From here
Airborne_Again wrote:
But it is true that we are registered as the operator with the Swedish CAA, which is a requirement. I’m not certain if this is due to national or EASA regulations.
My bet would be for a combination of ICAO, EASA, national regulation and insurance requirements. I did not try to reconstruct the situation and possible consequences for the ‘operator’ fabrication in GA – did anybody and could add to this?
No problem with renting, as a private agreement. EASA-reg or N-reg. Lots of bandwidth over the years on this (e.g. the “dry lease” requirement for N-reg spouted by one of the best known “for longer trips I take the Citation” UK pilots – turned out to be pure BS when I dug into it).
Just make sure the insurer is aware.
MichaLSA wrote:
My bet would be for a combination of ICAO, EASA, national regulation and insurance requirements. I did not try to reconstruct the situation and possible consequences for the ‘operator’ fabrication in GA – did anybody and could add to this?
The Swedish term in this case is not actually “operator” but I don’t know the appropriate English term as it is a kind of legalese. A literal translation into English would be “holder”.
I reckon the owner would be operator if it got crashed and drew attention.
Airborne_Again wrote:
The Swedish term in this case is not actually “operator” but I don’t know the appropriate English term as it is a kind of legalese. A literal translation into English would be “holder”.
Probably similar as in Germany, “Halter”.
This is famously relevant with cars: If you get caught on a speeding camera, but the photo of the driver doesn’t match with the registered Halter, then the police cannot assign the fine to them automatically but rather asks them who was driving. Because speeding is a personal offense done by a person rather than the car.
This is different in other European countries where the Halter just gets the fine regardless. I guess Swedish law being culturally similar to German law and unlike English case law, the concept will be similar.
Probably similar as in Germany, “Halter”. This is famously relevant with cars: If you get caught on a speeding camera, but the photo of the driver doesn’t match with the registered Halter, then the police cannot assign the fine to them automatically but rather asks them who was driving. Because speeding is a personal offense done by a person rather than the car. This is different in other European countries where the Halter just gets the fine regardless.
Which countries fine a driver and affect his driver’s record for something he didn’t do, just because he owns a car being driven by somebody else? Sounds unlikely to me, and if correct it’s bizarre.
Re the original post, as Peter says I’d be concerned mainly about commercial insurance coverage issues for a long period of use by a non-owner pilot. On the legal side, anybody can rent their property if they want to, that’s part of basic property rights. and anybody licensed to do so can fly the plane with the owner’s permission.
Silvaire wrote:
Which countries fine a driver and affect his driver’s record for something he didn’t do, just because he owns a car being driven by somebody else? Sounds unlikely to me, and if correct it’s bizarre.
Googling around showed that Austria, Switzerland, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom and France do this at least to some degree (usually it is just about the fine and not the driver’s record). The German word for this is Halterhaftung.
Cars are different to planes. Cars have long established methods to stop people avoiding getting done if the driver cannot be identified.
This is totally country specific. In the UK, cameras are not usually allowed to take a frontal photo and there used to be great workarounds involving stuff like having the car in the name of a company and not appointing anyone to be the “fleet manager”. There probably are still methods where a fine is paid but nobody gets points on their license (which is the key objective).
With a plane, I would not like to test it… The Sala case is interesting; the owner got done and put in jail, but he wasn’t just a passive owner. He was organising the “taxi service”, etc. I am not aware of cases involving passive rental.
But passive rental is very common. You would be amazed how many people are all over social media saying “my SR22” or “my TB20” but actually they are just informally renting it and have been for years. Often from someone who doesn’t seem to fly anymore.
In France if you get flashed by a speed camera, the owner of the car gets a notice telling them about the fine to be paid. There is a place to say “I wasn’t driving it” which iirc (happened to us once) the actual driver has to sign. So I guess if he/she refuses, the owner gets stuck with the fine and the points. But not 100% sure.
So I guess if he/she refuses, the owner gets stuck with the fine and the points. But not 100% sure.
Yes it stays with registred owner unless he nominate driver or make stolen car declaration
