LIPS / API CLAIM DENIED
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: thailand
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I call API just now and they say as of 13:30 30JAN18 in Dubai they were just talking to UK Guernsey and that nobody has receive a legal paper from anyone about anything and everybody shaking their head 
Also that they know who this poster is and that him and his lawyers and UK Guernsey lawyers agreed to a arbortration appeel but halfway through him and his lawyers change their mind and walk out and make threat so they wont be surprised and are prepared because it is just doing business. Can not make everyone happy all the time.
Also that they know who this poster is and that him and his lawyers and UK Guernsey lawyers agreed to a arbortration appeel but halfway through him and his lawyers change their mind and walk out and make threat so they wont be surprised and are prepared because it is just doing business. Can not make everyone happy all the time.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to tidy things up with further information.
I was under the impression that the summons had been served upon the trust, however I will quote directly from the email sent to the claimant today from his legal team, and I quote.
" In Guernsey the rules require personal service.Therefore the Summons was handed to HM Sergeant on Monday for the sergeant to serve by hand on Sovereign today.I expect to receive confirmation of service tomorrow." end quote.
So in essence the Summons was served but has to go in a slightly roundabout way, end result is the same.
While I cannot directly comment on Toilet Flushes statement about mediation/arbitration etc as I do not have sufficient knowledge of what was on offer, and unless they were personally involved with it, neither would they , nobody in their right mind wants to go to court due to the time and expense involved, therefore one has to assume that the gap between the parties remains unabridged,unresolved, and unlikely to be so.
One of the good things to come out of this may be just how much of an influence Harvey Watt will have over future cases, when presented by expert medical evidence to the contrary.
I was under the impression that the summons had been served upon the trust, however I will quote directly from the email sent to the claimant today from his legal team, and I quote.
" In Guernsey the rules require personal service.Therefore the Summons was handed to HM Sergeant on Monday for the sergeant to serve by hand on Sovereign today.I expect to receive confirmation of service tomorrow." end quote.
So in essence the Summons was served but has to go in a slightly roundabout way, end result is the same.
While I cannot directly comment on Toilet Flushes statement about mediation/arbitration etc as I do not have sufficient knowledge of what was on offer, and unless they were personally involved with it, neither would they , nobody in their right mind wants to go to court due to the time and expense involved, therefore one has to assume that the gap between the parties remains unabridged,unresolved, and unlikely to be so.
One of the good things to come out of this may be just how much of an influence Harvey Watt will have over future cases, when presented by expert medical evidence to the contrary.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dubai
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From personal experience, wide gaps between parties in negotiations is usually due to the naivety of one side. Their ignorance (and/or greed) will be fueled by a lawyer who intends to cash in on their ignorance.
I'm unaware of any details in this case and do not post as an endorsement to AIP or otherwise, but I'm getting tired of the highly emotional posts and personal insults.
Poster of said messages seems to think they have a valid claim. If they're not bias (hard to believe giving the emotion they post with), then it could be ignorance on the part of HW and AIP.
Time will tell, but one things for sure.....the lawyers will end up richer regardless.
I'm unaware of any details in this case and do not post as an endorsement to AIP or otherwise, but I'm getting tired of the highly emotional posts and personal insults.
Poster of said messages seems to think they have a valid claim. If they're not bias (hard to believe giving the emotion they post with), then it could be ignorance on the part of HW and AIP.
Time will tell, but one things for sure.....the lawyers will end up richer regardless.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Collateral damage / Brand protection
I asked API about this legal action and I received the following response:
As of 18:30 (Dubai time) 29 January, Sovereign Trust Guernsey had not been served any papers, warrants, legal documents, notes or anything that could be construed as a legal notification. This is not to say the Trust won't be served in the future but does highlight the accuracy of his statements.
The Trustee was sent a screenshot of the post from PPRuNe and had no idea to what the poster was referring.
The monthly contributions are used to run the API business. Anything which effects the API business is managed through contributions. Counter claims are a part of the business. Paying the current 21 (soon to be 22 ) claimants is also part of the business.
