Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Why does Mr Buckley continue to air his dirty laundry on a public forum about his inability to deal with his CASA issues?
I think he has some very valid questions to ask, and given he appears to have attempted to utilise the "proper avenues" and been left without an answer, other than "bugger off", why wouldn't he try everything else?
If I lost my business, my career and my home (and I'm sure other things), I'd be trying everything I could think of to bring me some "justice". Especially when he has been wrongly accused of stalking/harassing the poor CASA staff who destroyed his business.
I normally agree with most of your posts, TBM, but not this one.
Glen, wishing you further strength in your fight!
Thread Starter
Further correspondence to Ombudsman
Dear XXXX of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office,
Further to our phone conversation I have put together a sampling of communications that began more than 2 years before CASA reversed their approval of APTA.
I believe that CASA has also claimed that the Legal Department was not aware of APTA. The concept of shared AOCs had been accepted industry practice for many years, not only by my own Organisation but by many others. You will recall that I spent two years and hundreds of thousands of dollars working side by side with 10 CASA personnel designing APTA. The checklist that CASA used is attached as Appendix 2A.
Once every procedure was assessed and signed off by CASA personnel with the entire product going to a Peer Review and followed by the issue of the full revalidation of the business in April 2017. This was the approval that CASA legal only became awre of more than 18 months later. To be frank, the assertion by CASA is simply not the truth.
I hope you will consider this further information as part of your investigation.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
Further to our phone conversation I have put together a sampling of communications that began more than 2 years before CASA reversed their approval of APTA.
I believe that CASA has also claimed that the Legal Department was not aware of APTA. The concept of shared AOCs had been accepted industry practice for many years, not only by my own Organisation but by many others. You will recall that I spent two years and hundreds of thousands of dollars working side by side with 10 CASA personnel designing APTA. The checklist that CASA used is attached as Appendix 2A.
Once every procedure was assessed and signed off by CASA personnel with the entire product going to a Peer Review and followed by the issue of the full revalidation of the business in April 2017. This was the approval that CASA legal only became awre of more than 18 months later. To be frank, the assertion by CASA is simply not the truth.
I hope you will consider this further information as part of your investigation.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 July, 2018
Glen, I’m not sure what other correspondence you had with CASA, but judging from the email trail between yourself and CASA (in post #1622), it would seem that your email to Massey on 25 July 2018 was the trigger point at which you poked the CASA bear. To CASA, your stern email was a “threat, an act of war declared against the big ‘R’ regulator”. From that point they became determined to stamp out some little upstart who dare lecture them and indeed question their accountability for aviation safety and due diligence. Ouch! To CASA, you had now became a very big boil on their buttocks. With each further correspondence the relationship soured. The louder your voice bellowed, the bigger a threat you became until they crushed you like a soufflé.
I feel for you mate and you have the support of many many industry folk. But CASA is an entity that has morphed into a beast so powerful that even the Minister ****s his pants and runs gutlessly in the opposite direction. When that power is given to psychopaths and sociopaths the collateral damage is not only inevitable, it’s ugly, very ugly.
As always, best of luck and best wishes.
I feel for you mate and you have the support of many many industry folk. But CASA is an entity that has morphed into a beast so powerful that even the Minister ****s his pants and runs gutlessly in the opposite direction. When that power is given to psychopaths and sociopaths the collateral damage is not only inevitable, it’s ugly, very ugly.
As always, best of luck and best wishes.
Thread Starter
Integrity? Request for change of CASA contact
14/05/2021- Request for consideration of change of primary contact within CASA
Dear Mr Craig Martin, CASA Executive Manager Regulatory Oversight, (previously Regulatory Services and Surveillance)
I refer to correspondence received from you today, advising me of the following:
“I remind you that I remain the nominated CASA manager for responding to all correspondence received from you by any CASA manager or officer, including the CEO/DAS, but with the exception of the Industry Complaints Commissioner”.
It is important that I formally put this on record. I have done this in the past, but I will do so again.
As you are aware, I have raised an allegation of misfeasance in public office against you. That allegation is not vindictive or vexatious. I am fully satisfied that I have a valid basis for a claim. In my opinion you have been instrumental in causing much of the harm done to date. I have written to CASA before on this matter, requesting that you not be the point of contact.
It does not seem reasonable that l bring an allegation against a CASA employee for misfeasance in public office, and that same individual is then nominated by CASA to be the person that manages the project from within CASA. Surely that brings the integrity of the process into question.
