We all know that there is some stinky stuff going on as these three boys have ratings pulled, but the BEEEEG ? is - what recourse do they have. If they engage the services of a lawyer then they have to foot the bill - then it becomes very messy and the CAA know this. The current legislation is also very confusing as the ANR's are still in force for licensing issues and sec 1.13 refers to the Minister having to authorise the suspension - so is the suspension a legally valid one???? even if part (4) says the standard for the rating was not met - who can say this if the findings of the accident are not public knowledge yet, simply based on the numsaan's findings.
Makes one think that the industry needs to put pressure on the CAA that anytime they
up then they must pay for the losses that the user incurs - such as sending a renewal in and waiting six weeks only to have to chase them up and all at the users expense.
Imagine billing the CAA at x per hour because they lost your license.
So if it all comes out in the wash that these boys can simply carry on when some bright spark realises that the action taken was incorrect - who will compensate the guys for losing out AND of course they sit with a tarnished reputation in the industry because they were naughty and got punished.
Maybe this deserves a new thread on "Billing the SACAA".
Another issue is that of culpability - if the CAA approves the rating and the rating was done i.a.w the SACAA requirements and it does come out in the wash that the knowledge transfer from source to end user is lacking as the source (read E SA) actually have the info and did not provide it because the user was not specifically trained by E SA approved persons - then who is culpable the CAA for not ensuring the information does go out to the industry, or E SA or both.......Surely not the poor sucker at the end of the line.
Some food for thought!!!!!
