18/10/07 - News section
Military helicopter crew 'wrecked conservatory by flying down to ogle sunbathing au pair'
by EMILY ANDREWS
A military helicopter destroyed the conservatory of a £1.75 million mansion when its pilot swooped too low to look at a sunbathing au pair, a court heard yesterday.
The four servicemen flying the Merlin helicopter were said to have dropped to 500ft or lower for the "frolic" in July.
The house's owners claim the downdraught from the aircraft seriously damaged the 23ft-high glass conservatory, leaving it needing to be replaced.
Barry and Anna George, who own The Old Stables in Eastbourne, East Sussex, are claiming £250,000 in damages plus legal costs.
The Ministry of Defence denies all liability in the case.
Their barrister, Daniel Crowley, told a preliminary hearing at the High Court in London that the helicopter dropped to 500ft so the crew could "communicate" with the au pair.
He said the crew was not given permission to fly at under 1,000ft and that "their own regulations say they should not have been flying low over a built-up area of Eastbourne".
Mr Crowley claimed that when the MoD Merlin - which is 75ft long and weighs 14tons - flew over the mansion on the afternoon of July 23, 2004, the downdraught from its rotors damaged the conservatory's glass roof.
This left it leaking and, he said, "pretty much most of it" needed to be replaced.
Mr Crowley told the judge that Mr and Mrs George's home - which has two other houses attached - was valued at £1.75 million at the time of the incident.
Around 50 per cent of the roof of the property - which has a floor-space of 7,000 square feet - is made up of "steel and aluminium double glazed glass panels" and is highly visible from the air, Mr Crowley said.
He added that the conservatory had won an architectural prize in 2000.
The eight-day case, to start in February, is likely to generate hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal costs.
If the MoD loses the taxpayer will have to pick up the bill.
The judge, Jonathan Foster QC, described the incident as an "alleged frolic".
Conceding that suggesting the damage was caused as a result of a frolic gone wrong was a "serious allegation", Mr Crowley said he would seek to develop the point during cross-examination.
He said there was an issue as to whether "those piloting the aircraft were deliberately flying at a low height for fun".
"They have got this expensive equipment, it's fun to fly and, rather than just sit around, they want to fly it," Mr Crowley added.
But James Maxwell-Scott, for the MoD, insisted a 'helicopter flying at 500ft or above simply could not have caused the damage'.
He added that although, "technically", permission needed to be granted for flying the helicopter at under 1,000ft, a chart the pilot was using did not indicate that he needed it and that he 'felt he could fly down to 500ft'.
Central to the case is a piece of equipment on the Merlin which measures the height at which the helicopter is flying.
That was not working at the time.
Find this story at
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=488401&in_page_id=1770©2007 Associated New Media