Tricky drone job. Legal? Ethical?

[BigAl07]

Note that you cannot get DZ pre-approval auth if the area has LAANC. IT will tell you that LAANC is available and to use that.

When you get that "noification" you can indeed keep going in the Drone Zone and request a higher altitude. In fact, there is an excellent post going on with detailed instructions about this over in the Commercial Drone Pilots group:

COA for flight above LAANC altitude

What is the proper procedure for requesting clearance to fly above the LAANC altitude posted on the FAA UAS Facility Map? I have submitted through the Airhub app multiple times for various jobs. If you request clearance above the published altitude it says 'Requires Action - Further Coordination...

commercialdronepilots.com

 

[Cookedinlh]

Can you not get approval to go higher than 50'? I've gotten several approvals to go up to 400' in zero grids in Class C...it's not gonna be same day, but getting the approval is pretty easy. I would also say that overall the job is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I mean, the higher you go, the better, and even better if you can avoid flying directly over the property. But property disputes happen all the time and often lead to someone having to go onto a neighbor's property to take photos or whatever.

That's been my experience flying commercially in Ontario Canada at least. I've gotten permission to fly at several airports . . even CLASS F Restricted. You just have to ask. . or sometimes just know who to ask. I rarely need to take off FROM the property in order to fly near or OVER a property to get good photos. Generally I can stand-off using Mavi3 Cine's 28x Zoom and quieter noise level. Even my older M2 Zoom was great. Here are a couple of examples. You need to be qualified but there's nothing unethical about photographing in public as long as the person themselves is not the subject. If you want to do that then join the police or fire and rescue.

 

[RoofChaser]

Find an Non Disclosure Agreement on Google. Tweak it to fit your situation and take the job. Business is business. No one is going to blame your hustle. In my opinion of course. Do you. It's gotten you this far so I'm sure it'll still work. God bless.

 

[BigAl07]

Find an Non Disclosure Agreement on Google. Tweak it to fit your situation and take the job. Business is business. No one is going to blame your hustle. In my opinion of course. Do you. It's gotten you this far so I'm sure it'll still work. God bless.

That one statement, "No one is going to blame your hustle" is a mighty bold and dangerous one. Are you willing to help support any legal issues should someone end up "blaming you" after taking your legal advice?

 

[RoofChaser]

Wow. I'm concerned about your ability to make a living. jk jk. Yes I would totally do the job no problem if I can find a legal way to do the job, which would be making the client sign something saying he had acquired permission by some means.

 

[BigAl07]

Wow. I'm concerned about your ability to make a living. jk jk. Yes I would totally do the job no problem if I can find a legal way to do the job, which would be making the client sign something saying he had acquired permission by some means.

You do realize that the "Non Disclosure Agreement" you mentioned will do absolutely nothing to cover the UAS Operator/Flight if something they do is in any way illegal??? That form has nothing to do with permissions or legality of a UAS Flight. Honestly, I'm not even seeing the connection here what-so-ever.

Getting a 3rd party to say THEY had permission for YOU to do something illegal carries ZERO weight in court.

 

[RoofChaser]

Now that response sounds like legal advice. OP said he could fly at 50 feet but "wasn't sure" if it would pass at reasonable privacy. I think the nda is exactly what you need so that if it comes back to you, which is a longshot, you can sue the client for the nda. Maybe in the NDA I would specify that if the drainage is actually harming the land in some way, that they can't use those photos as evidence in any legal matters. I dunno. Someone is gonna do it. I think we should be thinking positively about the situation. We need to push the limits or else the government is going to take over everything. Oh wait...we may be too late. I appreciate the sentiment. And time. Thank you!

 

[dgibbphoto]

How much are you being paid for the job? Is it worth it? If not just decline.
It sounds like a legal operation but will additional costs come up if the neighbor goes to court about this? If so, I would pass on the job. There is so much work out there why deal with the hassle for a couple hundred bucks?

 

[Viewfinder]

Interesting discussion which reminds me a little of my former professional life as director of property in a large business. Property disputes were a constant feature of my life for many years. I am in the UK but that doesn't really make any difference.