As of 18:30 (Dubai time) 29 January, Sovereign Trust Guernsey had not been served any papers, warrants, legal documents, notes or anything that could be construed as a legal notification. This is not to say the Trust won't be served in the future but does highlight the accuracy of his statements.
The Trustee was sent a screenshot of the post from PPRuNe and had no idea to what the poster was referring.
The monthly contributions are used to run the API business. Anything which effects the API business is managed through contributions. Counter claims are a part of the business. Paying the current 21 (soon to be 22 ) claimants is also part of the business.
FACT The Summons has been served by H M Sergeant.
FACT you revealingly use the word API ‘business’:members take note your small & friendly pilot hand holding mutual has mutated and is now a business.
FACT Sovereign (Guernsey)Limited through Managing Director SH have a Fiduciary duty to protect pilot members money. They do not have the right to an open blank cheque book to the pilot fund.
FACT Most at risk are the 21 current (soon to be 22 ) claimants as they are net beneficiaries from the fund:they would do well to point this out to SH and keep a close watch on this case which goes on public record Friday.
Reminder: nowhere do the rules state the funds can be spent on “ anything which effects the API business”. (see the purported quote from API above).The current rules of the plan contain no mention of the funds being squandered on ‘liabilities’ arising out of legally challenged ‘recommendations’ made by Harvey Watt & Co who contracted the doctors who write their opinions in those reports.
As the API Consultants can change those rules at will members need to remain diligent and note any changes to the rules.
For the record the current rules state:
16 INVESTMENTS AND ACCOUNTS
16.4 All contributions paid by, or on behalf of the Members, less any remuneration or expenses shall be invested and/or held to administer the Plan and to fund the liabilities of the Plan to the extent that the Plan allows. The Trustee shall, where there have been deductions made in respect of remuneration or expenses provide the Members with a proper accounting for such deductions.
API Rule 16.4 API – 4 December 2017 Page 20 of 27
( notice how the ‘to fund the liabilities of the Plan to the extent that the Plan allows’ has become “to fund anything which effects the API business” and ‘The monthly contributions are used to run the API business’). Eyes wide open ? Point made.
Free legal advice: the 21 (soon to be 22 )claimants already receiving benefits who oppose their pilot fund being squandered on legal fees can ultimately write to the Guernsey Financial Services Commission and Channel Islands Ombudsman to complain using the following links:
https://www.gfsc.gg/consumers/compla...make-complaint
https://www.ci-fo.org/submit-a-complaint/
These two authorities effectively police (regulate ) the Trustee holding your fund and they will take your concerns seriously. Their service is free.
This is your legal right SO USE IT !
opinion : behavioral evidence (Reckless video page 8 above) suggests the PD ‘superman’ will attempt to instruct the Trustee Sovereign to use the pilot funds on a Risky Risky court case.(by changing the rules or poetic license ) After all its not his money.
Likely fallout /collateral damage to the brand reputation of employers and businesses involved is a real possibility.
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 3rd Feb 2018 at 15:07.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notes of appreciation have been received from claimant awarded benefit by API two days ago expressing gratitude for this current challenge to API .
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 3rd Feb 2018 at 14:21.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents & Ladies,
This is the alleged address in the BVI that is used by the fund & managers etc.
The question surely has to be, that in a "Tax Free" country such as Dubai, with a fund that is used for EK pilots in their hour of need, why does the money have to be kept in a "Tax Haven" such as BVI.
This is the alleged address in the BVI that is used by the fund & managers etc.
The question surely has to be, that in a "Tax Free" country such as Dubai, with a fund that is used for EK pilots in their hour of need, why does the money have to be kept in a "Tax Haven" such as BVI.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: DXB
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While there may be concerns about LIPS/API, this isn't one of them.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But why the BVI ?
There are plenty of other "Tax Havens" around, could it be because of a high level of secrecy about who actually is involved and where money is moved to.
Let's face it if Dubai was a problem there are plenty of other more open destinations, where they could plonk the money each month, and earn a reasonable return the rather large lump sum that must be involved.
