Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846079
Is there anything stopping me being PIC in an aircraft, if my friend hired it?
As in - is there a law that allows an owner to control who is PIC of their aircraft?

Could I hire an aircraft, then separately hire an instructor, to, say, do some night instructor for me without the owner giving the instructor permission to be PIC?

I'm wondering if there is normally some line buried in an insurance document which says that PIC can only be a person authorised by the owner. As such - any other person wouldn't be insured to be PIC (and so being PIC would be illegal). I've not found such a line (the headline policy I've seen just says "any pilot over 100 hours PIC" or similar).

I'm not contemplating doing any of this myself - it came up in conversation that there wasn't anything legally stopping one of our aircraft group owners letting their friend log P1 time in the group aircraft (and so be PIC during that portion of the flight).
User avatar
By 2Donkeys
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846080
Two avenues for you to contemplate.

When an individual hires an aircraft, there will ordinarily be a rental agreement that will be signed and/or agreed to as part of the rental. It may be that subsequently allowing another party to fly the aircraft puts the original renter in breach of the rental agreement. This would be a civil matter.

The insurance arrangements for the aircraft may well provide for any approved pilot flying under the aegis of the rental agreement (and that agreement may well stipulate minimum hours and other restrictions). Allowing another party to fly may therefore invalidate to limit the insurance cover and/or applicability. To the extent that valid insurance is required, this would be a potentially criminal matter.

Those two considerations aside, there isn't much 'law' that you would fall foul of in the scenario you describe.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1846082
riverrock wrote:Is there anything stopping me being PIC in an aircraft, if my friend hired it?
As in - is there a law that allows an owner to control who is PIC of their aircraft?
.


Surely it will depend on clauses in the hire agreement, not insurance?
Just imagine what happens when you hire a car - you don't let anybody drive it do you? You have to nominate the driver(s) when you hire it. Why would an aeroplane be any different?
#1846087
Our insurance allows for instructors to do their stuff without being named on the policy. You cannot use the instructor example as a guide to the more general rule.
In addition to the insurance issue, a hired aircraft would very likely have hire terms that govern who can act as PIC (other than instructors). Even within groups, there will usually be some form of agreement on the same topic. I'd say that the prospects of an unnamed person being able to fly as PIC without falling foul of the insurance and applicable agreements regarding use of the aircraft are slim enough to merit checking with the owner(s). And it would be the courteous thing to do.

If your group doesn't have an agreement on such things, I'd guess the group would benefit from adding it. After all, many groups spend a bit of effort making sure the members fit the group ethos so why risk letting persons unknown be responsible for flying?
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846092
On cars, there is a specific crime to take & drive without consent (separate to theft) which is pretty much equivalent to my question. That is the legal backing behind hire cars, beyond the civil matter of what you sign when you pick it up. Also with hire cars, insurance is named driver.

So it sounds like, to me, this is really a civil matter coming down to group rules (making it pretty hard for a group to enforce if one of the members says to their friend they can log P1 as they go on their travels).

Sounds like if I wandered down the line of aircraft at our club, filled a different group's aircraft with fuel, flew it for an hour (leaving a bit of fuel to cover the value of engine degradation etc), filled in the paperwork, put it back, I wouldn't actually have broken any laws.
Not that I recommend that either...
User avatar
By Morten
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846094
One commonly used insurance wording makes a distinction between what is covered for property damage (ie 'first party' losses to the aircraft itself) and third party liabilities.

First party cover is in force without any reference to the pilot at all) cover is for the aircraft, not the pilot):
Code: Select allIn respect of those risks and Aircraft which are specified in Items 4. and 5. of the Policy Schedule as being covered, Insurers will at their option pay for or make good physical loss of or damage to the Aircraft occurring during the Period of Insurance, including disappearance if the Aircraft is unreported for ten days after the start of the Flight, but not exceeding the Agreed Value specified in Item 5. of the Policy Schedule.


