LEGAL ACTION AGAINST NAUNTON PUGH t/a CAPE FLYING SERVICES (EUROPE)
 

LEGAL ACTION AGAINST NAUNTON PUGH t/a
CAPE FLYING SERVICES (EUROPE)

• The legal case BB 301870, AW Young (v) Naunton Pugh t/a Cape Flying Services (Europe) in a full hearing was part heard at Cambridge County Court on 25th March 2004 and thereafter at Peterborough County Court on 25 June 2004 to its conclusion.

• On the 25th June 2004, District Judge Wharton issued Judgment against Naunton Pugh t/a Cape Flying Services (Europe) for a breach of contract and awarded damages (£376) and costs (£461), total £837. After hearing all the evidence submitted by both parties the court had found that the contract being solely his responsibility and as a result of a breach resulted in damages and costs being awarded to me. Damages suffered as a result of the course attended at Cape Flying Services in George, South Africa and the failure being fully purchased through Cape Flying Services (Europe), costs being awarded in pursuit of the case.

• No grounds for appeal where entered and although Naunton Pugh sought permission to appeal this was refused and therefore not granted. He was given 14 days to pay the awarded decision, needless to say and from past experiences, this date deadline expired on Friday 9th July 2004, he has not paid the money which may now result in him being pursued by other legal means to recover the full debt that could include the seriously considered possibility of declaring him bankrupt, such as my determination.

• The awarded figure is more than he and Gerald Todd at Cape Flying Services in South Africa says is owed but less than my claim, however, principally a good, fair and just result considering all the facts presented.

I previously posted a thread called Cape Flying Services (South Africa) on 3rd May 2003 under African Aviation to essentially highlight my difficulties with “booking” and attending a PPL course at Cape Flying Services, George, in April 2003, “booking the course” through an “agent” Naunton Pugh t/a Cape Flying Services (Europe). The post had created an enormous amount of varying and interesting perspectives relating to all factors of aviation, the agent, school and indeed myself etc. Despite receiving over 100 replies with 5000 hits, sadly, on 3rd June 2004 the thread was closed.

However, I promised that I would report back to the forum when the legal case and due process was concluded. As this is now the case I would therefore greatly appreciate and request that this thread be allowed to continue further from this posting to allow fellow ppruner’s the opportunity to express their thoughts in a constructive way as the hope would be to help to prevent this sort of difficulty happening in the future and it is not some kind of personal vendetta, because, when you think hard about it, it will have an effect on African Aviation, irrespective, of which side of the fence you are sitting.

The legal action case was never ever fought or considered on the ability or arguably the lack of ability to complete the PPL course in the advertised 21 days, this point was always going to be obviously too difficult to prove for a lot of reasons, at the time, this was furthest from my mind; the trip halfway across the world to attend the course, diarise every single failed moment and gather documentary evidence whilst at the school for the purposes of obtaining a full refund upon return to the UK was simply not on the cards.

An example, say, in good faith, you paid upfront for 600 hours flying and only received 400, irrespective of the total hours, and say, only achieving solo status at 374 hours, it does not matter, because you would and expect a refund of the difference, not expect to have to go to drag this point alone through the courts and have yourself branded having a criminal record, unless speeding or a parking ticket is now regarded a being criminal, as labelled by the other “party”, that is Mr Todd during this process. Quite simply, the defence stated, that I refused to fly on the last two days because I went to Cape Town when quite obviously, I flew all the allocated time within the period that I attended the course, as seen in my flight log book. In fact, this successful point alone was my main point in my first letter of complaint to both of them back in 22nd April 2003, it is clear, a refund was not going to be paid under any circumstances for whatever reason only best known to Naunton Pugh and Gerald Todd.

Is it not a little bit silly or even suspicious that in the end, the simplest and easily resolved problems come back to bite your backside or land on someone else’s lap! like, refund for untaken flying time, overcharge on invoice and accommodation difficulties etc, notwithstanding, at least 8 attempts to resolve the whole thing have gone brutally unnoticed, settled or even counter proposed, not just even to avoid mounting costs on both parties. In fact, certain documents supplied by Naunton Pugh in his defence clearly and without question indicate a concerted effort by collusion with Gerald Todd to “keep this matter alive by dragging the process out” Surely, this whole affair is beyond belief and may raise some serious questions, certainly surrounding the business relationship between Cape Flying Services in South Africa and Naunton Pugh t/a Cape Flying Services (Europe) but, most importantly, no apologies, just character assassination, collusion and fabrication between Naunton Pugh and Gerald Todd, there is documentary evidence in support this statement through some extraordinary evidence of conversations between them. But let’s face it, they did have over a year to try and think up something plausible. It was expected that I was not going to complain, because nobody will or does complain about or to Naunton Pugh or Gerald Todd, even when they both agreed (as is documented) that monies are owed, that is, until they met me!