If I were asked to do something which might become evidence in a legal matter, especially a dispute, I would want to take instructions from the client's lawyer, not the client. Obviously it would be my responsibility to ensure the actual flight was lawful and I wouldn't expect the average lawyer to know the law affecting drone flights, but after discussing the matter with the lawyer and working out a plan that would constitute a lawful flight I would want my instructions in writing. If the client didn't have a lawyer or wouldn't pay for the cost of working out the flight plan and issuing instructions I would decline the work. There are two advantages of this approach. First, if the client is just a troublemaker rather than someone dealing with a potential dispute in a proper manner they wouldn't be able to complain that I had turned the work down capriciously. Second, if the subject of the flight and the photos complained to me I would be able to refer them to the lawyer and wouldn't have to get involved myself.

Having said all that, if my gut told me to walk away I would do that.

 

[ericole]

This could become a HUGE problem! This type of surveillance is illegal in many places. If it were me, I would get some legal advice before embarking upon such a project. The airspace restriction aside.

How is taking a photo illegal?

 

[GFields]

How is taking a photo illegal?

Taking a picture is NOT illegal nor did I say taking a picture was. But if you would please read the entire thread/question you will uncover more as to my answer.

 

[Viewfinder]

Taking a picture is NOT illegal nor did I say taking a picture was. But if you would please read the entire thread/question you will uncover more as to my answer.

Further to my post above, I think we need to recognise there are 2 distinct issues in a case of this kind:

1. Is the flight itself lawful? Does it comply with the laws which control the operation of UAVs?

2. Is the purpose of the flight lawful? A flight might be conducted in full compliance with the laws which control such flights but be for an unlawful purpose. Example: a drug smuggler flies a drone in open airspace taking off from and flying over land to which no lawful UAV prohibition applies, with the objective of spotting law enforcement and reporting this to the smugglers, thus committing the offence of aiding and abetting a crime.

There might be a third issue, but I am still pondering that.

As I said, this is an interesting discussion.

 

[GFields]

I think @BigAl07 has answered this question sufficiently.

 

[Parkerjh]

I have done a dozen or so jobs like this: encroachment, illegal dumping, using land for other than permitted activities, gun range that was firing outside of permitted areas, etc. I always make sure that my flights are legal as far as airspace and that I am just documenting what could be seen from the abutting property. I always charge more for something like this than a typical real estate job and don't think twice about doing them.

 

[DoomMeister]

This could become a HUGE problem! This type of surveillance is illegal in many places. If it were me, I would get some legal advice before embarking upon such a project. The airspace restriction aside.

This type of surveillance is illegal in Michigan. If the photos could be taken from the ground and not trespassing the property then no problem. If this involves a code issue for the neighborhood, the person/department in the local government should be contacted to assess the situation. They should be able to get a warrant to investigate the claims if necessary.

 

[aerovikings]

Your LEO analysis seems flawed. They need a warrant because Law Enforcement is a "state actor" and, therefore, 4th amendment rights are triggered. You are a private citizen and your conduct is not subject to constitutional scrutiny here (IMHO). A Google search should inform you about the privacy laws (not Constitutional guarantees) that govern private rights of action (civil liability) or potential criminal statutes (criminal liability) in your jurisdiction.

I came here to say this exactly.

 

[Mudbone]

Recently I had a customer referral for an unusual job. The client wants to get evidentiary photos of an abutting neighbor's land and outbuildings. The client claims that the new construction is creating run-off damage to their property but can't see enough of what's happening to take legal action. Another complicating factor is the entire area is in a 50' Class D location, so flights would be quite low. We know that airspace is not private, but at only 50' I'm concerned that "reasonable privacy" might become an issue. Plus, the entire vibe feels creepy to me. I've done lots of property/construction/site aerial surveys, but I've never been part of a dispute. Honestly not sure I want to start now.

Pretty simple here, Don't.

 

[AMann]

I didn’t read all of this but what about just using pole based photography from your client’s property? I made a 25-foot one using a extendable aluminum flagpole, there are times when it’s much easier to use than a drone.