May I respectfully request guidance on who I can raise this matter with? For clarity. I do not believe that process provides me with natural justice or procedural fairness. I am not trying to be combative, but I have a reasonable expectation that CASA acts with good intent.
I would also point out that by dealing through you, it does not provide clear lines of accountability, which are important, and CASA would appreciate the importance of clear lines of accountability.
Finally, and with all due respect. Whilst I respect your industry expertise it is outside of the flight training industry. By writing to the respective Subject Matter Expert (SME) within CASA I feel that to be more effective.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
Dear Mr Craig Martin, CASA Executive Manager Regulatory Oversight, (previously Regulatory Services and Surveillance)
I refer to correspondence received from you today, advising me of the following:
“I remind you that I remain the nominated CASA manager for responding to all correspondence received from you by any CASA manager or officer, including the CEO/DAS, but with the exception of the Industry Complaints Commissioner”.
It is important that I formally put this on record. I have done this in the past, but I will do so again.
As you are aware, I have raised an allegation of misfeasance in public office against you. That allegation is not vindictive or vexatious. I am fully satisfied that I have a valid basis for a claim. In my opinion you have been instrumental in causing much of the harm done to date. I have written to CASA before on this matter, requesting that you not be the point of contact.
It does not seem reasonable that l bring an allegation against a CASA employee for misfeasance in public office, and that same individual is then nominated by CASA to be the person that manages the project from within CASA. Surely that brings the integrity of the process into question.
May I respectfully request guidance on who I can raise this matter with? For clarity. I do not believe that process provides me with natural justice or procedural fairness. I am not trying to be combative, but I have a reasonable expectation that CASA acts with good intent.
I would also point out that by dealing through you, it does not provide clear lines of accountability, which are important, and CASA would appreciate the importance of clear lines of accountability.
Finally, and with all due respect. Whilst I respect your industry expertise it is outside of the flight training industry. By writing to the respective Subject Matter Expert (SME) within CASA I feel that to be more effective.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
99% of the industry is batting for you,Glen .
Keep strong!
Keep strong!
Thread Starter
Response to Post 1626
Dear Mr Buckley
As the CASA manager designated to consider your queries to CASA and prepare responses accordingly, my role is largely administrative. Where necessary or appropriate, I seek input from the relevant areas in CASA, which is duly reflected in the substance of my replies.
In light of the volume and frequency of your communications, this is the most effective and efficient way to manage these exchanges. Thus, with a view to maintaining the continuity of the process by which your queries are considered and appropriate responses provided, CASA does not intend to alter these arrangements.
Your unsubstantiated allegations of misfeasance against me, which CASA and I have rejected as baseless, have no effect on the integrity of this, as said, essentially administrative process. If at any point you believe this might not be the case, you should direct your concerns to CASA’s Industry Complaints Commissioner.
Yours sincerely
Craig Martin
Executive Manager
Regulatory Oversight
Aviation Group | CASA
Is it worth writing to the ICC, or is it a waste of time. Any other suggestions?
As the CASA manager designated to consider your queries to CASA and prepare responses accordingly, my role is largely administrative. Where necessary or appropriate, I seek input from the relevant areas in CASA, which is duly reflected in the substance of my replies.
In light of the volume and frequency of your communications, this is the most effective and efficient way to manage these exchanges. Thus, with a view to maintaining the continuity of the process by which your queries are considered and appropriate responses provided, CASA does not intend to alter these arrangements.
Your unsubstantiated allegations of misfeasance against me, which CASA and I have rejected as baseless, have no effect on the integrity of this, as said, essentially administrative process. If at any point you believe this might not be the case, you should direct your concerns to CASA’s Industry Complaints Commissioner.
Yours sincerely
Craig Martin
Executive Manager
Regulatory Oversight
Aviation Group | CASA
Is it worth writing to the ICC, or is it a waste of time. Any other suggestions?
Unless you get some genuine therapeutic benefit from arguing with or appealing for assistance from anyone in CASA, I'd suggest you focus on potential legal remedies.
They don't care, Glen. They literally couldn't give a toss.
They don't care, Glen. They literally couldn't give a toss.