Thought of the day: When considering any of their services, just think, what will happen if any problem develops, however, small and insignificant, who is going to resolve it for you? ...YOU DECIDE!

Just don’t call Mr Pugh or Mr Todd you might as well call in the Ghostbusters!




Regards and Happy Flying,


Sandy Young :ok:

Yyyyyyyyyyyyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwnnnnnnn:bored:

No, maybe that's not fair. Thanks ... I guess

Yawnnnnnnnnnn

How more boring can you be Sandy ?

Any Flying rumours or News for us perhaps ?

Then again you aint the flying type - that is obvious ...:}

I think you got it right the first time!

I'm thinking of offering a course in grammar...any takers?

Now, now kiddies....

If Mr Sandy has had a problem and dealt with it and wishes to share the experience on an open forum I reckon that's his right. We all see things in a different way and if we wish to refute his statements with something positive that's also good. Gotta back up whatever we say though............

Alexander Webster Young has entered a long diatribe regarding a case he brought against me, Naunton Pugh, and which he claims to have won in court.

The facts:

1 His original claim was for over £4,600.
2 He got judgement at Blackburn county court but I later obtained judgement to set aside on the grounds that that court had given judgement 'ahead of time' - ie the judgement was made before the legal period of 28 days, from the date of notice of action being served, had ended. I also got the case transfered to Cambridge county court.
3 In his first attempt at that court, A W Young failed and the judge made some very clear observations about the validity of A W Young's claim. at the judge's invitation A W Young made an'offer' to settle of something over £2,000. I refused.
4 A W Young then tried to get summary judgement. This was thrown out because the judge very clearly said that I had a very good case of defence and also said that it could be ruled that civil action should actually be taking place in South Africa. He also made comments about the extent of A W Young's case, stating that the sole question appeared to him to be how many hours of flight training did A W Young pay for, and how many did he receive, and if any money was due back to him whom should pay? A W Young then made a written 'offer' of over £600 to settle. I refused.
5 A W Young went back to Cambridge county court, where Judge Wharton part heard the matter, ruled there was a case to be made agaisnt m,e but that A W Young's claim for over £4,600 was 'clearly absurd' and that he should rethink his claim. He adjourned at 5pm and the matter was transferred to Peterborough county court to get it on the list earlier than had it remained at Cambridge.
6 Judge Wharton there ruled that A W Young was not entitled to £4,600 but that he would give judgement in his favour for 11 hours paid for but not flown plus costs of the matter, including an overnight hotel room after the Cambridge hearing and travel costs. You should understand that an average PPL student goes solo in around 14-15 hours, a good one in around 10-12 hours and a not so good one in around 20 hours. A W Young flew just over 32 hours duel before he was competent enough to go solo. After 15 hours of instruction CFS clearly told him that he would need more than the 45 hours minimum demanded by the PPL course. He gave himself just three weeks to do the course, spent so much time trying to go solo that he failed to do more than a few hours ground school (and told the judge that, in effect, there ws no ground school on offer, whereas his own witness, Leigh Griffiths, told the court that he did 'as much ground school as possible, two to three hours a day at least') and left a day early.
7 I asked Judge Wharton for leave to appeal, which he refused.
8 However, I am still entitled to appeal and this I have done on the grounds that Judge Wharton's decision was malfounded - that is to say he gave it on an incorrect basis as he ruled that A W Young had a contract with me, whereas I say that I act only as agent for Cape Flying Services and that A W Young's contract for flying tuition and ground school was with Cape Flying Services CC, South Africa.

You can therefore see that it is not unreasonable that I have not paid A W Young anything. The matter will await my appeal hearing.

A W Young can go ahead with any action he likes to try to make me bankrupt. It will cost him money to enter the action.

It will mean that any assets that I have personally (ie not jointly with my wife) will be frozen by the court. First call on any such assets is to the Inland Revenue. Second call is to any bank to whom I owe money. Third call is to unsecured creditors, of which A W Young would be one.

