Property Owner Permission To Fly Form......??

[Crow Horse]

I've searched and haven't found a consent/permission form for a property owner to allow UAS flights from their property. I put together this form. Am I overlooking anything?

Landowner Drone Flight Consent Form

​

I,____________________________________________, confirm that I am the legal owner of the property

listed below and grant (name of PIC) and his Visual Observer(s) permission to access my property to perform

photography using a drone (UAS), which is located at:__________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

from:____________________________ 2022, to __________________________2022, with the following

restrictions (please note if there are no restrictions):____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________



Landowner signature___________________________________________

Phone # _____________________________________________________

Email________________________________________________________

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Do you REALLY need this ?
For commercial or recreational flights ?

To me as a recreational pilot, bringing something up like this form would create confusion to some landowners, like they are signing away their rights to sue if something goes wrong.
I would think a casual approach for recreational would be best, "Hi, I'd love to get some footage with my aerial camera from your block, is it ok ? I'd be happy to share some footage / photos with you of your area from above" . . . type of thing.

I can understand it possibly being of use if filming a site commercially and getting the official ok to overfly, give clarity to places you need to keep away from etc.

Just not sure if this is for you, the drone pilot to have on hand / file away, so you can either do commercial work and keep a paper trail of permissions, and / or fly certain places where it might be difficult to find a take off / landing point on public land ?
Eg, a city bans flying from a large park you wish to overfly, but you get the ok to fly from a neighbouring block of land, which would make the flight possible keeping within other rules such as VLOS, no OOP, etc.

Who exactly is this to protect, reasons protection needed, and how does it protect against liability issues that a consent form is most likely easily overridden in a court ?

 

[Crow Horse]

In my case (which is unusual), the short answer is yes I do need this. There's a better than average chance that at some point that LE will be called and I want to prove that I have permission to fly from the property I'm on. The property owners know exactly why I'm flying from their property and I'm doing it for their benefit. I'll be documenting and monitoring a huge project that the majority of the community doesn't want. I can see that whatever develops from my efforts, the developer will pull strings to make anything and everything difficult for me. This is why I'm taking extraordinary precautions to protect myself. My flights will be commercial in nature and won't commence until I earn my commercial certification.
This is a very rural community. It's a combination of woodlands, farms, pastures, meadows and wetlands with homes that are spread out.
I know that my efforts to protect myself might seem that I've lost the plot, but past experiences with the developer prove to me that I can't be too careful.
It never ceases to amaze me that the scales of justice tip so out of balance when large sums of money are part of the equation. The lines between right and wrong become blurred and many times those who are "right" often lose. They justify their moral bankruptcy with financial gains. Disgraceful..........

 

[akdrone]

I'm no lawyer but it looks reasonable to me. If you're on private property cops have no right to enter without permission anyway.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I know that my efforts to protect myself might seem that I've lost the plot, but past experiences with the developer prove to me that I can't be too careful.

No probs, didn't mean that in any way, I now how litigious it can be in some countries.

I think the form is pretty good then, you shouldn't have any trouble proving your flight from a legal take off / landing location with that.

Obviously if flying over a development, you will watch out for not performing ops over people, machinery, cars, buildings etc, keep VLOS, all the FAA rules, just to give the developer no avenue to cause you grief with the FAA.

Make sure Airdata logs your flights, keep the camera rolling, positive proof you are playing by the rules.
(Depending on amount of flying, you may need an Airdata upgrade, small fee payable to keep up with proper info you can retrieve . . . a limited amount with the free version).

Good luck with the project when the time comes.

 

[eEridani]

I am NOT a lawyer, but that form is missing all sorts of details you want and your lawyer will want - things to protect you and the property owner from legal action in the event of trouble.

Where's the insurance clause? Any hold-harmless agreement? Legal description of property? Who is the owner giving permission to? How do you know the person signing has authority to grant permission to you and your crew? Any payment or compensation involved?

And even the wording is confusing: does that first section refer to the location of the property or to where you keep your drone?

 

[Phantomrain.org]

I tend to follow a more simple execution one that many Photographers use,.
That is to audio record permission with the owner to fly and take pictures and use them.

If something bad happens those forms are not going to mean anything more than you had consent.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain. Land on the Water.

 

[Wade L.]

If I was a property owner asked to sign that form, I would want language included that states that the rPIC assumes full responsibility and liability for any injuries or property damage related to the flight operation that may occur during flight made from or over my property. And I would want the rPIC’s signature on the form as well. That’s just me.

 

[Vic Moss]

I don't really see the need for this. I've been doing this for 33 years as a full-time professional, the last 8 with drones. And I've never needed anything like this at all. But since you and I talked offline, I can understand why you want to. It's overkill, but it won't do any harm to have it.

If you really plan on doing this, pay the money for a lawyer to draw it up. Otherwise it's completely useless. If you don't use a lawyer to put it together, anyone who has a problem with you doing what you're doing will have a lawyer, and they'll tear this to pieces.

