Cadet/NCO Car sharing

Hello, (kinda new to this forum thing so please bare with me)

I am curious to whether there are any official rules regarding cadet ncos giving lifts to cadets to/from the squadron and/or other events outside of the squadron yet still cadet related. I have been unable to find any information online concerning this topic within ACPs.
So here are my questions:
Are NCOs allowed to give other cadets/ncos car lifts? -Does it differ between giving a lift to a cadet and nco
Is it a matter of the age (e.g the driver is 18+ and the passenger is -16, would it be deemed inappropriate)?
If no, would it be a matter of insurance? - What type insurance would be required
Please may I have a link to the ACP relating to this topic if there is one, or any other source of information?

In addition please may this be factual and not a matter of opinion as I would love to be able to get this issue sorted on the squadron. Primarily asking this as there have been issues within my squadron recently, and no one knows the rules (if there are any)


I would say this is a very grey area actually.

If a cadet offers another a lift to Squadron then there isn’t really an issue. Likewise if two cadets are going to the same event and the lift is organised independent of the squadron.

If however transport is being provided to an event by the squadron, then all the rules about insurance over, DBS, etc come into play.

My own rules are that cadets shouldn’t transport as part of an organised activity transport plot as very few will have appropriate insurance (business cover etc) and with the age of cadets I wouldn’t class them as being experienced enough - the question would I let my child go with them would come into play.

In terms of rules, not sure that most staff are 100% in compliance 100% of the time either.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What if the cadet had parental consent for an NCO to give their child a lift, would the squadron be allowed to get involved and prevent this from happening or would the parents view over rule it?
Is this a grey subject area which would come under ‘CO’s discretion’ and would therefore vary from squadron to squadron?

Thanks your reply has been a really big help. :slight_smile:

I think you are effectively looking at 2 very different scenarios, in the first you are looking at cadets driving their friends to and from the Squadron for an activity which will take place at the Squadron (such as a parade evening). In that situation it’s nothing to do with the ATC as the activity doesn’t begin until they get to the Squadron and it ends before they depart.

In the second you are looking at cadets who drive taking cadets to an activity that has been arranged away from the unit, in this situation it would depend very much on when the activity begins. Now if you as a unit arrange the activity and tell the cadets that they must get themselves there, then it would be the same as the above. However if you as a Squadron arrange for the cadets to meet somewhere for onwards travel I would say that cadets would not be allowed to drive other cadets. My logic behind this being that once they have met up at a location specified by the ATC for travel arranged by the ATC then the ATC is responsible for them, as such the travel would need to form part of the risk assessment and they would need business insurance etc

I can’t find a hard and fast rule, but this seems logical based around the way we risk assess travel.

The rule I use in my head is similar to daws’.

If the meeting point has been arranged by squadron staff, it’s squadron travel and needs to follow the rules.
If the meeting point has been arranged between cadets, and the squadron staff don’t know or care, then it’s a private arrangement.

I believe the ACTOs related to AEF flying state that they must be escorted by adult staff or a suitable staff cadet, but I’ve not got chance to check right now.

This is yet another one of those things that has become a problem that never was before, because people in general got overly concerned about in a hurry and sought to solve a problem that didn’t really exist.

HQAC with their customary panache for such things invented policy to deal with it in the Corps context, but the fly in this ointment is parents and family members giving cadets lifts to things, without which us and similar organisations would all but cease to exist. My wife and I gave lifts to various youngsters when my son played football and he and my younger daughter were in a local athletics club. My wife has never had business insurance and I didn’t until around 12 years ago when I started using my own car for ocassional work travel. Around 5 years ago an older cadet left due to college work but his younger brother stayed in and he was a prolific and dependable lift provider in a typical teenager’s car. But he wasn’t a cadet anymore and doing us, like other cadets’ family members.

If it bothers you that much don’t offer lifts or ask older cadets to provide transport to events. You can always do a chapter and verse on Corps policy. But don’t get embroiled if they query parents etc giving lifts.

GHe2, where is this apparent HQAC policy you allude to?