Worse than that - they HATE people like you Glen -you disturb their sleep of a thousand years............... and threaten them with exposure to the light - stay with the media, the public and the lawyers
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Under Class C
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep Glen you need to let go of this Avenue it will never go anywhere. Nothing on their end has changed in over a year so why would it now. There is only one way forward if you want to pursue. Otherwise you will just be writing the same email and letters in five years living in hope.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where have my red pens gone?
It would seem that Mr Craig Martin is merely an administration person, according to his own words. He is just your regular ‘dude’ banging away at a keyboard 9 to 5, writing reports, refilling the coffee machine, shooing away the fruit flys hanging around the lunchroom rubbish bins and changing the ink cartridges in the printer (got to make sure the fax/printer is in good working order so they can send those 16:59 pm Friday show cause notices), What amazes me is that this ‘administrative manager/office girl’ gets paid around $200k to $250k per year. Not bad for a lowly admin Johnny.
Your unsubstantiated allegations of misfeasance against me, which CASA and I have rejected as baseless, have no effect on the integrity of this, as said, essentially administrative process. If at any point you believe this might not be the case, you should direct your concerns to CASA’s Industry Complaints Commissioner.
Craig Martin
Executive Manager
Regulatory Oversight
Aviation Group | CASA
Craig Martin
Executive Manager
Regulatory Oversight
Aviation Group | CASA
The 'butter wouldn't melt' drone (in Sector 7G?) signing his name at the end as 'Executive Manager, Regulatory Oversight' (with the very millenial and uber trendy || vertical lines (let me just add a few 'shift backslashes' to show I can do it just like the youngsters |||| ) suggesting you should direct your concerns to the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner is hilarious! They who have no doubt already approved the response, have been fully aware of your issue since Day One and no doubt shared a donut or ten at the Kasa Kool Aid Fountain with the drone (Sturbahnfuhrer Martin) minutes before pressing 'send'.
I have always enjoyed Yes Minister. What makes me enjoy it even more is just how good and how timeless their take on exactly this type of 'governance' actually was..
Last edited by V-Jet; 18th May 2021 at 12:27.
Even the AG had to finally step down after he put his hand up and admitted he was the accused. Basic morals would should have CASA staff stepping aside from this until it has been resolved, not sending emails under their professional title claiming the Monty Python excuse (I'm not dead yet, it's not even a flesh wound).
Glen,
I know you will keep going and plugging away at it. No doubt they expect you to eventually give up, we all know you won’t. If you need more funds please do crank up the go fund me. You will certainly need to throw a considerable amount at this.
As for one of the accused saying yeah nah it’s ok that I still conduct the ‘administrative’ process is another layer to the disgrace.
Para377 he certainly wasn’t preparing any show causes for Glen!
This is certainly Monty worthy as stated above, or in the Aussie tune Castle worthy.
Go hard.
I know you will keep going and plugging away at it. No doubt they expect you to eventually give up, we all know you won’t. If you need more funds please do crank up the go fund me. You will certainly need to throw a considerable amount at this.
As for one of the accused saying yeah nah it’s ok that I still conduct the ‘administrative’ process is another layer to the disgrace.
Para377 he certainly wasn’t preparing any show causes for Glen!
This is certainly Monty worthy as stated above, or in the Aussie tune Castle worthy.
Go hard.
Executive Manager Regulatory "Oversight"?
oversight: Noun. 1. an unintentional failure to notice or do something.
Pretty cruisy job description.
oversight: Noun. 1. an unintentional failure to notice or do something.
Pretty cruisy job description.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIGHT
noun
- 1.
the faculty or power of seeing.
When you take into consideration that CASA like to ‘R’egulate by watching YouTube clips of naughty pilots doing allegedly naughty things, that title might suit Mr Martin.
Thread Starter
Letter to Court, Deputy PM and Ombudsman
18/05/21 CASE K12266238
Dear Court Registrar, Moorabbin Magistrates Court, and the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office Reference 2019-713834, and to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Mr Michael McCormack.
To the Presiding Magistrate of case K12266238
I fully respect the legal process, and I am mindful of the significant resources that have been directed to this matter by all Parties. Nevertheless, I am unable to attend the case on Thursday 20th May 2021.
I understand that I am fully accountable for what I state here, and you have my word that this is the truth. I am submitting this to you, and fully appreciate that the legal and moral obligations to tell the truth are as strong as if I was in the courtroom, and under an Oath.
