BAL
Using the telephone I was informed that it was all the aircraft owners fault.
The line taken was that some owners in open shelters complained to the ombudsman about this double charging. Their aeroplanes are visable at all times. BAL state that the ombudsman directed them to treat all clients equally.
So this is their justification though I would have thought that the implication would be to stop being parsimonious and leave the open shelters alone.
However it is hard to get information on an individual case from the ombudsman unless directly involved so are there any out there who were directly involved and can inform us really what happened and is BAL being a bit precious with the truth?