things that should have been done years ago are now flagged up my a more formal audit system
If other engineers are of a like mind this would seem to reinforce the need for the stricter system now in force. I am no apologist for the CAA or EASA, but that seems to be the conclusion to be drawn from your comments. No doubt the CAA would say themselves that they are still getting to grips with a new system where the rules are open to differing interpretations, e.g. whether a "recommendation" = mandatory replacement, overhall or inspection. Will EASA be giving definitive guidance in some of these areas? If the CAA continue to misinterpret the EASA regulations (if that is what they are doing) then maybe AOPA or similar will take this issue through the High Court, though somehow I doubt it.