Another "is it legal" question

flyingcheesehead

flyingcheesehead

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
25,126
Location
UQACY, WI
Display Name
Display name:
iMooniac
Okay, this is going to be kind of a series of questions eventually.

Let's say there's a flying club that wants to organize a series of fly-outs to various destinations. The club is an equity club with members that pay monthly dues and also pay hourly for the use of the airplanes.

The hourly costs will be split evenly so as not to violate 61.113, but the club will be doing the splitting - Each person is billed for 1/(number aboard) of the total tach time for the flight, whether they fly or not.

Is this legal? As in, does the *pilot* have to pay the whole bill and get the others to pay him their individual shares, or is it OK for the club to split the time up evenly and bill it to the members on the plane?
 
As long as all parties are members of the club, I don't see any issue - they all paid no more than their pro-rata share of the expense of the flight.

If they weren't all members, then you have the issue of the CLUB billing the "public", perhaps.
 
I agree with Tim. The rule says "the pilot may not pay less than" the pro-rata share of costs; and he's not.

It'd be no different than if I went with three buddies on a flight, and when we got back, the FBO printed up the bill and each of us wrote a check to the FBO for 1/4 of the cost. The money doesn't have to go through me first.
 
Who the hell is going to tell?:yikes:

Sometimes you just gotta' live on the Edge...

JMPO


Chris
 
In my opinion, this is fine. A club, even a non-equity club, is like partnership. I see no problem sharing costs with other members of the club I belong to or my partners regardless of who's flying and who's sitting in back

The club doing the billing should be irrelevant.

As you know if you take my opinion to Starbucks with $5 you can get a cup of coffee with a name you can't pronounce.

Joe
 
Hiperbiper said:
Who the hell is going to tell?:yikes:

Sometimes you just gotta' live on the Edge...

JMPO


Chris
Click to expand...
Since ignorance is not a defense anyway (even though it may be bliss), it usually makes sense to understand the rule before deciding that it's okay to violate it.

;)
 
Ron Levy said:
Common purpose, pilot paying no less than pro rata share -- sounds kosher to me.
Click to expand...

Okay, it seems we all agree so far (astounding! :goofy:).

Now, the first twist: Let's say the club members each get their first $x of flying each month free by virtue of a "flying credit" that is technically part of each member's monthly dues (that they pay whether they actually fly $x worth or not).

Now, let's say Pilot A already flew this month and used up his flying credit, but pilot B didn't, so will use his flying credit towards this flight. Let's say Pilot B is the PIC, and is thus "paying less".

Still good?

Keep in mind that the flying credit *is* something that is paid for by every member, and which flight it applies to is not specified - It is simply $x deduction from the flight time costs at the end of the month. (For that matter, is the flying credit itself even technically legal?)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Now, the first twist: Let's say the club members each get their first $x of flying each month free by virtue of a "flying credit" that is technically part of each member's monthly dues (that they pay whether they actually fly $x worth or not).

Now, let's say Pilot A already flew this month and used up his flying credit, but pilot B didn't, so will use his flying credit towards this flight. Let's say Pilot B is the PIC, and is thus "paying less".

Still good?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I'm lost. Let's just say that as long as nobody complains to the FAA, it won't matter, and leave it there.
 
The ONLY way I could see something like this even raising an eyebrow would be if some person, NOT a pilot or member of the club, got a bill from the club for their "share" and later complained to the FAA that the flight was an illegal charter. Not gonna happen (or count) in a club where everyone by virtue of their membership clearly knows better.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Since ignorance is not a defense anyway (even though it may be bliss), it usually makes sense to understand the rule before deciding that it's okay to violate it.
Click to expand...

And I'm thinking of stealing that for a tagline! It should at least be in the quotes list.
 
Ron Levy said:
Sorry, I'm lost. Let's just say that as long as nobody complains to the FAA, it won't matter, and leave it there.
Click to expand...

I wish I could!

Another thing that I was told by a certain person today was this:

Let say there is a pilot Bob, who has a friend Ted. Bob says to Ted "Hey Ted, I'm flying to a pancake breakfast in Oshkosh on Saturday, do you
want to ride along and share expenses?", this is legal. Where as if Ted
says to Bob "Hey Bob, I heard there is a pancake breakfast in Oshkosh on
Saturday, do you want to fly and share expenses?", this is NOT legal. It
is also NOT legal if Bob says after the flight "Hey I think we should
share expenses".
Click to expand...

