Yet another sad flight training story!
Without mentioning any names (not the purpose of this thread) I recently learned of a group of students who seem to have been completely conned by their flight school.
A Modular training EASA ATO based USA, contracts signed middle of last year, zero to CPL/IR for $98,000 (part of training conducted in Europe), yes not a misprint, $98,000!! The incredible part - full payment upfront required and made by several students!! Terms, if cancelled at any time you lose 50%, all housing costs for the term of the original contract are charged, all training to date adjusted to full retail price.....bottom line you might get 10% back if you are lucky. From what I understand, one student spent 12 months for the PPL and 30 hours time building, visa ran out had to leave - probably most expensive PPL ever.
Can it still be possible for young men and women to be so insulated from facts and reality that schools can still get away with this? - I suppose I can answer my own question, YES it seems.
What I find sad is that such practices are not being exposed on this or any other forum as far as I can see by the students, they are likely too scared to do so and are worried about possible consequences? I guess if I had paid such a huge sum of money I would stay quiet in the desperate hope I might get finished and get a licence.
It serves no purpose either to call this company out and end up with a slagging match on this Forum - I think only the students would be entitled to do this anyway using first hand knowledge - I personally detest the concept of an anonymous slagging contest as it can often be abused by competitors.
So why mention it?, well it gives me one more opportunity to say to any new students reading this - DON'T DO IT. - don't pay large sums upfront and vote with your feet if you are not happy with the school.
Last question, especially for those seasoned veterans who contribute to this forum, do you think there is a possibility of successfully lobbying the authorities to pass a Regulation to prohibit approved ATO's from taking more than say 25% of a course costs upfront? Anybody agree with me this could be a good way of protecting the good schools and students in the future and make the industry a better place?