Blackpool council are trying to include drones in their PSPO against anti social behaviour

May have to get the Blackbelt Barrister on side for this one

1 Like

looks like they haven’t created the PSPO yet

note some of them date from 2019 and appear not to have been extended, but the one on dog fouling has been extended at least twice with the last one from early dec 2023… so I’m guessing that the website is upto date.

its interesting reading section 59 of the act
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/12/section/59/enacted

and trying to work out how or if they had reasonable grounds and that could be used in a s66 appeal

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/12/section/66/enacted

Perhaps off topic a bit but as a resident of Blackpool the menace of electric scooters in the South Shore area in particular is a proper issue.

Never heard of any issue with drones at all. Of course police bottle doing anything with these idiots in case they get a scratch or killed in a chase. Doubt whether council would get involved with something with no end product so will go for easy targets like drones.

Actually I have seen as many mature(?!) adults as kids contravening the law with these potential death traps. Every time I go out in the car these days the odds are one will appear out of nowhere.

I was blinded couple of days ago by an electric scooter at 9pm driving down centre of a busy main road. It had 6 very high powered lights on the front in 2 columns of 3 and of course not dipped! So anyone in the way totally blinded.

Has anyone ever heard of an electric scooter rider appearing in court and getting any come uppance? More likely to end up in a coffin.

Again a bit off topic but these “auditor” idiots who insist on flying drones for no reason other than simply to wind people up and have a run in with the police to practice their “alleged legal expertise” unfortunately provide plenty of ammunition to multiple agencies to get our hobby further heavily restricted.

Rant over for now.

I will be doing the survey!

No mention of drones ( so far )

The sign is located in an area I’ve previously flown the Mini2 from ( it was a quiet day when I did it )

I came across two today in London and I think they are more worried about ASB than Joe Bloggs the hobbyist and their drone.

interesting topic this.

Yep, like the twat recently who thought it would be a good idea to fly over and around an upper tier COMAH site. :roll_eyes: :face_with_symbols_over_mouth:

That is good news, I have been away since 31 December, just got back, I will be looking out for these signs around Blackpool but I figure if they have posted these around town then drones are not included, will have a look around Stanley Park and see if any different signs are posted.

I couldn’t agree more - the Youtube DJE Media guy needs to get a life, get into photography or some other past time instead of creating total havoc for responsible flyers able to empathise with anyone less familiar with the CAA

1 Like

As does DJ Audits and many more of these so called Frauditors :wink::wink:

yeah i don’t like that bloke at all
but I’m slit on the topic on 1 hand I hate how they draw unwanted attention to our drone hobby scene but on the other hand they actually teach the police about the laws regarding being allowed to fly so kind of make it easier if we get approached.

Is it the publics job to educate police officers about the law and display it on YT or social media?

If I am ever approached by a police officer who does not fully understand drone law I will educate him/her in a non confrontational way and keep it between them and me, I don’t need some so called auditor to speak on my behalf.

1 Like

Hmmmm, dunno about that Chip, most auditors seem to take the aggressive- wind up approach. The, “I’m not bothered what you say, I’m sending the drone up.” attitude. It bothers me that they post their stuff on YouTube and is seen by thousands of people, some of whom may take what the auditor says as gospel ( even though that may not actually be true, specially nowadays as we have the National Security Act to contend with ) Most of them seem to revel in provoking a response from security guards / police and none of them are actually experts in the Laws of the land ( specially the auditors ) :wink::wink:

Blimey, as someone who spends a fair amount of time in the area - that’s a surprise to me. It’s also complete absurd:

The use of unauthorised drones[1] is increasing and has been seen to be taking place on many open spaces within the borough[2]. If not properly controlled[3], drones could cause serious injury and harm, as well as causing a nuisance to the public[4].

  1. What constitutes an “unauthorised drone”?
    The requirement for authorisation arises from the PSPO itself, and therefore this could not have been an issue prior to the adoption of the PSPO.
  2. What metrics are available describing the increase in “unauthorised drones” and how were they gathered?
    Given the alleged severity of the problem necessitates the introduction of a PSPO, it would be reasonable to expect that Community Protection Notices (CPN) have previously been employed against individuals partaking in particularly troublesome behaviour? Likewise, are the observed occurences enough to justify a PSPO enforced across the entire borough as a proportionate measure?
  3. What is a “properly controlled” drone?
    Given an individual with a drone who is complying with their obligations as laid out within existing legislation, how could their behaviour lead to serious “injury and harm” - and have TBMC made representations with the CAA to highlight the apparent gaps within existing legislation?
  4. An operator who is causing a nuisance to the public is, by definition, already in breach of existing legislation.
    The “Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022” covers the exact scenario where an individual is failing to comply with legislation, and as a result endangers others or causes them discomfort.

I can also think of two places (Walderslade Woods/Taddington Valley) where I would be bound by the PSPO on one side of a footpath, but not the other. Similarly, I can think of other sites (i.e. Blue Bell Hill) where one could reasonably visit, inspect all available signage, and operate their drone without any knowledge of the PSPO - therefore being liable to a fine despite acting reasonably.

I’ll concede I’m being a bit of a snooty ass with some of my points; but this just reeks of a cash-grab devised by pompous local officials who have no real understanding of existing legislation, nor of the Home Office guidance on how PSPO’s should be implemented. I’m sure similar arguments can be made against the Blackpool PSPO too.

Hi @Cynical, it looks as though you’re quite new here :wave:t2:

Why not nip over to the Introductions page, and say hello properly and tell us a bit about yourself. :+1:t2:

Hi @Cynical , I reckon the Blackbelt Barrister would have a field day with Tonbridge and Malling Council :wink::wink:

Hi Cynical,
Keep in touch and diaryise when it’s for renewal , which it has to be every 3 years. We need a concerted effort to raise sufficient objections prior to that date as there is only a very limited time to challenge it and if not then stuck with it for another 3 years, other members please add your support.
Maxpower (DaveM).

Received the Blackpool Council e newsletter which refers to the new PSPO, no mention of drones :+1:

4 Likes