Sick of Illegal practices

[md902man]

Is there a place/person/website where you can inform the proper authorities in the UK about people flying illegally. ie Pleasure flying without the proper certification/licence/aoc etc?
I know of two companies doing this and I think it's unfair for all of those people who have the correct licences looking for work. I imagine it would mean no insurance if an accident were to happen during one of those flights.
Views and opinions appreciated.

[Hilico]

There are any number of ways to contact the CAA and whichever one you choose, I suggest that's what you do.

You might imagine a CAA staffer told me they have even met people in pubs after work where the contact has to be discreet - I could not possibly comment.

[NickLappos]

In the US we call that "dropping a dime" as in using a pay phone. just ask yourself what your motives are - You sound angry about the prospective employment opportunity lost because someone is a private pilot doing commercial pilot work.

No Champion of Justice would use that motive! The worst shellackings I got as a kid were "for my own good" and I'm not sure to this day that was true.

Are they unsafe? Is it a public endangerment? Those are the questions you might ask yourself, I think. If the answer is yes, then march on, and be right.

[Camp Freddie]

I have to agree with MD902man, I spent 50 f***ing thousand pounds getting all the licences and ratings to become a commercial helicopter pilot, and it really really really pisses me of when I become aware that cowboy PPL pilots are doing charters which I know they are, plus pleasure flying which I know they are.

In fact as I write this I am becoming more angry, they didnt sit at the dining table for weeks and weeks not speaking to their loved ones because they were studying for exams to join an exclusive club, they didnt go for months not earning any money while they were doing it.

why should they endanger passengers and steal food from my table which I should be earning instead of them.

In fact I would like to punch their lights out, every one of them.
(in a non violent politically correct manner you understand)

Mr Lappos, I am a little suprised that you seem to be condoning this practice, unless I misunderstood you ?

Mr md902man grass 'em up every one of the low lifes, go for it !!

[Helinut]

You may be surpised at the lack of interest which the CAA show in such things. I am told that unless you give them pretty much all the evidence yourself, they often try to discourage you from pursuing the thing, or at least exhibit no enthusiasm for it. I wouldn't want to speculate on the reason for this - you would have thought that was what they are there for, but they may have other ideas................

[NickLappos]

Camp Freddie,
I really do not understand the infraction at issue. If someone is doing something stupid, or unsafe, then have at it.

If the motive is to chase someone down using Governmental auhority for economic reasons, then watch out. We are often attacked by our detractors as unsafe, noisy and cowboying. I'd think twice about rolling in the Feds for someone, it is like the monkey's paw, likely to deliver more misery to everyone, in the end.

Let me also ask, after you have turned the guys in, would you then get his job?" Would there be a job there?

Dont get me wrong, I don't condone them breaking the law, I just dislike sneaking around calling in the Feds. Think of all the posts about those neighbors who tried to lynch helo pilots citing unsafe flying and such.

[Notar fan]

md902man
I have mixed feelings about this one. First of all, how sure are you that the law is being broken? Although, chances are that any md902man in the UK IS the law.

I imagine it would mean no insurance if an accident were to happen during one of those flights.

This doesn't sound too sure to me. I do not condone law breaking as a rule, but just because your breaking the law does not mean your doing something wrong. We all break some law or other everyday (eg; speeding, jaywalking). There isn't an operator in the US that doesn't enter that "grey area" from time to time, where he interprets the law one way and the Feds interpret it another.
You'll probably get more satisfaction and results by informing the clients of those you percieve operating illegally, than going to the authorities.

[Toppled Gyro]

It is not often that I feel to take issue with Nick Lappos, however, on this occasion I would ask Nick to review fully what has been asked and what he has stated.

The original posting made the following referral to insurance.

..”I imagine it would mean no insurance if an accident were to happen during one of those flights.”

A close friend of mine was severely injured whilst as a passenger in a helicopter accident. Without elaborating the extent of his injuries, he is not able to speak, will always need to be hand-fed, will always be confined to a wheelchair and requires constant extensive nursing. Because the operator and pilot of the helicopter were not properly authorised or licensed for the type of operation they carried out, their insurance was invalid. To make matters worse, the personal life insurance of this friend had small print exclusion clause that invalidating their commitment as it was not a proper licensed operator. The only course of action left was to personally sue the operator and pilot. When this legal net was closing in on this the operator, they went into voluntary liquidation. Only to re-emerge some few months later with a company name change and slight change in director structure. They are not now able to be financially pursued. My friend had chartered this helicopter believing that it was properly licensed and authorised for this. Externally, this operator had given all the impressions of a proper charter operator. From being a successful business man this friend and his family are now struggling to say the very least.

