Dodgy flying school going ons. What to do?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dodgy flying school goings on. What to do?
A bit of advice would be appreciated.
I have heard from a source that I trust implicitly that a certain school I used to teach at has been up to no good. The owner of the school (a PPL holder) has been spotted taking trial lessons. This is not something I have seen myself yet, but I will be investigating. Aside from any legal issues, I worry since I hardly rate the chap as competent enough to fly himself, let alone an unsuspecting and paying punter.
So, what is the best course of action? Talk my concerns through with a mate from the Belgrano? Confront the school? Or go down an 'official' route? (whatever that may be.)
Has anybody had any experience of this sort of thing? If so, what was the outcome.
Cheers in advance.
I have heard from a source that I trust implicitly that a certain school I used to teach at has been up to no good. The owner of the school (a PPL holder) has been spotted taking trial lessons. This is not something I have seen myself yet, but I will be investigating. Aside from any legal issues, I worry since I hardly rate the chap as competent enough to fly himself, let alone an unsuspecting and paying punter.
So, what is the best course of action? Talk my concerns through with a mate from the Belgrano? Confront the school? Or go down an 'official' route? (whatever that may be.)
Has anybody had any experience of this sort of thing? If so, what was the outcome.
Cheers in advance.
Last edited by Say again s l o w l y; 17th Aug 2004 at 22:49.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hendon
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your source is clearly not an idiot, but hearsay is not much to go with. You need dates, times and photographs. (The risk being that the guy could kill someone while evidence is collected). This sort of behaviour is bad for the whole flying community and personally I wouldn't hesitate to shop him to the CAA.
Not very much fun.
Not very much fun.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS
That is a terrible state of affairs! I aggree that the best route is the official one but with evidence eg tech logs and even testimony from the students as to who flew it. I would take him/her straight to the CAA. I think many of us have come accross pushy owner/operators who believe the rules don't apply. Not only do they endanger others but also we all end up being dragged in to the sinking mess. I wish you luck.
!
That is a terrible state of affairs! I aggree that the best route is the official one but with evidence eg tech logs and even testimony from the students as to who flew it. I would take him/her straight to the CAA. I think many of us have come accross pushy owner/operators who believe the rules don't apply. Not only do they endanger others but also we all end up being dragged in to the sinking mess. I wish you luck.
!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting the evidence is the very first step, what I would really appreciate is some idea of what to do with it after collection. I don't want to be vindictive and potentially take down what has been a good place in the past.
Dilemmas, dilemmas....
Dilemmas, dilemmas....
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't do anything that may put you at any risk, just refer it to the CAA, they have their ways and means of collecting evidence, and its probably far better that you're not involved beyond the initial reporting stage.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Niknak's on the ball. Let the powers that be deal with it.
It's quite possible that this may wind up as a criminal prosecution so you don't want to run the risk of getting yourself caught up with any legal technicalities.
Best Regards,
2close
It's quite possible that this may wind up as a criminal prosecution so you don't want to run the risk of getting yourself caught up with any legal technicalities.
Best Regards,
2close
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep track though. The Belgrano can be very wary of even investigating these things very thoroughly, let alone prosecuting, for fear of legal action. There was a case I know of not dissimilar that they refused to deal with until too late. So monitor what goes on, and if the CAA does nothing within a time period you think reasonable then let this person know that you know what's going on. He must be stopped before someone is killed.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: SURREY, U.K.
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A GOOD QUESTION
If this truly is the case, then the implications are potentially very bad. If the flight is being conducted 'illegally' by a PPL holder, then should any sort of incident/accident occur, then I doubt if the insurers would be too keen to hand over wads of greenbacks! Secondly, this sort of conduct hugely damages the reputation of all in the flying community, with the media fallout further tarnishing GA's already delicate reputation (vis...Low Flying, Noise etc etc). Likewise, it is morally unacceptable to condone by inaction such a dangerous activity being perpertrated on an unsuspecting member of the general public.
However, I endorse the comments above that such matters should be placed squarely into the hands of the regulators and the enforcement branch of the CAA. Naturally, the only option is to report your suspicions and 'allegations' (As until they are proven they can not be said to be accusations!) I am sure that those with a finer legal brain than mine will correct me if I am wrong, or offer further more relevant advice!
Tailwinds
However, I endorse the comments above that such matters should be placed squarely into the hands of the regulators and the enforcement branch of the CAA. Naturally, the only option is to report your suspicions and 'allegations' (As until they are proven they can not be said to be accusations!) I am sure that those with a finer legal brain than mine will correct me if I am wrong, or offer further more relevant advice!