There are plenty of other "Tax Havens" around, could it be because of a high level of secrecy about who actually is involved and where money is moved to.
Let's face it if Dubai was a problem there are plenty of other more open destinations, where they could plonk the money each month, and earn a reasonable return the rather large lump sum that must be involved.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: DXB
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm told Sovereign (business services) in Dubai (Google them, same Sovereign as who set up current API structure) was consulted at the time, BVI is what Sovereign recommended.
There's no wrongdoing in that.
There's no wrongdoing in that.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same structure that is now being called into question.
A fund such as the one the API hold has no need for such high levels of secrecy at all, or am I missing something.
I shall leave these links attached as it might well be relevant, and as no one seems to be able to answer the question as to why our money has to be held in such a secretive offshore haven.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/...virgin-islands
A fund such as the one the API hold has no need for such high levels of secrecy at all, or am I missing something.
I shall leave these links attached as it might well be relevant, and as no one seems to be able to answer the question as to why our money has to be held in such a secretive offshore haven.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/...virgin-islands
Last edited by gardenshed; 17th Feb 2018 at 15:04. Reason: Added link to a Youtube clip, and article from the Guardian Newspaper.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask the too BIG faces directly ( crew scheduling will have their contact details )
Notice on the aircrewprotection website under “how it works” there are some BIG new faces posted under API Consultants ...DC and DW. They allegedly work for the very same company as members do and crew scheduling will have their mobile contact details for certain.
You can ask them directly about the British Virgin Islands connection and report back on pprune.
Meantime news just received that yet another pilot claim has been denied by aircrewprotection after the company paid loss of license. Harvey Watt & Co strikes again. Details to follow.
777-up pm me please: toward an additional class of action.
You can ask them directly about the British Virgin Islands connection and report back on pprune.
Meantime news just received that yet another pilot claim has been denied by aircrewprotection after the company paid loss of license. Harvey Watt & Co strikes again. Details to follow.
777-up pm me please: toward an additional class of action.
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 22nd Feb 2018 at 13:20.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly it is true, and I happen to know this person, and before anyone asks his case is unrelated to the main topic.
It would appear that HW are now in the business of denying claims by fair means or foul, with the mealy mouthed reason of "preexisting" even though yet again in this case it wasn't, and EK have paid up on the loss of licence on his case too.
API now have to justify as to why there appears to be no right of appeal,how HW can refuse to accept the claim when yet again his medical has been pulled by the GCAA.
To quote Shakespeare " There is something rotten in the State of Denmark" and the API need to sort it out pdq, otherwise they may end up facing further legal action from a myriad of pilots, who have been regularly paying into a scheme that now seems shy of paying out when the need arises.
It would appear that HW are now in the business of denying claims by fair means or foul, with the mealy mouthed reason of "preexisting" even though yet again in this case it wasn't, and EK have paid up on the loss of licence on his case too.
API now have to justify as to why there appears to be no right of appeal,how HW can refuse to accept the claim when yet again his medical has been pulled by the GCAA.
To quote Shakespeare " There is something rotten in the State of Denmark" and the API need to sort it out pdq, otherwise they may end up facing further legal action from a myriad of pilots, who have been regularly paying into a scheme that now seems shy of paying out when the need arises.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sandpit.
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Gardenshed ... you know this isn’t going to be sorted out on Pprune right? The innuendo doesn’t help either. Write something that the majority can understand and follow, because I, for one, have lost interest in your crusade.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nakbin330 in very simple english then just for you.
Two separate cases where both pilots have had their claims for payment from API declined.
Both have received Loss of Licence from EK.
In both cases API via Harvey Watt have declined to pay out citing the reason of "Preexisting" with no right of appeal.
One case is now heading to the UK courts with a hefty payout if proven that API & Harvey Watt are in the wrong.
If API and Harvey Watt don't sort themselves out there may well be other court cases, especially if the one above wins, which will further drain funds needlessly , by pilots who have paid into the scheme, followed the rules only to be told sorry, an unknown somebody has decided that you are not going to receive what is rightfully yours.