The fact is that I have minimal personal assets, so any such action he takes would result in him getting nothing.

The man obviously loves playing with the law. He also obviously loves making these matters as public as he can, via pprune etc.

Anone who has followed this matter by reading his postings on Pprune may well take the view that he is vindictive, vengeful and downright nasty.

They may also take the view that he has damaged the good reputation of Cape Flying Services by making libellous statements in his postings and has identified himself as the author of such libel by posting an Email monicker that appears on all the Email correspondence on my original file on his course booking.

That damage could run to a court claim against A W Young for £500,000 by Cape Flying Services.

Watch this space.....

Thank you for your time to read this,
Naunton Pugh

I must admit I'm with CFS and Mr. Pugh on this one...

Mr. Young - you failed the grade, you screwed up, you couldn't cut it... etc... etc...

DEAL with it - move on - find a hobby that you CAN succeed at. (besides wasting the courts time).

I must also admit, maybe a little civil action against Mr. Young for defamation, libel et al may be in order.

R

Cardinal Puff,

I pressume you forgot about the previous borrinngggg threads and posts by Sandy.

What is he trying to proof ?

We have "tested" CFS and they came out tops. I have / think we all have said what needed to be said about them. (pos and neg's)

Just because he has a toffy to chew he hangs out his dirty laundry here on PPRUNE. (again)

Sandy, be a real man and proof it all in court and tell those that care when you win / loose your case over a few pounds.

CP : All I am trying to say (again) - what else excpet blowing up this "case" has Sanjo69 done for any PPRUNER or posted ANY direct flying related posts ?

None - just his little court case ... shame ... yawnnnnnnnnn ....

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz:suspect: :hmm: :suspect:

Naunton Pugh

You say an average student needs 14-15 hours to solo,must be using quite a complex aircraft. I went solo in 4:20, in a PA18 cub, a friend soloed in 3:30 in a PA28, although a few special circumstances with that one. This is going back 45 years, surely the ball game hasnt changed that much. From memory the average to solo would be well under 10 hours in the majority of cases, and that was using a tail dragger.


Prospector

Prospector
I think it is frowned upon these days to send students solo with less than 10 hours. Thats what they told me when I did my test. Maybe I was a lousy student and they didn't want to hurt my feelings:}

32 hours to solo?

You could train an earthworm to ride a bicycle in that time...

Hang glider, chopper, 747 or whatever,you have to be a faster learner than that - aviation will throw plenty at you that is not in any training programme.

Sorry to hijack the thread but the original topic was boring as bat sh1t!


PS 126,7 - I think maybe it is the shareholders feelings they are worried about, not yours.

One day, just for a laugh, I am going to go to a flying school or aero club and claim to have not flown before. Just to see how long it takes for them to figure it out. And of course see if it takes 10 + hours to solo. :}

NP on SY:
"Anone who has followed this matter by reading his postings on Pprune may well take the view that he is vindictive, vengeful and downright nasty. "

Whereas others may take the view that the defendant is is vindictive, vengeful and downright nasty!

CFI-CFS on PPrune
"Not going to post or probably even open this site again, unfortunately it provides a medium that can be abused by any individual to discredit whoever they like with very little if any, recourse…"


What a bunch of hypocritical *******:

I think that the whole story will make great reading in a popular UK Aviation magazine!And, this case may pave the way for future scenerios.

I fear this could signal a downturn of UK students visiting a certain flight school in South Africa, my only hope is that is does not tarnish the overall appeal of a PPL in Southern Africa and the legitimate 'what you see is what you get' or 'what you fly is what you pay for' type Flight Schools which do exist. Sandy should be praised for his resiliance and giving people a choice to see the facts in black and white, opening peoples eyes to just how big a decision it is picking a school abroad, when frankly you know very little about them. I expect to receive a torrid of abuse now from a certain person who operates the said flying school. Just remember, "...Sticks and Stones..."

CFS has had many a happy customer, THAT IS NOT IN DOUBT, they have also had many an unhappy customer and it is the treament of these customers that is the issue and one I personally find repulsive and unproffesional.

If Sandy has only tought prospective Students one thing, let that be

"Buyers Beware"

Fly safe, fly happy.

P.S If I had seen this forum before I chose where to do my PPL, CFS would never have made the shortlist.

It would appear that my previous posting re time to solo is completely outdated.