My name is Glen Buckley, for the next few weeks residing at 6 Susan Court, Mount Waverley. I am the owner of the Business Melbourne Flight Training named as a Third Party in the court case scheduled for Thursday 20th May 2021.
I have already experienced two court cases related to this matter, and the last one, I found particularly difficult. I was unable to afford legal representation and represented myself. My naive assumption being that I simply needed to attend and tell the truth.
Unfortunately, my lack of understanding of this matter was misconstrued as deception, and that is not the case. Quite simply, for my own mental health, and the wellbeing of my family, I am not prepared to put myself through that again. Not without a representative from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) also appearing to explain what happened or providing me with a written explanation for me to bring to the Court.
I have made numerous requests for an explanation as you will see from the attached communication with CASA.
My best explanation that I can provide as a background.
In October 2018, Mr Jonathan Aleck the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services determined that my two business, APTA, and MFT were an “unauthorised operation”. I was later found out that it was his opinion only, and that no external legal advice had been obtained at that stage. As stated, I was dealing with his opinion, not a law or regulation.
Later external legal advice received by CASA confirmed that Mr Alecks opinion was incorrect. That was also supported by the findings in stage one of the Ombudsman’s office investigation. Stage two of the Ombudsman’s investigation continues.
CASA placed restrictions on the businesses ability to trade. CASA advised that they would be short term restrictions. My expectation was that CASA would resolve this matter in a short time frame of approximately one week. I could not have reasonably assumed that this matter would continue for over 6 months and still be no closer to being resolved. After 6 months, with those trading restrictions still in place, it became obvious that those restrictions were not going to be lifted. My parents had already funded $300,000 to staff salaries to avoid redundancies. It was inevitable that the business had to be closed or sold.
I sold APTA for 5% of its value due to the CASA trading restrictions, including a CASA issued interim approval to operate that expired in a matter of days, with no certainty of operations was assured after that date. The new owners were taking a big gamble, hence the reduced price. Every single cent from that sale went to creditors of that business. I did not receive anything at all. The business was forced into a situation where it was effectively given away. I was to remain on as an employee, as a condition of the sale of the business.
CASA then turned their attention to my flying school, Melbourne Flight Training, that also had restrictions on its ability to trade for 8 months. CASA directed that I had to transfer all staff, students, customers, marketing, and financial control to the new owners of APTA. I had effectively been forced to give away my second business.
I do not believe this direction had any basis in law. I reluctantly complied with CASAs request. The CASA direction made no mention of who became liable for the financial obligations for the business Melbourne Flight Training. I was left with the debts that accumulated whilst the trading restrictions were in place, and still accruing, including this matter for consideration today.
After the loss of my two businesses APTA and MFT, CASA then wrote to the new owner of APTA advising that my continuing employment was untenable, based on comments that I was making publicly. Hours later I was terminated, and I did not receive any entitlements owed after more than a decade with the business.
The fact that CASA refuses to provide an explanation, makes it impossible to present before the Court, as I have no explanation, and I do not understand why this happened.
To assist you in your determination and for complete clarity
These monies that are owed are ethically and morally my responsibility to resolve. They are expenses incurred between CASA initiating their action in October 2018 through until I was forced to transfer the business i.e. customers, staff, marketing, and financial control to the new owners of APTA approximately 9 months later.
Despite my best intention, it is not likely that I will ever be able to resolve this debt and the many hundreds of thousands owed to so many businesses, customers and employees that have been impacted by this matter. My family has been left destitute by the conduct of those three CASA employees, and imminently about to be declared bankrupt, if that has not already happened.
I have continued to push the office of the Deputy PM for his intervention and submitted a formal request for compensation for affected Parties before pursuing any compensation for myself. That claim for compensation includes the other parties in this legal action.
I have made allegations of misfeasance in public office against three CASA employees Before the Senate on 20/11/20, and that was followed up with a written submission to the Deputy PM. No response has been received by the Deputy PMs Office.
Several requests over the last two years to the Deputy PMs Office requesting a meeting to present my evidence of misconduct have similarly received no response.
I continue to push this matter for the many people affected. My hope being that CASA will act in a well-intentioned manner and meet with me, so that I can pay back everybody that I have a moral or ethical obligation to, irrespective of which Party is deemed to be legally liable.
The matter has received wide industry support with over ¾ million visits to this story, on a discrete pilot’s website. Whilst I do not expect the Magistrate to review the material, it does go someway to indicating that it may have some “substance”. Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA - PPRuNe Forums
Regarding the Court case. I am unable to present before the Court and present my case. My reasons are as follows, and I mean no disrespect to the judicial system.