The money spent up front will more than pay for itself. Or even try and find a sympathetic lawyer to do it Pro Bono.

 

[beachcombing]

You definitely will want to add a "hold harmless" and "indemnification" clause to the release form.

 

[Crow Horse]

I am NOT a lawyer, but that form is missing all sorts of details you want and your lawyer will want - things to protect you and the property owner from legal action in the event of trouble.

Where's the insurance clause? Any hold-harmless agreement? Legal description of property? Who is the owner giving permission to? How do you know the person signing has authority to grant permission to you and your crew? Any payment or compensation involved?

And even the wording is confusing: does that first section refer to the location of the property or to where you keep your drone?

The "form" above was actually culled from a University that was looking to do research on private property. I just changed a couple of items to make it more UAS appropriate. The intent is to have documentation that I have permission to be where I am and I'm not trespassing. This would be for LE if they are called.

Having a "release", "hold harmless", or other legal issues would be another set of documents that I'll let an attorney sort out. In most cases, either myself or my VO will know the landowner. Tax maps will also prove helpful in knowing who is the legal owner of the property.

In all cases, there will not be any payment, or other compensation either to myself or the landowner.

Basically, everything rests on my shoulders and I really don't get a warm fuzzy knowing that. So why do it? There are many reasons and my efforts might not have a major impact on this project. However, if people actually see what they are in store for and the impacts on the community and the environment, maybe they can prevent this destruction from occurring in their community. Is this a NIMBY issue? **** right it is but the "other" NIMBY also is applicable - Next Idiot Might Be You........... Maybe others can see the reality of this and learn from it.........

 

[JimSteadman]

Crow Horse, at the end of the day, you are playing at being a lawyer here and then relying upon your own advice to feel assured that you are protected. Just remember this axiom - "The lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client." I have done real estate law for 45 years. You don't know who owns the land until you search the title. The signature of the person who lives there or who claims to be the owner means nothing. If you are looking for advice, get a lawyer. If you are seeking affirmation that you are a good lawyer and can rely on this document and your instincts, look elsewhere.

 

[jbierling]

PIC isn't defined, UAS isn't defined, and doesn't really sound like anything an actual lawyer would write. Might almost do more harm than good.

 

[Crow Horse]

I make no pretense of being a lawyer or for that matter, anything even close. I am merely looking at using a permission form that will show LE or anyone else for that matter that I have permission to be where I am. Nothing more. It's the same as a deer hunter might have for using land to hunt on. Anything beyond that is for a lawyer to sort out to develop. A deer hunter doesn't do a title search for land access. Public records like county tax maps are readily available to identify the owner. This is a small town and most folks know everyone and know who is who.

If I'm challenged by LE and asked if I have permission to be at that location, I can show him the document that indicates that I do indeed have permission to be there. If it gets that far, it's extremely doubtful that LE will challenge that and take it the the next level, whatever that might be.

I'm trying to do everything possible "by the book". At the same time, I want to have a reasonable amount of protection for myself, So, at the end of the day, I can say that I did everything right and sleep at night.

Unfortunately, we live in a litigious society where ownership and responsibility of our actions is myth.

 

[jbierling]

I make no pretense of being a lawyer or for that matter, anything even close. I am merely looking at using a permission form that will show LE or anyone else for that matter that I have permission to be where I am. Nothing more. It's the same as a deer hunter might have for using land to hunt on. Anything beyond that is for a lawyer to sort out to develop. A deer hunter doesn't do a title search for land access. Public records like county tax maps are readily available to identify the owner. This is a small town and most folks know everyone and know who is who.

If I'm challenged by LE and asked if I have permission to be at that location, I can show him the document that indicates that I do indeed have permission to be there. If it gets that far, it's extremely doubtful that LE will challenge that and take it the the next level, whatever that might be.

I'm trying to do everything possible "by the book". At the same time, I want to have a reasonable amount of protection for myself, So, at the end of the day, I can say that I did everything right and sleep at night.

Unfortunately, we live in a litigious society where ownership and responsibility of our actions is myth.

Understood. LE might not even know what LE means. Just replace the acronyms at the very least.

Edit:
Lawyers love acronyms, but they're usually well defined in the first few pages of the lengthy document.

 

[Crow Horse]

Y

Understood. LE might not even know what LE means. Just replace the acronyms at the very least.

Yes, that I planned to have my name in place of PIC. Drone (UAS) I thought was self explanatory.

 

[tvc184]

Yes, that I planned to have my name in place of PIC. Drone (UAS) I thought was self explanatory.

If you’re only intent in the document is to show a responding police officer that you had prior consent to be over the property, that should be sufficient. The officer would likely be there to investigate a suspicious circumstance.

Every state has different laws so what the officer could do or would be investigating will depend on the laws in the state. It seems like you just want something in hand that shows you’re not trying to conduct surveillance on someone illegally, trespassing or looking for something to break into, etc. It would be critical to know the laws in that state covering drones since they can differ greatly. I have flown drones in one state which had practically no laws covering drones and in another state, where I work, which has some of the most restrictive laws.