The following news article from a Coroners report after a fatal in a Piper Tomahawk, pilot lost it in turn from downwind to base, impacted in built up area, hit power pole first, then into front yard of house.

"Up to the day of the accident the student pilot had flown a total of 57.5 hours, 50.6 with another pilot (Must have been an instructor??) and 6.9 hours solo".

"In a statement to police Mr Drovers regular flight instructor described him as "very competent". "Whenever I gave James a forced landing or an engine failure after take off or landing? he would always head toward an open area like the beach or golf course. He would never have headed towards houses. His ability to fly at low speed was good".

Obviously the ball game has changed considerably.

Prospector

I agree with some of stallers sentiments. Whilst SY has laboured his point to death, he may well have opened peoples eyes to the shoddy treatment some people may expect at CFS - especially if they don't make the grade first time.
Not saying he is accurate in his description of the school - I've never been. But if it encourages people not to take bad treatment lying down this is good.
Having been at FTC for 6 months, I know only too well the treatment that can be handed out to the weak willed student. It ain't pretty. All too often foreign students are treated as cash cows, stuck a long way from home with 40 000 rand in their pocket. And all too often this is based on an unrealistic sales pitch from an agent based in the students home country. Once said student is in country, it is difficult to change schools, especially if they are new to aviation and have only a limited amount of time off work. So do they go home without trying? Only if they don't mind waiting till next year to learn.
As I have emphasised above this is not aimed at CFS - I don't know them and don't want to having seen this de generate. My point is he has raised awareness of poor practice.

Cheers

SK

Prospector old chap I'm not sure I agree entirely with the main thrust of the points you are making. I think it is bad form to get into some sort of a pi$$ing contest as to who solo-ed with the fewest hours. So many things affect this from weather, to a/c maintenance and the sbility of both pupil and instructor. Also if someone was to learn at a busy airport like FACT it would be impossible to do 40 hours flying without spending at least 3 hours taxi-ing:zzz: for example.

Another factor is the I know the general flying areas in use for both George and Cape Town are about 10-15 minutes from the airport so this adds time before the student can be "let loose" to fly as such.

A more general point is that these days anyone can become a pilot if they have the money. That lack of selection means that there will be some who take more time than others. Flying schools are not charitable organisations so they have to take virtally anyone that pitches up with cash and wants to fly even if this means you get the guy who has more than 50 dual hours before his solo.

I agree that the quote from the deceased pilot's instructor wasn't very coherant but I believe he can be given a bit of latitude given he's just witnessed a guy kill himself.

George Tower,
It was to point out that the average time to solo appears to have increased quite markedly in the last few years that was the reason for my original post.

You bring up some good points, one that is very relevant is the ability of both the student and the instructor.

Perhaps we were luckier in the old days with instructors who had done their apprenticeship with the Air Forces of the world, well rounded experience before being let loose as civilian instructors.

There are no doubt many competent instructors who are not products of the military, but many are only half a step ahead of their students. Unfortunate, but a sign of the times.

I would have to disagree with you when you state flying organisations have to take on anyone who fronts up with the cash, there must be a proportion of people who front up but should be told that they do not have the requisite skills.

Prospector

prospector,

I think you're quite a few years behind the times. I also did my first solo in a tail-dragger nearly 40 years ago and even then, while most students solo-ed in around 10 hours, the average was probably 7 or 8 for fixed wing. Helicopters are a bit different and usually take a little longer.

I also trained with the military and when I became a civil helicopter flying instructor, it was reckoned that around 10 hours was a good figure to give the student enough experience to survive an engine failure in the circuit in a helicopter, even if he seemed to be making good progress - after all the fear factor can make people do silly things and with an inexperienced student in a helicopter they can then turn out to be rather fatal!

PPL
 

Amateur dentists? - I don't think so.....amateur medical doctors?..I don't think so?........amateur politicians?...well yes! probably most of them.....but amateur pilots???....why do we need them??......perhaps in this modern age of aviation it is time to have a simple but effective "filter" i.e. a sytem of "selection by aptitude" - usually works for the military etc. Each "wannabee" gets a sim ride to ascertain whether or not he/she/it has even the faintest hope of ever becoming a competent pilot. In the case of failure, that should be sufficient to keep that person's feet well on the ground!! And hey! if one has not gone "Solo" before 7 - 10 hours - just FORGET IT !!!!!!!

Oh, come on! There are so many factors involved here that if you take such an arrogant view, you run the risk of disaffecting many perfectly capable young pilots.

