The Civil Aviation Authority has warned that it is aware of cases where estate agents may have broken the law by operating drones without a licence.
The CAA says they are risking fines of up to £5,000 and that it will prosecute companies that use drones without a licence for commercial purposes.
Drones are increasingly being used by high-end agents as a cheaper alternative to helicopter hire to get aerial shots. Drones can be bought for as little as £350.
A CAA spokesman said: “Any business or person operating an unmanned aircraft for commercial use, requires a permission from the CAA.
“To obtain a permission, they need to submit an operations manual demonstrating how they intend to use the unmanned aircraft, the person operating the device needs to be qualified, having successfully passed an approved training course and they need to have liability insurance in place.
“In addition, any business, which wants to fly within 50m of any property will need an additional permission from the CAA, again providing the necessary assurances.”
The spokesman added: “We are aware of a number of incidents where estate agents have potentially used unmanned aircraft without permission.
“We will be seeking to raise awareness of the rules within the sector.”
Comments (19)
I am dismayed to see someone who flies RC model aeroplanes coming out against the CAA. To fly a model plane requires the pilot to conform to CAA rules Air Navigation Orders, just as if it was a BA passenger jet and any modeller in this country knows they must have PI insurance normally obtained through the BMFA. There have been numerous cases of death, injuries and damaged caused by model aircraft from the small to the big models. The golden rule is you cannot under any circumstances fly a model aircraft within a built up area, cannot under any circumstances fly one over a public road or private boundary (neighbours property) without permission. Until the advent of toy shops coming along with park flyers and opticopters it wasn't a problem but that changed a few years ago and many are flown against the legal requirements and literature that is supplied when purchased and has even become worse with GPS flying models out of sight. The CAA take no prisoners on this subject.
Any property requiring an aerial photo is likely to be worth a substantial amount of money and therefore (in most cases) require a photographer to carry out the marketing. I imagine this would mainly affect those agents and properties in Rural areas and affect only a small percentage of the market. I really can't see the harm in having a handful of photographers up and down the shires hold a required license for this. If you want a job done…best to get it done properly and by someone trained to do so hence why most of us spend some of our time arguing the pitfalls of using an online agent.
I speak as both a very experienced ex Royal Air Force search and rescue helicopter pilot and a current architectural and property professional photographer. The CAA are completely correct in imposing these rules and conditions. Another case of agents trying to save money by trying to do everything themselves. They are agents for selling properties and they should proactively concentrate on this and not try to be all things to all men. Professional imagery really does help to sell houses and in some instances for high-end detached properties with land around them there can be a case for aerial drone shots but these should be supplied by qualified people under safe and controlled conditions. Agents, you earn quite enough for what you charge, sometimes for doing very little, please stick to what you do best and if you must dip your toe into other professionals' waters please ensure you are qualified, insured and safe.
22 Sqdn Colin? I fly RC fixed wing and helicopters at Chivenor, you might know it?
Comsar Squadron supporting No. 8 Squadron Hunters at RAF Muharraq, Bahrain 1969 to 1970, 18 Sdn RAF Gutersloh, Germany 1970 – 1971.
Do you know Colin you spoiled your argument with the jibes about "sticking to what you do" and "you charge for very little". That was bitterness and equally as unprofessional as the respect you seem to be seeking for others. Your point was made by myself and others above and had you simply reiterated it would have been supported. I suggest you consider where and to whom you are posting next time.
Yes, well that touched a nerve didn't it!
See http://www.droneindustryeye.com, there is a big Hoo Haa kicking off where the guys trained and licenced are kicking off against the FSBO (Flown and snapped by owner) seems it is so simple anyone can do it so why pay to have the job done properly?
I hear it's their most popular story by a mile!
Seriously??? whats the worse that can happen? you take down a kite, you startle a bird, you crash it and loose £350! Come on.
You land on a group of kids and kill a couple.
Do you work for the Daily Mail – Crikey! – Well it would be irresponsible for an agent to use one if there was a crowd of kids around (not to mention a poor photograph) and I think the kids would be unfortunate hit by the flying plastic and die from it. I don't use "Drones" but good luck to anybody that does (responsibly of course).
No, its not utter madness – it makes perfect sense – and good for the CAA I say!
These things are absolutely lethal in the wrong hands. With respect to the above poster, yes YOU know how to fly a fixed wing at 200mph but the vast majority of people go and buy one of these things and fly it over crowds of people in towns & cities with no idea whatsover or any tuition. Some idiots have even flown in stadiums and near commercial jet liners etc. Somewhat different to an experienced RC pilot in a farmers field in the middle of nowhere, with respect.
One of our multirotors weighs 7 kilos – that falling on your head from 150ft is only going to have one result. There is an epidemic of these things out there and regulations need to be enforced – otherwise I predict a fatality of some innocent member of public – people would then blame the CAA for not doing enough!
Looks like model planes enthusiasts club found PIE today 😉
I have to agree with rob 1699, I think to have people buzzing crowds, buildings without regulation is madness. There are a number of approved CAA courses out there (circa £1600) should anyone want CAA approval themselves and any credible agents doing this should be getting that. These things can be a great marketing tool but either get qualified or pay someone who is.
Rob, I agree with you 100% in the danger and the epidemic, see the idiots on Youtube with FPV. My point really is the comparison. I have zero rules and regs imposed on me other than common sense. I believe EVERYONE should be licenced, that includes me. I don't fly 200mph jets, but there is nothing stopping me. Sorry my initial post appeared to be implying the reverse.
The technology available is incredible, the potential for it to fall into the wrong hands for no outlay is not worth thinking about.
How rediculous! I have been flying model aircraft all my life with no qualifications or permission. I pay a pittance for a few million quids worth of insurance (about £40) and can fly a 200mph jet turbine from my local farmers field. But if someone pays me 5p for my little quadcopter (A small quadcopter, small enough to sit in the palm of your hand, with a camera can be bought for less than £50) to take a photo of his house from a 50 ft hover, I can feel the full force of the Civil Aviation Authority. Utter madness.
Om my you just shot yourself down. No qualifications or permission but you pay £40 for insurance which suggests you are a member of the BMFA which in that case you know perfectly well what the legal requirements are and that flying around houses is a no no.
So a fully controlled flying machine driven by electricity and which is always within sight of the operator needs formal training and a licence but Chinese lanterns which carry a naked flame randomly across thatched roofs and parched farmland are perfectly legal for any idiot to send up in whatever numbers they like …. I say get your priorities right.