Former Member Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Posted by Steve J on 14/06/2020 16:59:56: Posted by Andy Stephenson on 14/06/2020 13:46:20: From the Daily Mail this morning... Couple who were wrongly arrested over Gatwick drone that sparked three day of Christmas flight chaos in 2018 receive £200,000 in compensation Good although I am surprised that it has taken Sussex plod so long to settle. PS The Sussex police website, says that they only paid £55k. Edited By Steve J on 14/06/2020 17:10:44 I never noticed the £200,000 report was the Daily Mail. So obviously I'll believe your version Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete My wife's a lawyer. She's as rich as Croesus. They all are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Adams 4 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Well said Baaaaa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Manuel Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete Sounds about right. Lawyers get three times as much as the people who deserve it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Posted by Gary Manuel on 14/06/2020 21:25:43: Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete Sounds about right. Lawyers get three times as much as the people who deserve it. As Dickens wrote in Bleak House. It was ever thus Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 14, 2020 Share Posted June 14, 2020 Posted by Michael Adams 4 on 14/06/2020 20:12:35: Well said Baaaaa. Falsely arrested couple £55,000, lawyers £145,000, taxpayers minus £200,000 If my wife ever accused me of 'domestic abuse' she would be happy to defend me against the charge she herself laid if the taxpayers paid her well enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by Geoff S on 14/06/2020 22:47:05: Posted by Gary Manuel on 14/06/2020 21:25:43: Posted by Peter Christy on 14/06/2020 18:10:31: The BBC are reporting that Sussex police paid out £55,000, but that they are also facing a claim of £145,000 for legal expenses! **LINK** -- Pete Sounds about right. Lawyers get three times as much as the people who deserve it. As Dickens wrote in Bleak House. It was ever thus Geoff I see you've read Bleak House too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by GONZO on 14/06/2020 13:43:26: Richard Clark 2, agree with you. Our current situation with the 'toy plane' rules is just symptomatic of our current society. Anyone taking a wider view of society will see 'we' are all being slowly, incrementally hedged in by rules/laws and nudged this way and that by staged events to an eventual destination that would not have been acceptable if imposed in one go. In the absence of any organised 'refusal to pay' I have personally not paid the 'toy tax', nor will I. If I can't fly my planes so be it., the end of 60+ years. People have given up more for less. People have given their lives for the right to say what they think. Gonzo, You don't have to give up toy planes if you have not paid the toy tax. I asked my wife. 1) The police can always ask you your name but you are only obliged to answer if they say you are suspected of a driving or terrorist offence. 2) The police at the 'Gatwick event' said they did NOT think the arrested couple were in any way connected with terrorism. This will establish a precedent for 99% of 'unregistered drone flyers'. 3) Even in the rare occasions it doesn't establish such a precedent because the police do think you are a terrorist all they can do is arrest you even though they don't know your name. 4) A driving offence. If you refuse to give your name the police have no way of connecting a car parked nearby to you. 5) So either way, suspected terrorist or suspected bad driver, they put you in a cell at the local nick., still without knowing you name. 6)Then they have to persuade the Public Prosecutor that it'a worth taking you to court. At court is the FIRST time you are compelled to give your name. 7) In arresting you and taking you to the police station the arresting officer(s) will expose their actions to the senior officer at the police station and to go any further also expose their actions to the Public Prosecutor. That's all fact. My wife's professional legal opinion "After the recent decision on the Gatwick compensation no sane police force is going to do all this just for flying a toy plane in a farmers field, recreation ground, beauty spot, or whatever". So keep on flying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Our field is over a mile up a dead end country lane. In ten years I have once seen a police car go up this lane and the other day our secretary saw a police pickup truck go up and come back a few minutes later. They didn't stop to enquire what he was doing. Of course there is a bigger worry. The army might decide to load the guns on their Apaches and use our models for target practice...they do use our box as a dummy tank!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 15/06/2020 08:05:59: Posted by GONZO on 14/06/2020 13:43:26: Richard Clark 2, agree with you. Our current situation with the 'toy plane' rules is just symptomatic of our current society. Anyone taking a wider view of society will see 'we' are all being slowly, incrementally hedged in by rules/laws and nudged this way and that by staged events to an eventual destination that would not have been acceptable if imposed in one go. In the absence of any organised 'refusal to pay' I have personally not paid the 'toy tax', nor will I. If I can't fly my planes so be it., the end of 60+ years. People have given up more for less. People have given their lives for the right to say what they think. Gonzo, You don't have to give up toy planes if you have not paid the toy tax. I asked my wife. 1) The police can always ask you your name but you are only obliged to answer if they say you are suspected of a driving or terrorist offence. 