But for the liability part, there is specific reference to it being flown by pilot with permission of the policy holder:
Code: Select allIn respect of those risks and Aircraft which are specified in Items 4. and 5. of the Policy Schedule as being covered Insurers will pay on Your behalf and also jointly or severally with You:
   a. the pilot(s) as specified in Item 10. of the Policy Schedule;
   b. any person competent for that purpose who with Your permission is Taxiing or otherwise operating (excluding Flying) the insured Aircraft;
all sums which they shall become legally liable to pay as damages in respect of Bodily Injury and Property Damage arising from an Occurrence caused by the insured Aircraft or by any person or object falling therefrom.


Hence, if an unauthorised person (call them a thief) flies your aircraft, the damage to the aircraft is still covered but the thief is not necessarily covered for liability claims under your policy. So as a policyholder, you are continuing to get protection for your asset, whereas any liability which arises towards the thief would be unlikely to become a claim under your policy. Which looks reasonable to me.

If, for some reason, any liability attaches to the policyholder even though the aircraft was stolen, then that is covered as it covers liability towards you and others under a. and b. Of course, the thief may well fall under a. or b. in which case the policy will cover as intended.

Other wordings are available; it'd be interesting to know if they differ markedly.

So it would seem that the above means that the thief flies without insurance under a regime where such insurance is mandatory, they would be acting illegally (potentially criminally).

None of which would stop them from putting PIC in their logbook.
User avatar
By foxmoth
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846097
You start by asking about someone renting then at the end say
it came up in conversation that there wasn't anything legally stopping one of our aircraft group owners letting their friend log P1 time in the group aircraft (and so be PIC during that portion of the flight
If it is a group aircraft that is not renting the aircraft unless you are talking about a non equity group, so essentially it would be an owner allowing it and it is down to the group, their rules and the insurance. If a rental then that is down to the rental agreement but generally would not be approved without the owners consent.
User avatar
By F70100
#1846100
Even with instructors acting as PIC there can still be limitations.

I asked an owner if I (an instructor) could rent his aircraft without being a named pilot on the insurance policy; he explained that the insurance is only valid with an instructor as PIC if one of the named pilots is on board and receiving flight instruction. Seems fair enough to me, but nothing that throwing cash at the insurance company cannot solve...
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1846102
Most insurance policies for individual aircraft and small groups are named pilots only, but also there's usually a clause for an instructor to be insured as PIC *as long as they're instructing someone named on the policy*.

An "all pilot" policy is vastly more expensive.

If it were a flying club aeroplane, it may be limited to members of the club.

Regardless, I suspect that taking an aeroplane without the owner's consent would be unlawful, even if they did put it back afterwards.

Edit: Crossed with F70100.
By Ibra
#1846111
It seems you will need this thing or paper when going to collect an aircraft left in Dinard especially if your honest answer was: is it yours? No, are you renting? No

Obviously you need your name on the insurance :thumleft:

Most likely the insurance will not cover an instructor flying without owner but I doubt there is an insurance that does not allow an instructor to fly with the owner? maybe for single seat aircraft, for most aircrafts they seem to be always insured for "owner instruction" as default case, I will be curious to hear about any exception?

The same insurance with named pilots does not cover pilot+mechanic unless his name is on it, even god is not covered on these...
Last edited by Ibra on Mon May 10, 2021 5:23 pm, edited 3 times in total.
By pullup
#1846113
How do these far fetched questions keep cropping up?

If anybody I allowed to fly my aircraft then permitted another pilot fly it, without my knowledge or permission, then that would be the last time they ever got anywhere near it.

And I would make sure everybody knew.

Something similar once happened when the aircraft was in for maintenance and the maintainers allowed a CAA test pilot to fly it (under the pretext of a “performance check”) without my knowledge. I made my position quite clear to both the maintenance organisation and the CAA.

I received an apology.
lobstaboy, riverrock liked this
#1846164
David Wood wrote:Most insurance policies cover any FI/FE acting as P1 whilst instructing or testing on the aircraft. I've never seen that qualified by 'with the permission of the owner'.


There are instructors I wouldn't let tow my aircraft out of the hangar never mind fly it, regardless of what the insurance policy says.