The reference to Shakespeare and Hamlet,why not have a read, it's quite telling.
Two separate cases where both pilots have had their claims for payment from API declined.
Both have received Loss of Licence from EK.
In both cases API via Harvey Watt have declined to pay out citing the reason of "Preexisting" with no right of appeal.
One case is now heading to the UK courts with a hefty payout if proven that API & Harvey Watt are in the wrong.
If API and Harvey Watt don't sort themselves out there may well be other court cases, especially if the one above wins, which will further drain funds needlessly , by pilots who have paid into the scheme, followed the rules only to be told sorry, an unknown somebody has decided that you are not going to receive what is rightfully yours.
The reference to Shakespeare and Hamlet,why not have a read, it's quite telling.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fact :The decision to save or obliterate the fund is about to be made.
"The purpose of the Plan is to provide benefits to Emirates Pilots (protect Emirates pilots from financial hardship) in the event of permanent loss of Class 1 Medical Certificate and termination as a pilot by Emirates Airlines for medical reasons"
Members standby for updates
"The purpose of the Plan is to provide benefits to Emirates Pilots (protect Emirates pilots from financial hardship) in the event of permanent loss of Class 1 Medical Certificate and termination as a pilot by Emirates Airlines for medical reasons"
Members standby for updates
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 26th Feb 2018 at 15:30.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update and the need to act now before the fund is depleted beyond the tipping point
Fact Preliminary indications are that the “founding partners ” ( those whose identities remain undisclosed on Aircrew Protection International BVI company registration paperwork and sanctioned by the API “consultants “ including “sewerman” and as referred to in the quoted reference below by Stephen Hare of Sovereign (Guernsey) Limited as “the leaders or API ") are indeed embarking on a legal spending spree using pilot members money effectively using the fund as a legal fund to defend opinions of doctors commissioned by Harvey Watt & Co to deny members claims.
Currently beneficiaries, the recipients of notice of entitlement need to realize this is YOUR money. If the fund folds as a result of this action current beneficiaries and members alike cannot hold these individuals responsible . The API board wrote the rules of no liability themselves to ensure they will remain immune from prosecution.
RULES OF AIRCREW PROTECTION INTERNATIONAL
17 INDEMNITY
17.1 Neither the Trustee, Aircrew Protection Incorporated, Ltd., its Directors, advisors, consultants, secretarial administrator or administrative staff or any person holding office for the time being or who has in the past held office under the Plan shall be liable for any damages, losses or expenses arising from their acts or omissions in carrying out their respective duties unless arising from their gross negligence or dishonesty in the jurisdiction(s) in which said persons live or work or where funds are maintained.
17.2 No Member, their Nominated Recipient, or their Nominated Beneficiaries shall have any claim against API Limited, the Trustee, the Directors, the Committee or their appointees or representatives should the Plan be legally and properly depleted within the Rules of the Plan or unable to meet the liabilities of the Plan to the Members, or their Nominated Recipient, or their Nominated Beneficiaries concerned. This limitation shall apply irrespective of whether or not a Notice of Entitlement has been issued by the Trustee.
API – 4 December 2017 Page 21 of 27
On point of legal direction:
Whilst Rule 17.1 is clearcut
Rule 17.2 contains a clause that assists beneficiary and member alike:
Rule 17.2 states that the boards indemnity will only stand in so far as the Plan be legally and properly depleted within the Rules of the Plan
So what can current beneficiaries do right now to protect their future payment entitlements ?
Write to the Ombudsman and GFSC and question the legality and propriety or otherwise of the funds managers and Trustee allowing depletion and or collapse of the fund being caused by the boards decision to illegally and inappropriately allocate funds to finance defending legal liabilties.
