discover issues?
Better to have it discussed now from aerial imaging, in escrow, before they dig it up later, while on the ground, after escrow!
In the desert outside of Las Vegas, all sorts of dead bodies are buried!
They used to settle all disputes with a shovel! ?
The buyer was just doing his due diligence!
Ask to see the report, and go from there.
Why be concerned about their having flying over the property to discover issues?
Better to have it discussed now from aerial imaging, in escrow, before they dig it up later, while on the ground, after escrow!
Last edited:
Matchlock
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2017
- Messages
- 129
- Reactions
- 29
- Age
- 78
Anybody can take all the pictures of your property they want and there's nothing you can do about it.
Matchlock
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2017
- Messages
- 129
- Reactions
- 29
- Age
- 78
" the impedance mismatch at the ground is going to be a problem." WHAT?????
Please, go ahead and explain that would you? I'd love to hear this one.
Please, go ahead and explain that would you? I'd love to hear this one.
Sure - specific acoustic impedance is the product of density and sound speed. When a sound wave meets a boundary separating two media of different acoustic impedance, the reflected energy scales with the difference in impedance. In the case of a sound wave in air ( low acoustic impedance) hitting the ground (much higher acoustic impedance), most of the energy is reflected, with relatively little transmitted. The same occurs in the reverse direction. So broadcasting sound waves from an airborne platform is a very inefficient way to couple them into the ground, or to detect reflections from sub-surface structures.
drjulian
Member
I cannot speak to the technology, but regarding the intrusion on your property... A buyer has the right to 'due diligence' which in mentioned in the offer. I would expect that this type of investigation *could* be allowed as part of that investigation. Best to check with your lawyer....
But also, If it is true it is important that you are aware of it so you can address the problem appropriately for future potential buyers.
But also, If it is true it is important that you are aware of it so you can address the problem appropriately for future potential buyers.
We can debate lots here, however, you don not always own the land under your house. Mineral, Water rights can be owned by the government, oil, gas, and rare earth elements can be owned by mining companies. Last but not least survey records are public. So can he do this, yes, does he have the tech, maybe,
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
-
-
-
3 Mostly failed to take a good shot in the Everglades- Started by Erk1024
- Replies: 0
Forum statistics