Tailwinds
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a similar note - my local flying school has employed a newly qualified instructor, straight from test, who is teaching fulltime with no unrestricted instructor on site ie this guy is getting no supervision. I suspect that this negates the CAA school authorisation and probably the insurance but am at a loss as to what to do. I don't want the guy to lose his licence or the school to be shut down but believe that it is dangerous for him to be instructing without the support/advice of a more experienced supervisor. Was it clearer when we had an "AFI" rating ? Am I just being an old fart ? Who has a view ?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would you want members of your family to go for a "trial flight" knowing that they were probably not insured? That the organisation was not correctly supervised, that corners were being cut; and that the management were failing to exercise any duty of care
I think the answer is obvious!
A useful number is 0207 453 6175
I think the answer is obvious!
A useful number is 0207 453 6175
Probably the most ridiculous piece of Eurocracy concerning FIs was the introduction of the 100/25 requirement for upgrading. Previously it was by test - for all the AFIs who hadn't been snapped up by the airlines by then, that is.
The 100 hours instructional time could be a succession of trial flights, the 25 solo sign-offs can easily be achieved if people have a think about it. But it proves nothing. OK - 100 hrs and a test I would agree with - but the 25 solo sign-offs are a complete irrelevance.
At least the definition of 'supervision' is now more flexible. It doeasn't exist........
The 100 hours instructional time could be a succession of trial flights, the 25 solo sign-offs can easily be achieved if people have a think about it. But it proves nothing. OK - 100 hrs and a test I would agree with - but the 25 solo sign-offs are a complete irrelevance.
At least the definition of 'supervision' is now more flexible. It doeasn't exist........
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well unfortunately this has come back to life.
This time it's even worse, with both one of the company directors and a newly minted 17 year old PPL taking up trial lessons. Neither of whom have anything but basic PPL's. I'm spitting chips about this.
This time however, there is more evidence. So another letter to the Belgrano and hopefully something may actually happen this time!
This time it's even worse, with both one of the company directors and a newly minted 17 year old PPL taking up trial lessons. Neither of whom have anything but basic PPL's. I'm spitting chips about this.
This time however, there is more evidence. So another letter to the Belgrano and hopefully something may actually happen this time!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
essouira:
Difficult one this. The JAA FI regs don't specifically require a supervising instructor on site whereas the old UK AFI regs did. Common sense says there should be one but in this particular case I'd say if the guy's working full-time he'll very quickly gain the knowledge and experience required to make sound judgements. But if he's working on his own he'll never get his 25 sup. solos - unless he fiddles them, but no-one does that 
As regards the illegal trial flights, if you don't work there any more SAS, why not give the guy the benefit of the doubt and speak to him about it. It'll either get him to stop without the CAA getting involved, or confirm to you that he needs the heavy hand of the law.
NS
my local flying school has employed a newly qualified instructor, straight from test, who is teaching fulltime with no unrestricted instructor on site ie this guy is getting no supervision
As regards the illegal trial flights, if you don't work there any more SAS, why not give the guy the benefit of the doubt and speak to him about it. It'll either get him to stop without the CAA getting involved, or confirm to you that he needs the heavy hand of the law.
NS
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: uk
Age: 56
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this makes me laugh
I posted last year about a similar subject. If you were to visit a certain few heli schools on certain days, you'd see illegal flights taking place, ie commercial flights (peasure trips) without a commercial pilot at the controls.
Maybe my name gives me away but I am powerless to do anything about it. Having had the CAA investigate a few instances, I have been informed that there was no evidence, the owner of said companies showing only trial flight took place etc. I do know of a flight which took place, was claimed as a trial lesson, was a land-away at an unlicensed site and they got away with that too. How? Claimed it was a private flight by the pilot. The pilot is known for constantly doing illegal flights!!
Maybe my name gives me away but I am powerless to do anything about it. Having had the CAA investigate a few instances, I have been informed that there was no evidence, the owner of said companies showing only trial flight took place etc. I do know of a flight which took place, was claimed as a trial lesson, was a land-away at an unlicensed site and they got away with that too. How? Claimed it was a private flight by the pilot. The pilot is known for constantly doing illegal flights!!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 300 miles south of EDI
Age: 55
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the alleged criminal activity at a certain flying school with illegal trial lessons. I doubt the individual who may be involved in perpetrating this activity would by interested in any advice given to them by a professional pilot. They certainly haven't listened to any in the past...
This complete abandonment of flying safety standards at a JAR flying school is a serious matter. It must be stopped for the safety of the public, conned into thinking they are paying money to fly with a properly qualified instructor.
ST
This complete abandonment of flying safety standards at a JAR flying school is a serious matter. It must be stopped for the safety of the public, conned into thinking they are paying money to fly with a properly qualified instructor.
ST