Sounds like a straight fwd fraudulent claim to me that could have been challenged by the guys Insurance Company; or better still counter for causing an obstruction to the highway 
If flights are legal liability insurance should cover damage. As far as trespass is concerned the class of fines iaw the by-law is less than a parking charge and costs more for them to administer I fear. 
Im not 100% certain on this, but i was under the impression that they would have to return it if it came down, i thought i had read somewhere in the drone regulations of the multitude of the documents published by the CAA, and that it covered this exact scenario as over flight isn’t illegal, therefore the recovery of the aircraft is to be made possible by the land owner.
But i may be wrong.
Which right is that ?
No right at all. Only the appropriate authority can retain a drone if classed as evidence to a crime. Keeping the drone in any other circumstance would be classed as theft. Wish, I knew that when the mean neighbour wouldn’t give us our football back when it landed in his rose garden!
We are both correct. If your drone comes down on someone else’s property they have the right to seize it. But they then must return it. The law regarding trespass allows you to enter land belonging to someone else. but you must not do any damage and walking through a standing crop can be contrued as causing damage. Similarly a drone crashing into a flower bed could again be construed as causing damage. Heaven forbid if you hit one of the buildings. Its not what we as drone flyers consider to be damage its what the land owner considers to be damage.
Its not what you and I might think of as damage but its what the “injured party” ie in this case the National Trust considers to be damage.
I think we have now done this topic to death, so time to move on.
It’s been ongoing since like forever.
Every so often bits crop up and it comes to life, until there is a a change from them on their stupid stance (and understanding of the laws of the sky) or a proper test case where someone actually gets prosecuted for anything, I think we’ll leave the topic here
Yes you are correct .The land owner must return your property BUT what is in dispute is how long it takes them to return it . Should your drone have caused any damage and its not YOUR assessment of damage that matters here the Nat Trust will seize it and hold it to ransom until the cost of any “repairs” is met. I have seen the Nat Trust close up when they are attempting to recover costs for repairs to property. They have some of the most aggressive legal brains on board and they have much deeper pockets than you or I.
I think we have done this topic to death so time to move on.
I would go out flying but its belting down with rain as it has done for the last four weeks Time to build an Ark and gather up the animals two by two.
If I cause damage during a legal flight, I would let my liability insurance sort it. Doubt the NT would match my insurance companies endevours to keep as much as they can of the Millions I’m covered for!
Having said that, I am, and will always be, a member of the NT. I respect others and their use of their land and have many friends and family who volunteer and work for them.
I am also a Nat Trust member and have been for over fifty years and think as an organisation they do very valuable work but they are grossly inefficient and wasteful.
If you try to give them a property they demand a huge “dowry” to go with the gift.
Basically if a drone goes down on their land, they have to take steps to get it back (in conjunction with the owner).
Also:
[quote]
The finder of the lost property does not have any absolute ownership over the objects but does gain the right to keep it against all people other than (a) the true owner; (b) a person claiming through the true owner or; (c) someone who can prove prior right to the lost property.
The person who has the finders rights has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to find the true owner, state the current whereabouts of the item and care for it in the meantime.[/quote]
I regularly fly not over NT property but over CADW property which is like a Welsh NT . Love to photograph castles, They have a similar policy as the NT so I always send them a few copies of the photographs I take flying around and over the properties they manage together with a copy of the Drone Code and ask them to please update their policy to be more in line with the CAA. I have also on the CADW Facebook site placed one or two images of my over and around flights , but still no change to their policy, cheers Len
Perfect helipad 
It was the flatest thing around.
Ugh. Compass error potential!
Anyone for Jenga?
Next it will be the down thrust damaged the stones😂
Highly unlikely, as it will probably be a non-ferrous metal casting.
I was doing some filming at a castle last year (not NT). Was chatting to a member of staff over lunch and he told me they had a tourist rock up with a drone a few weeks before, They’d been buzzing over the roof, crashed in to a flag and come down on the top of a turret.
They then had the cheek to ask for the drone back, no word of an apology.
Apparently it was retrieved quite quickly… but by the time it reached its owner it was definitely not going to be flying again.
I won’t pretend I didn’t chuckle.
“Sorry sir, it fell down the stairs”