The impact of this matter has been substantial. Quite simply, I no longer have the mental capacity to deal with the fallout from this matter. I am placing my health and wellbeing as my priority. I do that for the benefit of my family who depend on me.
Eighteen months ago, I was depressed and suicidal, my family having lost absolutely everything. I had a nervous breakdown and an extended period of unemployment.
Since that correspondence in October 2018 from CASA, my wife has had a staggering 4 days free of work, as she works through every public holiday, family birthday etc trying to rebuild some modest level of future security. This is literally killing her and it breaks my heart.
I have been dealing with this matter and its fallout for every waking moment of the last two and a half years. I cannot resolve it.
My current situation is that my family has been provided a notice to vacate our current rental property, as the Landlord is selling the property. Between my wife and I, we do not have the money to afford a furniture removalist, let alone a rental bond. Our situation is grim, and was totally avoidable, but for the misconduct of those individuals. I am staring down the face of being homeless in a matter of weeks.
Quite simply, I have spent 18 months trying to get out of a very dark place and fighting not to go back there. Until CASA can provide an explanation, I am not prepared to risk it.
I recognise that by making this decision, I may have committed a regulatory breach. I will respect any determination made and commit to doing my utmost to resolve any associated financial penalties, or any other punishment applied.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
To the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable, Mr Michael McCormack the Minister responsible for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)
My understanding is you have been fully briefed on this matter over the last two and a half years by Mr Anthony Mathews, the Chair of the Board of CASA. I have also written to you on several occasions since October 2018 requesting the opportunity to present evidence in support of my allegations of misconduct/misfeasance in public office against current CASA employees.
You are aware that I raised allegations of misfeasance in public office against three CASA personnel, Mr Crawford, Mr Aleck, and Mr Martin in Parliament on 20/11/20 and followed up with a written submission to your office. After many months, that correspondence remains unanswered.
You are also aware that similar allegations were made by Mr Bruce Rhoades, against those same three individuals, and that formed the basis of an ABC program into their conduct. Tragically Mr Rhoades died of cancer whilst still trying to clear his name and hold these same three individuals to account. I have his family’s approval to mention this matter. He attributed his terminal illness to the stress caused by the misconduct of those same CASA employees. His family will verify Mr Rhoades thoughts on this matter. The fact that the ABC devoted an investigative story into this matter alone, suggests that my allegations should be considered by your office, and most especially because misconduct amongst the senior executive management of CASA could potentially negatively impact the safety of aviation.
I have also advised you that senior ex CASA employees have contacted me, and offered simply, to tell the truth, should that opportunity present, and I again extend that offer to your Office.
My allegations are substantive, and there is an overwhelming body of evidence in support of those allegations by myself and other affected individuals I have written to you on several occasions over the lasty two years, seeking the opportunity to present my evidence. You have chosen not to present that opportunity.
For complete clarity.
Again, I am making a request of your office to facilitate an investigation into the conduct of those three CASA personnel. The impact of their action has no basis in safety or regulatory compliance
I respectfully request, a well-intentioned and comprehensive response from your office on this matter, as I have previously requested.
Respectfully
Glen Buckley
To the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office – Reference 2019-713834
As you are aware there are three matters being investigated by your office.
May I respectfully request that the above correspondence be considered prior to your final determination as to the appropriateness of that direction.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Dear Court Registrar, Moorabbin Magistrates Court, and the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office Reference 2019-713834, and to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Mr Michael McCormack.
To the Presiding Magistrate of case K12266238
I fully respect the legal process, and I am mindful of the significant resources that have been directed to this matter by all Parties. Nevertheless, I am unable to attend the case on Thursday 20th May 2021.
I understand that I am fully accountable for what I state here, and you have my word that this is the truth. I am submitting this to you, and fully appreciate that the legal and moral obligations to tell the truth are as strong as if I was in the courtroom, and under an Oath.
My name is Glen Buckley, for the next few weeks residing at 6 Susan Court, Mount Waverley. I am the owner of the Business Melbourne Flight Training named as a Third Party in the court case scheduled for Thursday 20th May 2021.
I have already experienced two court cases related to this matter, and the last one, I found particularly difficult. I was unable to afford legal representation and represented myself. My naive assumption being that I simply needed to attend and tell the truth.
