Universal’s warning to drone operators around its Bedford site has prompted fresh debate over what the company can and cannot enforce, with aviation guidance making clear that a private developer cannot create its own no-fly zone.
As reported by the Bedford Independent last week, Universal Destinations & Experiences (UDX) published a cease-and-desist notice on its UK Project website and around the site after reporting low-altitude drone activity, with footage of workers being shared online.
The company says it is acting to protect the safety and welfare of people on site as activity increases.
Read: Universal warns drone operators to stay away from Bedford theme park site
What the notice does do
Universal’s formal notice says unauthorised drone flights over or near the site may lead to criminal or civil action.
- It refers to Article 241 of the Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2016, which makes it an offence to endanger people or property through reckless or negligent flying.
- It also warns that filming and publishing images of identifiable individuals may breach privacy and data protection rules.
- The company says operators must stop flying over or near the site, stop publishing footage in which workers can be identified, remove material already posted, and not carry out further flights without written permission.
It says activity is being monitored and recorded and could be passed to police or used in civil proceedings.
What it does not do
What the notice does not do is create a formal no-fly restriction.
- Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) guidance says people are allowed to fly some drones in towns, cities and commercial areas provided they follow the rules, including limits on height, proximity to people, privacy and restricted airspace.
- It also says concerns about dangerous flying or privacy should be reported to the police, while formally restricted airspace is regulated nationally, not by private landowners.
That means Universal’s notice may serve as a warning and as the basis for action where flights are unsafe, intrusive or persistent, but it does not by itself stop lawful drone operations in the wider area.
Discussions continue
That appears to be where the issue now sits.
Bedfordshire Police have said no formal offences had been reported, but confirmed discussions were ongoing around drones being flown over land earmarked for the Universal development.
From an operator perspective, FPV UK, a national drone users’ organisation, said flying over private land is not automatically unlawful.
A spokesperson said: “Flying a drone over private land does not, in itself, breach drone regulations… there is nothing within aviation law that prevents a drone from flying over private land.”
They added that notices like UDX’s “do not carry legal force in terms of aviation regulation”.
“Airspace is a national asset regulated by the CAA, and landowners do not have the authority to restrict access to it. Only the Secretary of State has the power to impose such restrictions,” the spokesperson said.
Meanwhile, CAA guidance states that organisations must apply to the Department for Transport to introduce formal airspace restrictions.
Referring to the ANO 2016, the guidance said drone operators must not act in a way that “recklessly or negligently” endangers people or property.
It also sets out distance rules, including that drones weighing more than 250g should not be flown within 50 metres of people, while lighter drones can be flown closer in some circumstances, although not over crowds.
Universal, for its part, says the information it published “accurately reflect[s] the legal position” and is intended to deter unsafe low-altitude flying and the inappropriate sharing of footage online.
In a statement to Bedford Independent, a spokesperson for Universal Destinations and Experiences said it was
“Safety is our priority on the project site, and the notice and website are intended to deter unsafe low-altitude drone activity and the inappropriate recording and publication of footage of individuals online.
“Drone operators are responsible for ensuring they comply with the law.”
In practice, that leaves a gap between what is currently enforceable and what Universal would clearly prefer.
The company can rely on existing aviation, privacy and civil law where specific behaviour crosses the line, but any watertight blanket restriction would need to come through a formal airspace process rather than a site notice alone.
CAA guidance makes clear that concerns about dangerous drone flying should be reported to police on 101, or to 999 if there is an immediate danger to life.
Wider message
The row also reflects a broader tension already picked up in the Bedford Independent’s Bedford Ian column last week.
Read: Bedford Ian writes… (13 March 2026)
As shown in Facebook groups following the site’s progress, most responsible drone users follow the rules.
But all it takes is a handful of reckless flights near an active site for the debate to shift from online arguments about rights to real questions about worker safety, privacy, and whether tighter restrictions may eventually follow.
Additional reporting by John Guinn,
Local Democracy Reporter
Update: This article was updated on 17 March 2026 at 18:45 to include a quote from Universal Destinations and Experiences.
