Response to Lead Balloon Post #2041
Lead Balloon, in regard to your question,
“I seek just 1 clarification. You said in your most recent post:
"One member had already been approved formally by CASA through a significant change process."
This is very important. Did CASA write a piece of paper that said "Member X is approved to conduct flying training" or something like that?
Or did CASA write a piece of paper that said APTA is approved to conduct flying training using Member X's resources at Member X's location" or something like that?
It is very important to understand who was "approved".
The way in which Member X is "approved" to conduct flying training is that it is issued an AOC/Part 12X certificate.
The way in which APTA is "approved" to conduct flying training using Member X's resources at Member X's location is that APTA gets the approval (maybe a variation to its certificate?).
There can't be a half pregnant world in which an entity has an "approval" to conduct flying training but not an AOC/Part 12X certificate authorising it.”
Lead Balloon, I understand the point of your question. I am trying to cast my mind back 5 years now, and I cannot be assured that my response is correct. I will make an FOI request for the certificate that CASA issued and on receipt I will be able to post it and answer correctly. My recollection is that it stated the Member could conduct training under the APTA approval, in accordance with our procedures. Please standby, and I will update upon receipt. Regarding your second query.
“ASIC shows the current entity with the name “Australian Pilot Training Alliance Pty Ltd” is ACN 119 046 385. ASIC says that that entity’s former names include “Melbourne Flight Training Pty Ltd”.
ASIC also shows ACN 612 834 152 as named “Melbourne Flight Training Pty Ltd” with the former name “Australian Pilot Training Alliance Pty Ltd”. However, that entity is shown as having been deregistered on 23 January 2021.
Looks like two different corporate entities swapping identical names. Nothing too unusual about that, but I want to make sure I understand who’s who in this zoo.
What was the ACN of the entity of which you were CEO called “Australian Pilot Training Alliance Pty Ltd” while you were dealing with CASA? I’m guessing it was ACN 612 834 152 – the one that’s now been deregistered – and ACN 119 046 385 then grabbed the name. But I’d rather not guess.)”
Unfortunately this is somewhat confusing.
Company ending in “285” was the original Melbourne Flight Training that commenced operations as a flying school in 2006,
Company ending in “152” was established in 2016 and was called APTA. The intention being to set up APTA as a completely separate Entity, with its own separate AOC.
CASA advised that due to all resources being directed to Transitioning existing organisations, they would not be able to process any new applications for approximately 12 months. Therefore, the new Company “152” was effectively useless as those timelines were unacceptable.
In discussions with CASA, I elected to build the APTA model under the existing Melbourne Flight Training, Company “285” registered in 2006, with all of the existing approvals i.e. ARN 759217, RTO 22508, and CRICOS approval.
As the APTA concept, was an Australia wide concept, I preferred the Company name “Australian Pilot Training Alliance,” rather than Melbourne Flight Training.
I swapped the names only. No other changes were made. This was done through ASIC and CASA. The original Company from 2006 changed from “Melbourne Flight Training” to “Australian Pilot Training Alliance” to better represent the concept.
Therefore the original Company from 2006 changed from MFT to APTA, obviously retaining the original ACN ending in “152”
The newer Company from 2016, with no approvals changed from APTA to MFT.
There was only the one AOC ever issued back in 2006 to ACN “285” with ARN 759217. That is the business that CASA took action against. With the trading restrictions in place for ACN “285”, my funds were exhausted. CASA would not permit the multi base, multi entity structure, and would now only allow one entity to continue under the AOC.
I was unable to continue operating as all funds were by now exhausted, and approximately $200,000 of debts had been accrued, as the matter had dragged on far longer than anticipated.
I transferred the business with ACN “285”. The original business with the CASA approvals to one of the APTA members to facilitate their continuing operations in return for taking on the debt and paying it in full. The business now had minimal value as CASA was still “considering” if it would be permitted
I transferred the shares to the new owner in return for settling the debt. Not one cent ever went into my bank account.
I hope that goes someway to clarifying a very confusing situation. Please come back with any queries. I am about to go into a roll of 3 X 13 hour shifts with a hefty drive each side, so please be patient as I may not get back here till Tuesday midday ( a few Married at First Sight episodes to catch up on in the morning). Wow that Olivia looks like a real piece of work, and she was my favourite originally, as the family keeps reminding me.
Have a great weekend all, cheers. Glen