True? :dunno:
 
TMetzinger said:
The ONLY way I could see something like this even raising an eyebrow would be if some person, NOT a pilot or member of the club, got a bill from the club for their "share" and later complained to the FAA that the flight was an illegal charter. Not gonna happen (or count) in a club where everyone by virtue of their membership clearly knows better.
Click to expand...

In the event we have a significant other come along, the pilot would just be billed for both of them. I don't think anyone else would be allowed to come along or the club would run out of planes.
 
Let say there is a pilot Bob, who has a friend Ted. Bob says to Ted "Hey Ted, I'm flying to a pancake breakfast in Oshkosh on Saturday, do you
want to ride along and share expenses?", this is legal. Where as if Ted
says to Bob "Hey Bob, I heard there is a pancake breakfast in Oshkosh on
Saturday, do you want to fly and share expenses?", this is NOT legal. It
is also NOT legal if Bob says after the flight "Hey I think we should
share expenses".
Click to expand...
I don't agree with that but it is so confusing I'm having trouble saying why.

The way I see it the illegal situation (under part 91) is if I say "Hey Kent, I'm going to Oshkosh and you can ride with me IF you pay your share of expenses"

If we go to for a flight and afterward I say, "would you please pay your share", or "Hey I think we should share expenses". I really don't see the problem. The only repercussion for saying "Stick it in your ear Joe, if you expected money from me you were delusional" (many revisions to eliminate *'s), is that I don't offer you another ride along, I don't see a problem.

Joe
 
Areeda said:
I don't agree with that but it is so confusing I'm having trouble saying why.

The way I see it the illegal situation (under part 91) is if I say "Hey Kent, I'm going to Oshkosh and you can ride with me IF you pay your share of expenses"

...

Joe
Click to expand...

I think that situation is perfectly legal. You're going regardless.
 
Back to basics:
  1. The pilot must have a common purpose for the flight with the expense-sharing passenger.
  2. The pilot must pay at least his pro rata share of the direct expenses of the flight.
  3. The pilot cannot "hold out" an offer of air transportation for money to the public.
As far as Bob and Ted are concerned, there is no problem unless Ted complains to the FAA about the flight, in which case Bob is probably screwed on whatever it was that scared Ted, regardless of the 61.113 issues.
 
Can I ask something a bit different, since this has been raised?

I've had a pilot friend in between planes ask me to fly him somewhere and he would pay for the cost of the trip. (He had a plane like mine and know what it costs to operate.)
Of course, I know this doesn't work and told him I couldn't work it out then. He owned a company before, had a corporate pilot that flew him around. Under what conditions could I fly him? I have a commercial certificate. Can I fly him as an employee of his company? In my plane or his? I guess I'm asking how I could legally fly him around. He could afford to jigger things around if need be, but I have no idea if it's worth me fooling with or whether I even want to get into it if it can be worked out. Of course, my insurance wouldn't cover a commercial flight either.

Sorry if this is thread creep Kent.

Best,

Dave
 
With a commercial cert, he can certainly hire you to fly him in HIS airplane, or any other airplane HE provides. He's the operator, you're the pilot.

He can't hire you to fly him in YOUR airplane, as that makes you a commercial passenger-carrying operator. Now, you might be able to lease your airplane to him, or make him a co-owner, and then he can hire you to fly.

As long as you're providing pilot services only to an operator under part 91, you're fine with a commercial certificate. When the operator starts carrying people or freight for hire, then they need the appropriate certificate too.
 
Last edited:
Dave Siciliano said:
I've had a pilot friend in between planes ask me to fly him somewhere and he would pay for the cost of the trip. (He had a plane like mine and know what it costs to operate.)
Of course, I know this doesn't work and told him I couldn't work it out then. He owned a company before, had a corporate pilot that flew him around. Under what conditions could I fly him? I have a commercial certificate. Can I fly him as an employee of his company? In my plane or his? I guess I'm asking how I could legally fly him around. He could afford to jigger things around if need be, but I have no idea if it's worth me fooling with or whether I even want to get into it if it can be worked out. Of course, my insurance wouldn't cover a commercial flight either.
Click to expand...

He can hire you to fly HIS plane. If you provide pilot AND airplane, it's part 135 with all the mess that comes along with that. I don't really see a way around it. Duck test and all, ya know!

Sorry if this is thread creep Kent.
Click to expand...

No prob Dave, I was wondering how on earth we kept a thread on a single subject for so long! :rofl:
 
Thanks guys! That just confirms what I thought and I don't want to get into the 135 stuff. So, I can fly his plane or he can ride where I'm going anyway and chip in a pro rata share, but he can't direct where the flight heads and pay of it. Sounds good to me.

Best,

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top