At the school I train at, even at the fastest possible rate you are unlikely to start flying regular circuits much before 7 hours. Then you have to perform at least 4 error free circuits in a row before anyone is going to sign you out. You cannot tell me that someone solo'ing after 3 1/2 hours has been through exercises 1-11 (of the SA PPL, maybe it's different in the UK) plus become completely competent in circuits with the requisite radio work in what amounts to just over 2 lessons.

I did my intro training over a period of 5 months so I was often having to relearn skills and got unlucky on two occasions due to radio failure half way through the preliminary circuits and only solo'ed after about 22 hours. I may be no Chuck Yeager but I certainly don't deserve to be grounded. Or do I? :*

All valid points.

Colour that also with knowledge of several fatals that occured when people who were obviously not up to it were encouraged/allowed to continue to the point where they killed themselves/others when the signs were obviously there.

10+ attempts at exams to get a pass, for example.

Someone encouraged into an aircraft beyond their ability because some instructor wants the multi time, for example.

Anyone can fly a plane. Not everyone can do it well enough to survive the experience.

All OK and understandable, except I can´t see why this individual had only 3 weeks to do entire course! As far as I can see , most problems in his case are originating from his own far too tight schedule.
Nikolai

Exactly - it was a bloody tight slot.
Not that a tight slot is a bad thing.......!

This is the root of the problem I feel, students being enticed by a PPL in 3 weeks. If a person is sharp and on the ball that is tight. If they are just average or even below average they have not much chance of this. A PPL is a big thing and shouldn't be de valued. If a school is going to try to sell them an intense PPL, there should be a selection process.
As for soloing in 45 mins or whatever you guys say you did it in then well done. Did you feel you were safe and could have coped with any probs that came up? Around the 10 hour mark is a level I feel gives enough practice at failures, stalls in all configs etc.

SK

There obviously is exemptions but in my experience when the student is older than 25 years it will take longer to reach required standards. When over 40 it gets even more time consuming task and I am not talking about required flight hours only. I mean the entire process takes longer to complete. Don´t know the age of student in this case.
However, usually older students are well aware of their personal learning capabilities and intelligent enough to allow reasonable time for safe learning process.
Nikolai

In Sandys case
 

He was enticed with the offer of a 3 week PPL without anyone ever taking into consideration apptitude and or natural ability, he was obviously concerned that the 3 weeks allocated was well short for his own progression and in my experience is too short for most budding PPL students. The whole "PPL in 3 weeks" advert is unrealistic and should be foretold with a long list of if, but's and maybes.

Regards

Staller

p.s
I see CFS-CFI has removed his thread recently. How bizarre he doesnt take time to defend the school!

Lets see the evidence

The case here seems to me to revolve around the alledged mis-selling of a service. Let's see the evidence. Perhaps Sandy could post a copy of the advert he replied to so we can all judge for ourselves, whether the kind of advert he responded to would mislead.

Howzit Guns

We all see things differently, boet. All I'm saying is that you see things one way due to positive experiences and Sandy sees things a little differently. These open fora are all about dragging the skeletons kicking and screaming out of the closet and rattling a few bones. If Sandy has a gripe I see no problem with him airing it as long as it doesn't get too personal (a bit of banter is always welcome as far as I'm concerned).

As far as being long winded and boring goes, we all go there occasionally and carping on can get a bit tedious but a friendly reminder along the lines of "@#$^&(& jou ^^*#$%!" sometimes gets results :E .

In the end we all learn something with any luck, which is what makes this place worthwhile........




Hope to see ya in CT next week if I don't get stuffed around here too much:ok: .

Lets get one thing straight. No-one enticed Mr Young to do anything. He is over 40 years old and made his own decision to try for the PPL in three weeks.

I told him that, if he wanted to do the course in three weeks, he would need to go to SA armed with a good working knowledge of the theory and he said he would do so.

I also told him that it would be better if he could find four weeks, but he said he could not.

I also told him that, in seven years of representing CFS in the UK & Europe, I had sent two students out to do the course in three weeks, and they both passed - one a lady who was given the course as her 50th birthday present.

So it can be done - if you work at the theory beforehand and are a good enough student pilot when doing the training.

CFS warned Mr Young after about 15 hours instructor training that, to gain the PPL, he was going to need more than the mandatory 45 hours minimum flying. As I've said before, he took over 32 hours hours before CFS would let him go solo. In the seven years I've worked with CFS I have never known a student I've sent out to take longer than 18.5 hours to go solo - and that was a student aged 67!!