2) The police at the 'Gatwick event' said they did NOT think the arrested couple were in any way connected with terrorism. This will establish a precedent for 99% of 'unregistered drone flyers'. 3) Even in the rare occasions it doesn't establish such a precedent because the police do think you are a terrorist all they can do is arrest you even though they don't know your name. 4) A driving offence. If you refuse to give your name the police have no way of connecting a car parked nearby to you. 5) So either way, suspected terrorist or suspected bad driver, they put you in a cell at the local nick., still without knowing you name. 6)Then they have to persuade the Public Prosecutor that it'a worth taking you to court. At court is the FIRST time you are compelled to give your name. 7) In arresting you and taking you to the police station the arresting officer(s) will expose their actions to the senior officer at the police station and to go any further also expose their actions to the Public Prosecutor. That's all fact. My wife's professional legal opinion "After the recent decision on the Gatwick compensation no sane police force is going to do all this just for flying a toy plane in a farmers field, recreation ground, beauty spot, or whatever". So keep on flying Unfortunately the club field is highly visible from the A 55 and the 'committee' have decided to police the regulations contrary to the advice of the BMFA. Additionally, due to the 'boggy man' virus only members who live no more than 5 miles from the field can book a slot to use it. I have a couple of sub 250g planes which I intend to fly from the beach where I live. The club field is irrelevant anyhow as I am in the shielded category and the Welsh government recently sent me a letter extending my virtual house arrest until August 16th at least. I'm thinking of having bars installed on all windows to make the experience complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by Steve J on 15/06/2020 09:18:30: The primary driver is enabling commercial unmanned aircraft operations. Hence my comment about making sure your site is on NOTAMs, etc. That ought to ensure that commercial drones do not pass through your airspace. -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by Steve J on 15/06/2020 09:00:04: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 15/06/2020 08:05:59: I asked my wife. Has your wife seen the bill that is currently passing through Parliament? Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Bill My wife's professional legal opinion "After the recent decision on the Gatwick compensation no sane police force is going to do all this just for flying a toy plane in a farmers field, recreation ground, beauty spot, or whatever". Just don't fly in an FRZ or other bit of restricted airspace. No. She wasn't aware of it and neither was I. Anyhow it is irrelevant. It's just another set of laws And the police arrest and the entirely separate public prosecutor decision processes involving your identification (or anything else) are the same for all laws. It's the actual practice that matters, not the law itself. These 'drone' laws simply aren't being, and won't be, enforced in 99% plus instances. That does not mean I approve of deliberately breaking them as some kind of 'provocation'. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 15/06/2020 10:20:39 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Clark 2 Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 Posted by Barrie Lever on 15/06/2020 08:50:45: ...........What does make me laugh is the total over reaction of clubs to trying to police the ID's and your friend the Secretary was a case in point, it is not a clubs responsibility to make sure that their members are compliant in law, rather it is a members personal responsibility. Regards Barrie Edited By Barrie Lever on 15/06/2020 08:54:28 Yes. the 'Beaulieu Committee' which is not a 'club' as such, has been trying to demonstrate that we are a 'particularly responsible' group of people in the hope of gaining the Forestry Commission's approval rather than their long-standing reluctant consent, which exists only because of an undocumented agreement in about 1959. This is entirely wishful thinking, as those of us who have been flying there ever since the 'early days' well know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyh Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 14/06/2020 16:30:32: Being compensated AFTERWARDS is no use whatsoever. being compensated BEFOREHAND might be viewed as premature though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Posted by Steve J on 15/06/2020 09:18:30: Posted by Barrie Lever on 15/06/2020 08:50:45: I am still trying to figure what the whole thing is about? The primary driver is enabling commercial unmanned aircraft operations. Security, safety and privacy issues (some of which are valid, most of which are simply to appease various groups) are secondary drivers. I would perhaps adjust your first sentence to read "The primary driver is enabling commercial unmanned aircraft operations in order to gain the tax £s and drone industry jobs that the government believe go with it", but then I am a bit more cynical than you... One thing's for certain though - this has never been primarily about safety, that is just a handy narrative to sell registration, remote ID and the Drone bill to Daily Fail readers. Edited By MattyB on 16/06/2020 14:13:35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Adams 4 Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Another load of Cods Wallop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 I can't find that statement Steve. Could you be more specific? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.