How about when the students are sick or no-shows.
Disclaimer, I don't know anything about this particular school and keep an open mind, some people just don't have what it takes to be a pilot no matter how many hors they fly and there are always two sides to these stories...but how many flying schools are going to tell them that before squeezing 150 grand out of the feds on their behalf? I've heard of some places that will charge their account for the full lesson anyway and the student doesn't care as it's not "their" money. One friend, who worked at one of the many big schools that had VET approval then collapsed in a heap and left instructors unpaid and students with a big debt and not even a logbook to show for it despite this manna from heaven, said a huge chunk of that taxpayers' money goes in these "no show" fees.
Literally, money for nothing for the flying school.
Good to hear there is scrutiny bearing in mind the stories of the rorts when these loans first came in. For schools that don't want to do this kind of bulk training it is difficult to compete with what students perceive as "free" training and I would have probably fallen for it too, you can't blame the students who think they have found an easy cheap short cut, the marketing hook.
I think there is a place for government help, but it should be for people already in industry with a good employment track record to upgrade with ratings etc. Does having an endless supply of fugly CPLs really do anything to reduce the so-called shortage?
Final question, The stories of this fellow being sacked for making a suggestion that the boss try using different aircraft, surely there is a bit more to it than that?
This is all interesting to me because when people make reports like that in the national media a bit of mud sticks to all flying schools.