There is a lot of misunderstanding with regards to insurance. Cadets who drive would not require business insurance themselves as they are not involved in anything that could be seen as some kind of employment/volunteer work. A CFAV would, depending on their insurance company, require business insurance as they would be using their vehicle for ‘work’ other than general commuting, and standard insurance only covers one place of work.

If you are arranging lifts from one location to another using cadets and/or parents, it could be said that you do have a degree of responsibility to the cadets, but if something happens I’m afraid business insurance will be absolutely no help!

You may have to have comprehensive insurance however, because someone at HQAC doesn’t understand how insurance works.

It would be interesting to get a poll added to this to see what rules different Squadrons have.

The whole Business Class insurance requirement is only relevant when you are being reimbursed by the MoD for use of your private vehicle so won’t ever affect Cadets as under current regulations/guidance the MoD will not accept any liabilty for Cadets driving themselves to/from activities regardless of age - and certainly not for carrying other Cadets.

Personally I would advise not to put Cadets in a position where they might be responsible for driving other Cadets and by that I mean if they wish to offer other Cadets a lift - and they accept - then that is a private matter between the Cadets involved but I would NEVER instruct or advise any Cadet to transport others in their private cars.

The one requiring fully comp with business use included for cadet activities, which although only required when in receipt of MMA, does imply it being a standard. My CWC regularly cover mileage at the going rate when it can’t be claimed officially and this will include staff, cadets and CWC and we don’t check what insurance people have.
Given how much this level of insurance can cost (I know that some companies add business at no extra) could mean that very few young staff (under 25) would have what would be reqarded as adequate cover for cadet activities. TPFT is bad enough and costs my kids a small fortune when you consider their cars.
Again the idea, I remember the email and letter coming out c8/9 years ago and the rumblings it caused, while probably well intended, was probably not thought through as it has some interesting spin-off consequences if actually tested.

However when all said and done if you are involved in an accident you claim against the person or the company with whom you are doing the activity. As such you wouldn’t claim against the ACO if you were in a road accident in a private car, or would you?
Would the ACO claim against you, can’t see how or why, but who knows.

Like all things transport wise you ask people to help, they volunteer and cadets just get in the cars. I’ve never said to anyone or had it said to me you will take cadets generally or specifically in a car.

I had that argument with a WgExO once. He read the old F1771 as requiring fully comprehensive insurance. This was never the case, which is why the new form says that vehicles have to be ‘insured comprehensively in accordance with ACP300’. The definition there is essentially akin to third party so that’s all you need.

The one requiring fully comp with business use included for cadet activities, which although only required when in receipt of MMA, does imply it being a standard. .[/quote]

14. Adequate Insurance Cover. It is the personal responsibility of an individual using his/her private motor vehicle (para 7 above refers) in respect of authorised Air Cadet activities to ensure that the vehicle insurance policy covers the risks set out below (which, notwithstanding the voluntary nature of the Air Cadet Organisation, will require insurance for occasional business use or as advised by the individual’s insurer) and has the following minimum cover:
a. Private Car Rate. Personnel using their private motor vehicle and claiming MMA at PCR in respect of authorised Air Cadet Activities are to be insured to a financial limit of not less than £10M against claims in respect of:
(1) Bodily injury to or death of third parties.
(2) Bodily injury to or death of any passenger.
(3) Damage to property of third parties.
b. Motorcycles. Personnel using solo motorcycles on authorised Air Cadet activities must be covered by at least third party insurance; it must be fully understood however, that the MOD accepts no responsibility in respect of risks not covered by the insurance policy.
15. Excess Policies. Insurance policies which provide only for cover in excess of a stipulated figure (excess policies), is to be clearly understood that any claim up to that amount will be the responsibility of the user. In no circumstances will public funds bear any payment in this connection. MOD accepts no responsibility in respect of risks not covered by an insurance policy of a member of the Corps.[/quote]
No implication there (my underlining). So, only when you are claiming travel back do you need to have the set isnurance rate. Outside of that, there is NO policy from HQAC which instructs otherwise that i can find.