Nick, in your reply postings you stated:

“..I really do not understand the infraction at issue. If someone is doing something stupid, or unsafe, then have at it.”

“.. Are they unsafe? Is it a public endangerment?”

Putting to one side the question of safety, I would say that it is definitely a public endangerment.

I am sure that if Nick had a close friend that had gone through all this, his views might somewhat be altered.

To any ‘invalidated cowboy operators or pilots’ out there, I simply ask you to consider if you could have something like this on your conscience for the rest of your life.

If only these ‘cowboy’ operators would put the same effort into becoming properly authorised as they do in deceiving the general public our industry would be a lot better.

T.G.

[Camp Freddie]

I can't believe we are even discussing this, If you went on Holiday on your Boeing 737 and it turned out that either or both of the pilots were not correctly licenced you would expect the CAA to take action against the individuals and the airline.

What is the difference ?
there is no difference !

Shop the B***ards, miserable scum every one of them.

[md902man]

To Camp Freddie and Toppled Gyro.
I appreciate your comments and find myself in a position where I feel I will gather the necessary evidence (maybe in the form of video evidence with a scanner on in the background perhaps?).
and then hand it in to the necessary authorities.

Like many others I also spent a fair amount of money becoming licensed but that is not my motivation for doing this. As Toppled Gyro points out, innocent people suffer! If I wish to continue working in the helo environment I think we all have a duty to keep it safe for not only ourselves but the public who may be taking their first (and only) trip in a helicopter.

Notar fan:
I can't possibly comment on my present employment status!;)

[Camp Freddie]

Mr md902man,

I surely hope you do report them if they are not guilty they will rightly put up a legitimate defence.

everyone knows it is going on and yet a malaise exists where people just let it happen.

the PPL guys who often do the flying are well known for it, and yet only circumstantial evidence exists.

dont be put off by the fact that you have to collect evidence, I believe it is worth it and I would do the same.

good luck

CF

[diethelm]

A thought

You make a complaint to your local governmental aurthority, and they follow up. Now we all know that when a governmental authority knocks on the door we are in for a bundle of legal fees even if we are in the right. It is simply the process.

So, if you complained and the "scum" was operating in a perfectly legal and safe manner, are you prepared to be an honorable person and reimburse him for his bills? :\

[Camp Freddie]

so mr diethelm,

based on your rationale nobody can ever report somebody unless they are prepared the pay the costs if they are wrong themselves.

firstly you would not report to the CAA unless you had reasonable cause I would hope.

I cant believe that people seem to be happy with some t***er flying there wives and children around who obviously has no conscience along with no licence and backed up by a crappy scummy helicopter company who endorse the practice in the first place.

you know I think next time someone I know has an operation I will see if it turns out OK, and if it does and the surgeon turns out to have been struck off or not be properly qualified, I will say "oh well it doesnt matter, the op went ok so no problem"

this is madness, only in the helicopter business would we put up with this s**t.

thats it now I am not adding to this thread any more, the answer is so obvious I cant say it anymore !

[Crashondeck]

Go get 'em 902 man.

If they are taking short cuts on licenses etc, what other short cuts are they taking? - maintainance, hour logging?

The CAA should take keener steps to nip this sort of thing in the bud before more accidents happen and the helicopter industry takes another slating from the press.

The CAA set up so many hurdles for getting a licence / AOC and charge so much for the privilage, they should protect the honest part of the industry from the cowboys.

[paco]

I would certainly go for them - the paying public have a right to expect people taking them up for money are properly licenced, etc etc - I would certainly expect it of any airline, as mentioned above.

However, be aware that the CAA would untilmately be powerless as most of the legislation is possibly invalid anyway - certainly there is no provision in the Civil Aviation Act to allocate money for the investigation of "crimes" by the CAA. Probably getting the Air Transport Licensing boys in would be more effective.

Phil

[diethelm]

MD902Man:

Let us not get our knickers in a knot. My belief is that everyone should be responsible for their own actions. If someone is breaking the rules they should be fined, put out of business or whatever the appropriate sanctions should be. Clearly no one on this forum would condone illegal or unsafe operations.

However, if one makes a bogus claim that turns out to be wrong, why should the safe and responsible operator and in the end his customers be required to pay for that?

[Thomas coupling]

MD902 (somebody's got to fly ,em:) ), let us know how you get on, eh?

