Thanks for the reply LB, sorry if my style is frustrating and/or seems stupid to you.
There was a great comment made in RRAT sub #70 on the SAFA appeals issue.
RRAT Submission #70 (PDF)
Originally Posted by Sub #70 (page 2)
CASA’s remedy “for members” - Part 149
At the Senate RRAT Estimates hearing 20th October 2020, Dr Aleck for CASA said in response to questions from Senator Patrick said:
“Under Part 149, if a person has one of their authorisations suspended or varied by RAAus they can chal- lenge that. That decision can be referred to CASA, and CASA reviews that decision, and CASA’s decision on that is reviewable in the AAT. Previously RAAus members did not have that option. If they lost their authori- sation as a result of a decision of RAAus, they had no recourse through the tribunals; they would have to go to court and claim unfairness of some sort”
However, in adoption of RAAus’s Part 149 the principle of “justice delayed is justice denied” is realised as a person that is the subject of a suspension or variation of an authorisation will be put through a process that is considerably longer than the process a CASA licenced pilot without the protections afforded in the legislation or CASA’s policies and procedures.
As for the risk issue. I suppose I'm hoping the issue can be seen as: unlawfully suspended for no reason = administrative error = any actions done were essentially while still "licenced". I fear you will laugh at this idea. So be it :)
PS. Whatever does happen, good, bad, or ugly - CASA will seek to use it as a reason to stonewall their review of my Part 149 paperwork!!