I am wary, being medically unqualified, of challenging a professional's judgement in that regard (probability analysis) - but I have to say from the moment I read the letter I had doubts about how that specific conclusion was reached. The whole thing feels 'fudged'. It could just be down to the possibility that not all of the decision making process is disclosed to the applicant (me), but my experiences with the CAA have left me cynical enough to not be so naive as to expect a thoroughly fair and professional process every time.
I sincerely doubt the same level of ambiguity will be acceptable in my appeal.
One thing that did catch my attention is that in their letter, the assessor states they are basing their decision to make me unfit partly on my failure to disclose my issues earlier (back when I wasn't flying). This hardly seems fair. I sincerely doubt the risk of relapse of my previous symptoms and therefore the risk of incapacitation (which is what fit/unfit decisions are based on) has anything to do with how quickly I disclosed my symptoms. I understand failing to disclose the issues in a timely manner was a mistake (albeit an unintentional and certainly not malicious one) and in contravention of the regulations associated with my medical certificate, but surely tying that in to the question of medical fitness is absurd?
The CAA's process just fills me with confidence.
