Standards Document 39 3.6.1 - governs PPL training for a UK FTO.
Standards Document 39
JAR-FCL Criteria for the Approval of a Flying Training Organisation offering training for the JAA PPL and Night Qualification for Aeroplane and Helicpoter, in a non-JAA State.
I don't believe OAA conduct PPL training, do they? However, even if Standards Doc 39 were the authority, I think you would find similar compliance issues:
Standards Document 39
2.3 Chief Flying Instructor
2.3.1 The CFI shall meet the requirements of JAR-FCL 1.055/2.055, and in addition, hold an instructor qualification that is recognised by, and valid in the State in which instruction is to be given.
According to the FAA, The CFI does not hold an FAA Flight Instructor Certificate and I don't believe the FAA recognise UK CAA or JAA instructor qualifications?
3.5.2 The ratio of non-JAA instructors qualified in accordance with Appendix 1 to JAA-FCL 1.300/2.300 to JAA qualified instructors shall not exceed 8:1 for PPL training courses. There shall always be a JAA qualified, unrestricted flight instructor on duty at the FTO when training is taking place. This instructor must be readily available within the FTO, or on the airfield or not beyond the circuit pattern if flying is taking place.
So PPL training demands a ratio of not greater than 8:1 non-JAA to JAA instructors; what is the ratio in Phoenix? Is there always an unrestricted, qualified JAA instructor on duty as described, seven days a week throughout the day, after 5pm until the cessation of night flying and at weekends?
3.6.2 Non-JAA instructors qualified as described in para 3.6 shall only give instruction for a JAA licence or rating at the FTO where the standardisation took place; the qualification is not transferable. No instruction shall be given towards a JAA professional licence or Instrument Rating.
So clearly the wrong document BigGrecian but it illustrates an interesting point; why pay so much more for professional pilot training, integrated or modular, at a school that partially trains outside of member states when they don't even meet the basic criteria for PPL training approval outside of member states according to the CAA? These facts may be acknowledged by former students but few if any potential trainees have even the slightest clue about the regulatory safety nets established to protect them prior to signing up for many tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt - and it doesn't seem that in this case, the FTO does either.