VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-15-2011, 06:17 PM
dabney dabney is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: valencia, ca
Posts: 207
Default Sharing expenses-what is legal?

I think all Private pilots know and are tested on the privileges of the Private Pilot certificate. Simply put, I was always told that a private pilot is allowed to have passengers pay their pro-rata share of expenses such as fuel.

My cousin just took his PVT pilot checkride yesterday. He was asked by the examiner this hypothetical question: "your friend asks you to fly him someplace so he can attend a meeting. can the pilot accept the friend's offer of paying for his 1/2 of the fuel bill?" My cousin said "Yes". the examiner said WRONG! Since the friend was going someplace on "business" the friend could not pay for anything. The examiner claimed that only if the flight is for "fun" can the PAX pay their share. I never heard of such a distinction. Was the examiner correct?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-15-2011, 06:35 PM
John Clark's Avatar
John Clark John Clark is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,324
Default The legal view

Because there have been many interpretations and rulings over the years, here is the "long answer" from the AOPA:

http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pi...92/pc9207.html

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-15-2011, 06:40 PM
Pave Tim Pave Tim is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Out West!
Posts: 80
Default

The examiner was correct. It was a business flight. Some examiners even consider flight time as "compensation"


61.113
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-15-2011, 07:40 PM
N546RV's Avatar
N546RV N546RV is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Brookshire, TX
Posts: 1,036
Default

An important factor which was mentioned in the AOPA link above is the purpose of the flight. Basically, if the main reason you're making the flight is to have a paying passenger along, you're treading on thin ice.

If I call my friend up, tell him I'm in the mood for a burger this weekend, and ask if he wants to come along and split the rental cost, that's fine. If my friend calls up and asks if I'll fly him somewhere if he pays half the rental, that's quite different.

My personal approach is to not obligate anyone to pay me if we go for a burger run or something. If they want to chip in, great, if not, well, it's worth the money to me just to get in the air. Better safe than sorry.
__________________
Philip
-8 fuselage in progress (remember when I thought the wing kit had a lot of parts? HAHAHAHAHA)
http://rv.squawk1200.net
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-15-2011, 07:50 PM
MeGiron MeGiron is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 81
Default Charter Flight

Everyone's pretty much nailed it.

This flight would be a charter flight subject to the rules of part 135.

The ol' business gotcha!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-16-2011, 07:39 AM
Snowflake's Avatar
Snowflake Snowflake is online now
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 3,932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N546RV View Post
My personal approach is to not obligate anyone to pay me if we go for a burger run or something. If they want to chip in, great, if not, well, it's worth the money to me just to get in the air. Better safe than sorry.
My general rule is that the pilot pays for the flight, and the passenger buys lunch. That way, the passenger gets to contribute, but rarely if ever pays out half the cost of the flight... So very little chance of running afoul of the regs.
__________________
Rob Prior
1996 RV-6 "Tweety" C-FRBP (formerly N196RV)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-16-2011, 09:12 AM
tadsargent's Avatar
tadsargent tadsargent is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 307
Default

The word "Meeting" is ambiguous since he did not specify a "business" meeting of sorts. The examiner incorrectly wondered around the point. Possibilities abound here. I can think of hundreds of other meetings that I attend that are not business. If I am going to a lunch meeting with my pals I can fly you there and it not be considered a business proposition. In FAA speak was there a "Profit Motive"? I did not see one in the example given.

AA has "Meetings" does that count?

The examiner was using too much latitude in his questioning.

ASEL/COMM

Last edited by tadsargent : 03-16-2011 at 09:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:18 AM
Auburntsts's Avatar
Auburntsts Auburntsts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tadsargent View Post
The word "Meeting" is ambiguous since ....
Based on my understanding of the FARs, I think you're missing the point. The key to the FAA's position is not that the passenger is attending a meeting, it's the fact that the passenger asked to be flown there when the pilot had no plans to fly there themselves. IOW, The reason for going to a particular destination is immaterial: it could be for a meeting, a lunch, sporting event, etc. The bottom line is if you as the pilot aren't already flying to that destination, you can't ask for compensation, pro rata or otherwise.
__________________
Todd "I drink and know things" Stovall
PP ASEL-IA
RV-10 N728TT - Flying!
WAR EAGLE!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:29 AM
fl-mike's Avatar
fl-mike fl-mike is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,347
Default

Hmmm, how about this scenario (that was a possiblity for me last week):
You are going from central FL to TN and someone (not knowing this) asks if you might be able to fly them to GA to meet some friends. It's not directly on your planned route, but not a huge deviation (at RV speeds). Can they share expenses?
__________________
Mike W
Venice, FL
RV-6A. Mattituck TMX O-360, FP, GRT Sport EFIS, L3 Lynx NGT-9000
N164WM
N184WM reserved (RV-8)....finishing kit in progress. Titan IOX-370
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:37 AM
John Clark's Avatar
John Clark John Clark is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,324
Default Compensation

Quote:
Originally Posted by tadsargent View Post
The word "Meeting" is ambiguous since he did not specify a "business" meeting of sorts. The examiner incorrectly wondered around the point. Possibilities abound here. I can think of hundreds of other meetings that I attend that are not business. If I am going to a lunch meeting with my pals I can fly you there and it not be considered a business proposition. In FAA speak was there a "Profit Motive"? I did not see one in the example given.

AA has "Meetings" does that count?

The examiner was using too much latitude in his questioning.

ASEL/COMM
"Profit motive" is the question here, and even though the examiner's question may have been little clumsy, it was on point. The catch is that the only reason the pilot in the example was taking the flight was to get some half-price flying. Which in FAA speak is "compensation," a no-no for a private pilot or anyone in an experimental aircraft. In fact, as an ATP, I couldn't do it unless I operating on a 135 certificate. The flip side is that if the pilot in question was going to attend the "meeting" and took a co-worker along, it is all legal.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.