I have been a police officer for most of the last 38 years until I retired a couple of months ago. I also created and commanded a drone unit for the police department and have a Part 107 license. I also have a private pilot license for what that’s worth.

There is obviously a huge difference between criminal law and civil law. If you were looking for indemnification or proper coverage and protection of a commercial business, obviously you need to seek legal advice from a lawyer. You can obviously be sued for things that are not anywhere near criminal law.

Getting back to your intent, if all you’re doing is showing a police officer that you have permission to be there at that time, I think your form is sufficient. It would help to defuse any situation and hopefully help the officer feel more at ease.

And in the case of land that does not have houses on it or if the houses are a good distance away (search curtilage), the police can go onto the land and it is not considered a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment of United States Constitution. The idea that police cannot go onto private property is simply not true in many cases. If it puts your mind at ease and possibly that of a responding officer also, the document certainly can’t hurt.

Also I mentioned state laws earlier, a state law or state court ruling can be more restrictive and can prevent officers if some situations of going on to private property. That would be helpful to know what it is in your jurisdiction.

Search “open fields doctrine” or the US Supreme Court case of Hester v. United States for understanding of an officer’s authority to go on private property and it not be considered a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

In my opinion.

 

[slozukimc]

I also live in NY. Police can most certainly go on private property if they have been called. Whoever said that they can’t is way off base. Entering your home is another issue. Open land is fair game.

As far as permission goes in NY you need permission of the tenant of the property. That can be the landowner or a lessee. If the land is leased/rented you need permission from the person leasing the land as well as the landowner seeing you are ruffling feathers.

Mike

 

[smashse]

So based on what you said, you are looking to have proof that the landowner/lessee said it was OK to be there. Nothing more, this isn't a legal contract, except in that it allows you onsite and to avoid trespassing charges. Like said above, it would be just as valid to have a video recording of the land owner saying it was OK for you to be there and to fly a sUAS from his property.

I would probably put something in like "the RPIC is responsible for ensuring legal use of the sUAS and any and all imagery captured by the drone". The land owner maybe could (depending on state laws) actually be charged as an accomplice if you fly up, go to a neighbor and then start peeping in windows or fly after dark with no strobes. By saying you are responsible for legal use of the drone, he can't have any concern that he will face peeping or FAA charges. Technically I think it is implied by you being the RPIC, but it might help some reluctancy.

Last change, I would say something like RPIC and Operations team, or flight team, or flight crew, etc. While you could just call anyone a VO, you might have someone who isn't a VO but a valuable part of your team, like making sure people do not stand in your flight path for security, etc. Heck you could have a flight manager that technically would be trespassing since they aren't a VO. But could still be part of the operations team. Or depending on drone, you could have a photographer that is using a remote to take pics, but isn't a VO or RPIC.

I don't see any harm, just as above, I am NOT a lawyer. But I am a fan of forms, mainly just to prove what people agreed to.

Good luck and hopefully you will never show one of these to an officer, but good to have in case!

 

[Crow Horse]

So based on what you said, you are looking to have proof that the landowner/lessee said it was OK to be there. Nothing more, this isn't a legal contract, except in that it allows you onsite and to avoid trespassing charges. Like said above, it would be just as valid to have a video recording of the land owner saying it was OK for you to be there and to fly a sUAS from his property.

I would probably put something in like "the RPIC is responsible for ensuring legal use of the sUAS and any and all imagery captured by the drone". The land owner maybe could (depending on state laws) actually be charged as an accomplice if you fly up, go to a neighbor and then start peeping in windows or fly after dark with no strobes. By saying you are responsible for legal use of the drone, he can't have any concern that he will face peeping or FAA charges. Technically I think it is implied by you being the RPIC, but it might help some reluctancy.

Last change, I would say something like RPIC and Operations team, or flight team, or flight crew, etc. While you could just call anyone a VO, you might have someone who isn't a VO but a valuable part of your team, like making sure people do not stand in your flight path for security, etc. Heck you could have a flight manager that technically would be trespassing since they aren't a VO. But could still be part of the operations team. Or depending on drone, you could have a photographer that is using a remote to take pics, but isn't a VO or RPIC.

I don't see any harm, just as above, I am NOT a lawyer. But I am a fan of forms, mainly just to prove what people agreed to.

Good luck and hopefully you will never show one of these to an officer, but good to have in case!

I like your suggestions and I'll incorporate them in. Thanks!

And here in lies the irony. My first flight once I earn the 107 certification will be from the property of a State Trooper. He's very enthusiastic about it and if I understood the message his wife sent me, he's going to arrange for another Trooper who's area of expertise is sUAS's. I'm not clear on what that exactly means but he'll meet with me when we do a preflight site survey as well. I never saw this twist coming. I'm pretty amped about it. If it does come to pass, I'll default to "sponge mode" and welcome any and all information he can share.