[ppheli]

Notar Fan

It's OK, I will do your research for you! :cool:

There are two N-reg corporate Explorers in the UK, both rather early MD900 examples, I might add. One of them (which was at Helitech in the static display) was chalked up for replacement by a shiny new 902, but the owner's companies are not in a good way at the moment... his 900 seems to currently be leased to another corporate owner who recently sold his 600N.

The other one, which featured in the latest Bond movie, also replaced a 600N.

[Vfrpilotpb]

Md,

I was going to PM you, but It seems I cannot so here is a short note,

Not far from me there is a man who runs severel helis(not his) he is larger than life and very up front, even when caught with the equivelant of a " Ringed Motor"(if you get my meaning) the CAA did nothing about the rest of his ops, so it seems that they opt for the quiet life and only get really messy when there are limbs on the fields:(

[Tallguy]

diethelm

If somebody reported the company I work for for suspected illegal public transport to the CAA, and as a consequence my CAA FOI(H) turned up on my doorstep demanding to know what was going on all I would have to do is produce the Tech Log pages for said dates, my legitimate AOC Cert., Pilots Licences etc to show that I'm afraid the reporting person was incorrect in their allogations and as such that would be the end of the enquiry. The CAA may keep a closer eye on the operation for a bit, but being legal operators there would be no problem.

If we had been operating illegally then we would fully deserve all that followed. My point being if I was reported by somebody and we had done nothing wrong it would be no problem in the slightest and cost nothing to resolve the situation, therefore if anybody has a concern about an operation they should report it and not just sit on it for the fear that if they are wrong they may have to reimburce the reported company. Illegal operators make me want to :yuk: as I have to jump through hoops, pay huge fees and go through constant inspections. Why should certain people feel they are above this :mad: :mad:

[Notar fan]

ppheli,
I was alluding to the fact that the other ten or twelve explorers (most of the UK fleet) in the UK are used in law enforcement.:ok:

[Shawn Coyle]

Any chance of finding out who the offender's insurance company is and telling them? They might be interested in protecting themselves...

[zalt]

Steady boys! I don't think MD902man identified a specific aircraft type.

Paco - are you actually familiar with the ANO?

[ShyTorque]

Seems to me that the greater issue here is safety.
Helicopters have always had a reputation, not always deserved, for poor safety. We are all victims and we will all lose something if this isn't stopped.

If con-men like these (and that is what they are) are making money at the expense of the safety of an unsuspecting public, then they need to be grounded asap. Seems to me it is certainly a criminal offence. Fraud, contrary to Health and Safety, Duty of Care, call it what you will.

They need ramp-checking. The CAA do this at the larger public events already. I suggest you contact the CAA and suggest where they might find it convenient to carry out a ramp check on these cowboy operators. The legislation is already in place as I understand it.

MD.

Do it, please. Soon. Before the limbs are in the fields.

[RDRickster]

Perhaps Flying Lawyer will hazard an opinion, but it seems to me that you are pretty much obligated to do something at this point. If you are knowledgable of potential safety issues and fail to report it to the authorities, isn't is possible that after a crash a family member sue you for not taking appropriate action? Besides, scammers need to be caught and punished. If they are ligitimate, then Tallguy's points are well taken and no harm done.

[Helinut]

RD,

No doubt FL will respond himself, if he sees your post, but I cannot see that someone unconnected with the "illegal" operation has any obligation that is actionable in law - a moral one certainly but you can't (yet) get sued for that.

If this was not the case, then the consequences would be never ending.

Incidentally, my experience is very similar to VFR's that unless the matter is given to the CAA on a plate, they can't be bothered to do a decent investigation.

In response to Shawn, insurance companies have a great "let out" clause. They do not need to bother investigating before an accident - they just do not pay up afterwards if they can find any way in which the flight was illegal. That way they too can save a lot of effort, if an accident does not occur........

[RDRickster]

Well, I'm not an attorney. It seems in the U.S. people sue at the drop of a hat... it's really ridiculous. However, I'll give you an example of what prompted my post above. A retired EMS worker was driving along and noticed an accident in front of him. The EMS worker had one of those little blue medical cadeuses stickers on his bumper.

Anyway, as he passed the accident scene he could tell that somebody was hurt. However, he felt his skills weren't quite up to the task since he had been out of the healthcare game... even though his certification was still current. So, he called dispatch from his cell phone to send an ambulance and kept driving.

The injured party sued AND WON a lawsuit against the retired EMS worker. Why? The retired EMS guy showed "intent" when he put his foot on the brake and he had a medical insignia on his bumper... showing that he was trained in the field and did nothing (he was sued for abandonment). If he had driven by without putting his foot on the brake, he would have been okay.

