Regulation 6, CAP 1049 and Doc 24
Thanks for the professional insight, Olster ...
Decisions made by the CAA into complaints about the conduct of a test or exam are posted on the CAA website under ORS 8 and remain posted for five years from the date of review, including for two years, identification of the parties. Looking at ORS 8 in March 2024 there are no such decisions posted, meaning there have been no complaints made to the CAA about the conduct of a simulator test since early 2019. The only decisions currently posted under ORS 8 are not relevant to this thread.
Captain Lawson's simulator rides that might have generated a complaint took place in 2016 - 17 so would no longer be visible. The Virgin Training Captain in question was obliged to inform the failed candidate of the review process afforded by Regulation 6, as described in CAP 1049, and as mandated in Doc 24, but perhaps wisely, chose not to do so.
I would surmise that, like many of us, Captain Lawson would have been unaware of this valuable review facility at the time of the extraordinarily prejudicial circumstances described in his successful ET Judgment. If he had been previously aware, or had been made aware by the Training Captain who 'failed' him, it would be extraordinary if he had not made a complaint.
The fact that, apparently, there have been no requests for review made to the UK CAA within the last five years begs several obvious questions.
...- Was anyone who failed a simulator test in the last few years, informed of the complaint procedure by the tester ?
- Did anyone who failed a simulator test consider if they might have grounds for complaint ?
- Has anyone tried to complain to the CAA about the conduct of a simulator test in the last five years - and if so, what was the outcome ?
- Anything else relevant ?
Mind how you go.
.... LFH