Unfortunately, my lack of understanding of this matter was misconstrued as deception, and that is not the case. Quite simply, for my own mental health, and the wellbeing of my family, I am not prepared to put myself through that again. Not without a representative from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) also appearing to explain what happened or providing me with a written explanation for me to bring to the Court.
I have made numerous requests for an explanation as you will see from the attached communication with CASA.
My best explanation that I can provide as a background.
In October 2018, Mr Jonathan Aleck the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services determined that my two business, APTA, and MFT were an “unauthorised operation”. I was later found out that it was his opinion only, and that no external legal advice had been obtained at that stage. As stated, I was dealing with his opinion, not a law or regulation.
Later external legal advice received by CASA confirmed that Mr Alecks opinion was incorrect. That was also supported by the findings in stage one of the Ombudsman’s office investigation. Stage two of the Ombudsman’s investigation continues.
CASA placed restrictions on the businesses ability to trade. CASA advised that they would be short term restrictions. My expectation was that CASA would resolve this matter in a short time frame of approximately one week. I could not have reasonably assumed that this matter would continue for over 6 months and still be no closer to being resolved. After 6 months, with those trading restrictions still in place, it became obvious that those restrictions were not going to be lifted. My parents had already funded $300,000 to staff salaries to avoid redundancies. It was inevitable that the business had to be closed or sold.
I sold APTA for 5% of its value due to the CASA trading restrictions, including a CASA issued interim approval to operate that expired in a matter of days, with no certainty of operations was assured after that date. The new owners were taking a big gamble, hence the reduced price. Every single cent from that sale went to creditors of that business. I did not receive anything at all. The business was forced into a situation where it was effectively given away. I was to remain on as an employee, as a condition of the sale of the business.
CASA then turned their attention to my flying school, Melbourne Flight Training, that also had restrictions on its ability to trade for 8 months. CASA directed that I had to transfer all staff, students, customers, marketing, and financial control to the new owners of APTA. I had effectively been forced to give away my second business.
I do not believe this direction had any basis in law. I reluctantly complied with CASAs request. The CASA direction made no mention of who became liable for the financial obligations for the business Melbourne Flight Training. I was left with the debts that accumulated whilst the trading restrictions were in place, and still accruing, including this matter for consideration today.
After the loss of my two businesses APTA and MFT, CASA then wrote to the new owner of APTA advising that my continuing employment was untenable, based on comments that I was making publicly. Hours later I was terminated, and I did not receive any entitlements owed after more than a decade with the business.
The fact that CASA refuses to provide an explanation, makes it impossible to present before the Court, as I have no explanation, and I do not understand why this happened.
To assist you in your determination and for complete clarity
These monies that are owed are ethically and morally my responsibility to resolve. They are expenses incurred between CASA initiating their action in October 2018 through until I was forced to transfer the business i.e. customers, staff, marketing, and financial control to the new owners of APTA approximately 9 months later.
Despite my best intention, it is not likely that I will ever be able to resolve this debt and the many hundreds of thousands owed to so many businesses, customers and employees that have been impacted by this matter. My family has been left destitute by the conduct of those three CASA employees, and imminently about to be declared bankrupt, if that has not already happened.
I have continued to push the office of the Deputy PM for his intervention and submitted a formal request for compensation for affected Parties before pursuing any compensation for myself. That claim for compensation includes the other parties in this legal action.
I have made allegations of misfeasance in public office against three CASA employees Before the Senate on 20/11/20, and that was followed up with a written submission to the Deputy PM. No response has been received by the Deputy PMs Office.
Several requests over the last two years to the Deputy PMs Office requesting a meeting to present my evidence of misconduct have similarly received no response.
I continue to push this matter for the many people affected. My hope being that CASA will act in a well-intentioned manner and meet with me, so that I can pay back everybody that I have a moral or ethical obligation to, irrespective of which Party is deemed to be legally liable.
The matter has received wide industry support with over ¾ million visits to this story, on a discrete pilot’s website. Whilst I do not expect the Magistrate to review the material, it does go someway to indicating that it may have some “substance”. Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA - PPRuNe Forums
Regarding the Court case. I am unable to present before the Court and present my case. My reasons are as follows, and I mean no disrespect to the judicial system.
The impact of this matter has been substantial. Quite simply, I no longer have the mental capacity to deal with the fallout from this matter. I am placing my health and wellbeing as my priority. I do that for the benefit of my family who depend on me.
