charging $ for part 91

[bell47]

What if an FBO, that has a couple of rental aircraft, rents one to a non-pilot individual and then that individual in turn hires a qualified pilot to fly him and his dog from point a to b in this rented aircraft? Now the pilot does NOT work for the FBO but does meet the open insurance policy to act as PIC of said rental aircraft and has previously been checked out in the airplane. The non-pilot renter pays the FBO and the pilot seperately when he and his dog get back from his point "b" trip. The pilot and the FBO are seperate and neither advertise as any sort of charter service. The FBO just says we rent aircraft if you are qualified, or have a qualified person flying you. The pilot just by word of mouth says he will fly you in your aircraft or one that you can use for say $50 bucks an hour. The FBO, when asked about pilots says they don't provide pilots just airplane rental, although we can give you the names of some of our happy rental customers to see who flew them. The previous customers gladly give out the pilots name and phone number. talk about 134 1/2!

 

[Seat 0A]

Just fly passenger X from A to B at no charge.

When you get to B agree to drive X from the FBO to his hotel (and carry his bags) for a sum that is fair (I would say an amount greater than the flight cost plus 20%, you are an exceptionally good driver after all ).

Report your "limo driver" income to the IRS and all is well.

 

[avbug]

I spell the word one way because that's how I've always typed it, and couldn't give a damn. I add the spelling I do here for the benifit of TonyC, who is no longer here, as he was the spelling cop among us. He still gives me grief elsewhere. Nothing to do with saving face, nothing to do with you, and clearly you're still not prepared, nor capable, of providing something useful to this thread.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

I spell the word one way because that's how I've always typed it, and couldn't give a dang. I add the spelling I do here for the benifit of TonyC, who is no longer here, as he was the spelling cop among us. He still gives me grief elsewhere. Nothing to do with saving face, nothing to do with you, and clearly you're still not prepared, nor capable, of providing something useful to this thread.

Thanks for playing.

ahhhh.....

Nevermind.

 

[climbhappy]

quote: opinions at the FSDOs carry no weight.

well, they do if they're your POI. i have played the game.

quote: Now, there is avery dangerous and ignorant false statement.

i believe in real world politics not theory. there aren't enough POIs to go around , never has been. they have two base inspections a year to check the box and look at the files. otherwise , you never see them. oversight is carefully monitoring an operation with daily or weekly presence. this never happens. that's why guys are forced to fly broke airplanes for fear of losing their jobs. mainly at the bottom feeders than operate 20 to 30 old king airs, piston, etc.

quote: that was funny , but can you say that with a straight face.

yep, proving a case in court , when it comes to proof for what that flight was or who it was for is hard. you sound very informed and respect that, but i'm drawing on real world experience with many FSDOs in the southeast. even worked for a frim that operated 10 turboprops.

my POI once said , there is alot "gray" area in the regs for good reason. as long as it isn't in your GOM, we don't care. the debate for charging people money is endless. the "acid test" has been and always will be, "are you holding yourself out to the public?"

i did want to play some more and this is all i can contribute. have a merry and safe christmas to you all.

 

[avbug]

quote: opinions at the FSDOs carry no weight.

well, they do if they're your POI. i have played the game.

Your POI has no authority to interpret the regulation and is bound by both the regulation, any legal interpretations thereof by the regional or chief legal counsel, and preambles to the federal register. These are defensible, and you may rely on them fully when dealing with your POI...the POI has no flexibility there. Being tactful about it is another matter.

my POI once said , there is alot "gray" area in the regs for good reason. as long as it isn't in your GOM, we don't care. the debate for charging people money is endless. the "acid test" has been and always will be, "are you holding yourself out to the public?"

Your POI, of course, was wrong, as the regulations aren't grey, just misunderstood. The regulation is intended to be changable and adaptable with time as circumstances change and new issues arise. For this reason we continually see notices of proposed rule making as changes occur. For this reason we continue to see establishments of policy through legal interpretations. What is usually lacking is effort on the part of individuals, including frequent failures at the FSDO level, to understand the regulation and put in the effort required.

The acid test is not about holding yourself out to the public, as one may hold out if one doesn't charge...one may offer to transport someone else if not for compensation or hire. One may hold out to do that. The acid test is really dependent upon the circumstances, and too few variables for a given flight have been discussed here. One may hold out. One may not hold out for compensation when taking someone or something from A to B. One may not shell out one dollar shares in an aircraft and circumvent the regulation...ample legal interpretation exists on that count to completely dismiss the idea.

Not discussed here yet are other issues such as an approved drug testing program, etc. What has been brought up, and is irrelevant, is what the IRS has to say on the matter. The issue of what you can take, with respect to the FAA, is purely an issue of what you're allowed to do as a pilot and operator given your specific operation.

 

[Princedietrich]

If you are afraid of the flying/working conditions and want the FAA to intervene, just grab the phone and call them. I'm sure there's at least one phone at your base or FBO.

 

[CaptainSpaz]

If you are afraid of the flying/working conditions and want the FAA to intervene, just grab the phone and call them. I'm sure there's at least one phone at your base or FBO.

Indeed!

Or on the flip side: If you are looking for guidance on how to bend/break the rules that you know to be true - don't go asking the FAA for it! Just go do it and get yourself a good aviation attorney to attempt to back you up.

 

[falcondrivr]

91.501 was what i was looking for. thanks guys.
and amish, get a hobby.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

91.501 was what i was looking for. thanks guys.
and amish, get a hobby.

Thanks, but I won't get into the "why" of it as it accomplishes nothing. It spilled over from another thread which I felt to be futile to dispute. Suffice it to say that others around here enjoy making unprovoked attacks when someone offers opinion. Just a taste of ones own medicine.

Sorry if it disrupted your thread. I do need some new hobbies in general though.

Happy New Year.