I have yet to hear from the court re the outcome of my application to have the judgment set aside or revoked. When I do, whichever way the court decides, I'll post a factual note here.

Thank you for your time in reading this,
Naunton Pugh
Looking after CFS in the UK & in Europe.

Naughton Pugh
 

Are you telling me that there is nothing in your literature that "sells" your three week PPL.

I FOR ONE WAS ENTICED Mr.Pugh

I WAS TOLD BY YOURSELF THAT I WOULD NEED A MAXIMUM OF FOUR WEEKS AND IT ACTUALLY TOOK ME SIX, AND THAT WAS PUSHING IT!!!!

Also, you forgot to mention the other 3 week PPL student you sent out who I understand was a journalist of some description and was reporting on the "3 week PPL " falacy, con, heist whatever you want to call it. I also understood CFS pulled out all the stops to PASS him and there was rumour that he wasnt even upto PPL standard yet was still passed on his GFT.

You may be looking after CFS in the UK and Europe but you sure aint lookin after the clientele, just your £££!


:yuk:

Caveat Emptor

Prospector

Staller writes:"I FOR ONE WAS ENTICED Mr.Pugh

I WAS TOLD BY YOURSELF THAT I WOULD NEED A MAXIMUM OF FOUR WEEKS AND IT ACTUALLY TOOK ME SIX, AND THAT WAS PUSHING IT!!!!"


A Long thread going nowhere. Even in the U.S. Army it takes nine months to spit out a comercially trained Pilot. Average solo was 8-12 hours if I remember.
Someone who wants to do stuff like this overnight HAD better be prepared to get his brain wrung out for sure. Specially considering all the BS that one has to accomplish with the CAA exams etc. Much harder than anything the FAA will dump on you.
I guess Stallers comments above just go to show some folks are smarter than others........or is it the otherway around.

I was in Gerald's office this morning and PPRUNE was discussed, on asking what Cape Flying Services is going to do about it, his response was "nothing, if a person takes the time to read the whole thing, it should quickly become clear what went down and what Sandy Young is all about...its getting old and people are tired of his nagging".



You ask why Gerald Todd hasn't responded, I believe he already has, and if you read his post, and all of Mr. Young's you might conclude that this whole thing is nonsense. I spent just over a year at Cape Flying Services, doing my PPL/CPL/TWIN/IFR and Instructors ratings, loved every minute of it. Today I work for Cape Flying Services and know exactly what they promise and don't. Cape Flying Services advertise a Private Pilots Course saying that it can be done in three weeks however suggesting a forth and even then there is no guarantee that you will meet the required standard. Here is a copy of a paragraph signed by both Mr. Young and Lee Gearing taken directly from the Terms and Conditions form:

" Understands that every effort will be made to complete training on time, but Cape Flying Services George CC will not be held responsible for circumstance causing delays beyond their control."

Mr Young says he paid for 45 hours and only got 33, fails to acknowledge that dual time costs more than solo, and that 5 of the hours were on a simulator. Besides this, I know for a fact that Cape Flying Services South Africa paid him back everything he wanted refunded, except for the non refundable deposit of 350 pounds paid to Naunton Pugh.

I do however find it interesting that both Mr Young and Mr Gearing wanted to return to Cape Flying Services. The fact that Mr Gearing was told to take his 3000 pounds and spend them elsewhere, peeved him off, as for Mr Young, well.... You have to be joking right?

I doubt we will hear from CFI-CFS on this site again, and Gerald didn't remove his post, the moderator did. It addressed a statement made by Mr Young regarding certain personal accusations. On this site its fine to accuse a company of wrongdoing, but don't dare have it the other way round,
you might note that your post was also adjusted.

Roll up Roll up
 

Welcome aboard the great CFS bandwagon !!!!!!!!!

"where every customer is welcome aboard" , as long as you pay up we dont give a sh1t

"caveat emptor", a bit tricky from the other side of the world!!!

Theres a saying, for every satisfied customer another one is told of the satisfaction.

For every unsatisfied customer, another TEN are told of their dis-satisfaction.

To quote a relevant lyric

"The damage is done so I guess I'll be leaving."



:ok:

PS Mr Stark- In our country it is a common thing to find polite trust worthy people, who EVEN GIVE FLIGHT SCHOOLS A SECOND CHANCE!