Eighteen months ago, I was depressed and suicidal, my family having lost absolutely everything. I had a nervous breakdown and an extended period of unemployment.
Since that correspondence in October 2018 from CASA, my wife has had a staggering 4 days free of work, as she works through every public holiday, family birthday etc trying to rebuild some modest level of future security. This is literally killing her and it breaks my heart.
I have been dealing with this matter and its fallout for every waking moment of the last two and a half years. I cannot resolve it.
My current situation is that my family has been provided a notice to vacate our current rental property, as the Landlord is selling the property. Between my wife and I, we do not have the money to afford a furniture removalist, let alone a rental bond. Our situation is grim, and was totally avoidable, but for the misconduct of those individuals. I am staring down the face of being homeless in a matter of weeks.
Quite simply, I have spent 18 months trying to get out of a very dark place and fighting not to go back there. Until CASA can provide an explanation, I am not prepared to risk it.
I recognise that by making this decision, I may have committed a regulatory breach. I will respect any determination made and commit to doing my utmost to resolve any associated financial penalties, or any other punishment applied.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
To the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable, Mr Michael McCormack the Minister responsible for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)
My understanding is you have been fully briefed on this matter over the last two and a half years by Mr Anthony Mathews, the Chair of the Board of CASA. I have also written to you on several occasions since October 2018 requesting the opportunity to present evidence in support of my allegations of misconduct/misfeasance in public office against current CASA employees.
You are aware that I raised allegations of misfeasance in public office against three CASA personnel, Mr Crawford, Mr Aleck, and Mr Martin in Parliament on 20/11/20 and followed up with a written submission to your office. After many months, that correspondence remains unanswered.
You are also aware that similar allegations were made by Mr Bruce Rhoades, against those same three individuals, and that formed the basis of an ABC program into their conduct. Tragically Mr Rhoades died of cancer whilst still trying to clear his name and hold these same three individuals to account. I have his family’s approval to mention this matter. He attributed his terminal illness to the stress caused by the misconduct of those same CASA employees. His family will verify Mr Rhoades thoughts on this matter. The fact that the ABC devoted an investigative story into this matter alone, suggests that my allegations should be considered by your office, and most especially because misconduct amongst the senior executive management of CASA could potentially negatively impact the safety of aviation.
I have also advised you that senior ex CASA employees have contacted me, and offered simply, to tell the truth, should that opportunity present, and I again extend that offer to your Office.
My allegations are substantive, and there is an overwhelming body of evidence in support of those allegations by myself and other affected individuals I have written to you on several occasions over the lasty two years, seeking the opportunity to present my evidence. You have chosen not to present that opportunity.
For complete clarity.
Again, I am making a request of your office to facilitate an investigation into the conduct of those three CASA personnel. The impact of their action has no basis in safety or regulatory compliance
I respectfully request, a well-intentioned and comprehensive response from your office on this matter, as I have previously requested.
Respectfully
Glen Buckley
To the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office – Reference 2019-713834
As you are aware there are three matters being investigated by your office.
- The CASA reversal of approval of my business APTA.
- The determination that my flying school of more than 10 years, Melbourne Flight training (MFT) was suddenly an “unauthorised operation”, provided 7 days’ notice of continuing operations and under what CASA deemed, “direct operational control”, I was forced to hand over all customers, staff, financial and marketing control to another business. CASA made no determination on the liabilities, and therefore all liabilities fell back on me, leading to this current court case.
- The direction to my employer that my continuing employment was not tenable based on comments that I was making publicly.
May I respectfully request that the above correspondence be considered prior to your final determination as to the appropriateness of that direction.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
response from the court
not sure what it means, but i got this
Good afternoon,
The Court notes the contents of your email.
The Court is expecting an Application to uplift this action to another jurisdiction and is awaiting the outcome of that. This is quite a lengthy process as it has to be considered by the Designated Judicial Officer of both Courts.
Kind regards
Regards,
[img]file:///C:/Users/61418/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg[/img]
Good afternoon,
The Court notes the contents of your email.
The Court is expecting an Application to uplift this action to another jurisdiction and is awaiting the outcome of that. This is quite a lengthy process as it has to be considered by the Designated Judicial Officer of both Courts.
Kind regards
Regards,
[img]file:///C:/Users/61418/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg[/img]