My point is, the issue has been raised in a very public way and something needs to be done. I don't know about U.K. law, and I'm sure FL will set me straight, but I'd be worried about covering you own tail at this point. People can be really petty at times... especially when they are angry or hurt. I guess it's a mute point, as 902 already indicated he was going to do what he thought was the right thing (most of us are in agreement).

[Helinut]

RDR,

Wow what a story - since we seem to follow 20ish years behind you, we have lots of goodies to come then! Mind you, unwittingly I may be right though, it does look never ending.

[Flying Lawyer]

Rick
I don't know about America but, in the UK, there is no legal obligation to report someone for committing an offence, and failing to do so would not give rise to a cause of action in civil proceedings.

paco
If 'most of the legislation is possibly invalid', nobody's noticed yet. Please don't say this again on a public forum - if it turns out you're right, I'll be out of work. ;)

Allocation of funds or not, the CAA spends truly fantastic amounts of money investigating and prosecuting people, often for trivial offences which would be better not prosecuted. When investigating/prosecuting, the CAA acts in a care-free 'money no object' manner and (in stark contrast to any other law enforcement agencies/prosecuting authorities I've experienced in my career) doesn't appear to pay the slightest regard to the cost involved or proportionality of response.

The frequent criticism in the industry is that the Authority seems very enthusiastic about prosecuting trivia whilst allowing more serious matters to escape their attention. I think there's much force in that criticism.
Most of us in or associated with the industry know the illegal public transport and 'bent charter' offenders so it seems very unlikely the CAA is unaware of them. I've never understood why they pursue trivia/minor infringements with such enthusiasm and don't take action against the well-known offenders. Evidence would be very easy to obtain if they went about it the right way.

(On a completely separate point - did you work at the now defunct Wessex Helicopters in the mid 90's? I flew a Bell47 there once years ago and think we may have met.)

[ali250]

As CP for an AOC company I can only point out that legitimate companies suffer for the misgivings of not so legitimate operators.

Without going too deep a few years ago a high profile passenger lost his life in an accident that if normal commercial air transport procedures were to be applied the aircraft would not of been able to take off in the first place.

The aftermath was that the law abiding operators got well a truly kicked in the knadgers!

My view is stop thinking about it and get it stopped now. Your not grassing up anyone who doesn’t deserve it, your protecting us.

[md902man]

Thanks for all of the views here. Nice to know we can have these type of discussions/posts. As for the type of helicopter being used, it's not a 902, believe me. More like a piston 4 seater and jet ranger. Two different operators, both UK. They know who they are and the camera/scanner will now be running at the first opportunity. I don't like causing grief for people but I think this is important. If they want to run an AOC operation, I suggest they get an AOC, oh, and licenced pilots!
Y'all have a nice day!

[Bandit in the Sun]

902 man. How do you know that they don't have a certification/licence/aoc etc?

[Thomas coupling]

:eek: :eek: That was a late fast ball, MD902!! mentioning no AOC and/or licenced pilots:suspect:
If that is the case - do your worst.

Personally, I think Bandit in the Sun is hiding something:suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

Are you involved perhaps?

[Bandit in the Sun]

Nothing to hide Thomas.
This is an interesting topic.

Just wondered, how does he know?

[Rich Lee]

Nick Lappos wrote:

"In the US we call that "dropping a dime" as in using a pay phone. just ask yourself what your motives are - You sound angry about the prospective employment opportunity lost because someone is a private pilot doing commercial pilot work.

No Champion of Justice would use that motive! The worst shellackings I got as a kid were "for my own good" and I'm not sure to this day that was true.

Are they unsafe? Is it a public endangerment? Those are the questions you might ask yourself, I think. If the answer is yes, then march on, and be right."

I see nothing unsound with Nick's opinion. If someone is flying without appropriate certification or in a manner that would endanger the safety of others those of us within the helicopter industry have an ethical responsibility to pursue appropriate remedial measures. Nick only asked that true motives be considered and I agree.

Anyone who has been in this industry more than a few years has seen pilots report other pilots to authorities for purely personal gain or retribution using safety, or violation of regulation as a cloak to obscure true intentions. I do not mean to suggest this is the basis or motive of the matter being discussed. Quite the contrary. Rather it is a note of general caution. The helicopter guild remains a small, loose alliance with a long memory. The ability to trust those with whom you work is an important discriminator used when one is considered for employment. When intent is pure, trust remains intact. When intent is diluted by personal motives, the bond of trust becomes diluted.