Sanj69 - What a STRANGE name ......
 

Sanjo69

When will you realise you are utterly, hopelessly boring. Rhodie tells it right. You are trying to exploit this site for your own questionable purposes.
Give us all a break and disappear, please man.

oTd

Ever so sorry, this should have been on the " LEGAL ACTION AGAINST NAUNTON PUGH t/a CAPE FLYING SERVICES (EUROPE) "
page

Sorry

oTd

Sanj69 - What a STRANGE name ......
 

Sanjo69

When will you realise you are utterly, hopelessly boring. Rhodie tells it right. You are trying to exploit this site for your own questionable purposes.
Give us all a break and disappear, please man.

oTd

There have been no changes made to this thread by the moderators - I say again, threads will only be altered or removed if they contain foul language, are considered to be blatantly offensive to all or certain groups or if the post contains what is considered free advertising.

Often the threads are removed or altered by the poster themselves, creating a false picture of posts, subsequent to the altered post.

4HP

staller,

your country and trustworthy people in the same sentence may cause considerable mirth amongst many people in the southern half of Africa.

caveat emptor, is a bit tricky from the other side of the world.

So why did you deal with the other side of the world?

Dear All,

Just came across this thread by chance and as I also went to CFS in 1996/97 for a CPL/IR/Twin I wanted to add my comment to this list.

For one, I had the time of my life at CFS: Great people (Howzit Gérald!!:D, Frenchy here!) great place and great flying environment.

Throughout the 9 months of my training I saw a number of PPL students (one of which was to become my wife...;) ) and I have to say that there are those who can fly and those who are just not made for 3D environments and who should stick to cycling. Gerald, remember Amina? What was it, 55hrs before solo?

M. Young, sorry, you just didn't make the cut. No point in trying to find excuses and transferring the fault onto others. You can't fly and never will be able to. Just like I'll never be able to be an astronaut.

Time spent at CFS is one of the best memories I have and I would like to take the opportunity to thank all the staff there for their kindness and great attitude.

Hope to go there soon again!


Frenchy - ZS-NDV

Hey Frenchy Nick,

Comment ca va, c'est bien ?

Gary, here the flying Dutchman !!

I also read this thread thread by chance.

Went to the US in 1996 and didn't regret that for one moment !!

All these promisses :mad: about flying Albatrosses and working in Africa as a pilot or Flight Instructor...........yeah sure........lets get real.....!

The problem is that ''man'' ( Male or Female for this matter ..!!) who have a dream.... which they believe in........ want to make this dream come true and rely on man's word and sincerety !!
And that just does not work in Aviation in general ..and Flight schools in particular !!!!!!

But other than that Nick, I am glad your still married to that very good looking Swiss lady....

And he.....I think you would be a great astronaut......as long as they don't build any low level powerlines up there......!!!!!!

Take care my friend....!!!

Nothing beats a Lear at 450...!!!

Gary

Votre Ami !!

Wrong!
 

Mr.Pugh my name was withheld through

"FEAR OF VICTIMISATION"
although I did post it once in the original thread regarding CFS. Mr Todd then did a U turn on his statement

"Staller please e-mail me, perhaps we can still resolve things, on the face of it this seems so silly, though I can’t remember what made me so angry.
Gerald Todd" He then BLANKED my attempts then later went on the verbally abuse me as I predicted.

Perhaps what made him so angry was the fact I had to visit a
SOLICITOR WITH ANOTHER CFS PUPIL WHILST MY PPL WAS DREADFULLY OFF TARGET AND HIS CPL THE SAME!!


Check your PM
Check my file,
check the facts.

Staller

P.S I didnt say you had sent the journalist to do the 3 week PPL.

I have heard about this string through the aviation grapevine.
By the sounds of your reply Mr %%%%% pugh.Your %%%%%bricks.Lets face it we know its not the first time you have %%%%% people off.It appears to me that you have been warned by the lawyers, if you have been keeping your assets minimum.Sounds like a man who is in big trouble.I think their coming to get you.
Well done sandy.
You got the %%%%% to squirm.and pay back a little of their fortune.
Their is a lot of people baying for pughs blood.Seeing sandys outcome will give them confidence to pursue action

You seem to have ignored the rules you signed up to. If you want to participate in this thread or on this forum you should realize ( as if you didn't already ) that it is not OK to hurl abuse at an individual, it is not OK to be offensive and it is not OK to use offensive language............OK !