Your only effective course of action is to review post #187 above and protest to the Ombudsman and Guersey Financial Services Authority using the links provided.
https://www.gfsc.gg/consumers/compla...make-complaint
https://www.ci-fo.org/submit-a-complaint/
Here is a direct quote from Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited viewable on the aircrewprotection.org website since 2016:
"INTRODUCTION FROM THE API TRUST
Introduction from the API Trust
August 2016
Dear LIPS members,
My name is Stephen Hare and I represent Sovereign Trust (Guernsey) Limited which acts as the Trustee of the Aircrew Protection International (API) Trust in Guernsey, UK.
As you may be aware, in May of 2015 the Emirates Pilot’s Loss of Income Protection Scheme (LIPS) was rebranded as Aircrew Protection International. Over the past year the API leadership has been instrumental in making your loss of license plan and the fund, where you have been making your contributions, more secure and an important part of that effort was the establishment of the API Trust.
Before I go further, let me explain what a trust is. A trust is a legal relationship whereby property (the fund) is held by one party (the trustee) for the benefit of another (the members, who are all beneficiaries of the Trust). While the trustee is given legal title to the fund, in accepting it the trustee owes a number of fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries including:utmost good faith, impartiality and acting in the best interests of the beneficiaries. The Trustee is licensed and regulated by the Guernsey (UK) Financial Services Commission.”
end of quote
What is 'Doctrine Of Utmost Good Faith'
The Doctrine Of Utmost Good Faith, also known as uberrimae fidei, is the minimum standard requiring transacting parties to act honestly and not mislead or withhold critical information from one another. The doctrine of utmost good faith applies to many everyday financial transactions and is one of the most fundamental doctrines in insurance law.
Squandering notice of entitlement sanctioned beneficiary funds (funds already allocated to disabled pilots) on extortionate legal liability costs cannot be in the best interest of those beneficiaries.
Members pay their premiums monthly and believe this money is kept securely to support them should they lose their medical and their employment is terminated:
No one pays their monthly premium knowing this money is now being used as a legal fund to fight liabilities incurred by the API board and Sovereign Guernsey Limiteds choice to solely (without question) accept and consequently defend opinions made by Harvey Watt & Co contracted doctors at astronomical cost to the fund.
Currently beneficiaries, the recipients of notice of entitlement need to realize this is YOUR money. If the fund folds as a result of this action current beneficiaries and members alike cannot hold these individuals responsible . The API board wrote the rules of no liability themselves to ensure they will remain immune from prosecution.
RULES OF AIRCREW PROTECTION INTERNATIONAL
17 INDEMNITY
17.1 Neither the Trustee, Aircrew Protection Incorporated, Ltd., its Directors, advisors, consultants, secretarial administrator or administrative staff or any person holding office for the time being or who has in the past held office under the Plan shall be liable for any damages, losses or expenses arising from their acts or omissions in carrying out their respective duties unless arising from their gross negligence or dishonesty in the jurisdiction(s) in which said persons live or work or where funds are maintained.
17.2 No Member, their Nominated Recipient, or their Nominated Beneficiaries shall have any claim against API Limited, the Trustee, the Directors, the Committee or their appointees or representatives should the Plan be legally and properly depleted within the Rules of the Plan or unable to meet the liabilities of the Plan to the Members, or their Nominated Recipient, or their Nominated Beneficiaries concerned. This limitation shall apply irrespective of whether or not a Notice of Entitlement has been issued by the Trustee.
API – 4 December 2017 Page 21 of 27
On point of legal direction:
Whilst Rule 17.1 is clearcut
Rule 17.2 contains a clause that assists beneficiary and member alike:
Rule 17.2 states that the boards indemnity will only stand in so far as the Plan be legally and properly depleted within the Rules of the Plan
So what can current beneficiaries do right now to protect their future payment entitlements ?
Write to the Ombudsman and GFSC and question the legality and propriety or otherwise of the funds managers and Trustee allowing depletion and or collapse of the fund being caused by the boards decision to illegally and inappropriately allocate funds to finance defending legal liabilties.
Your only effective course of action is to review post #187 above and protest to the Ombudsman and Guersey Financial Services Authority using the links provided.
https://www.gfsc.gg/consumers/compla...make-complaint
https://www.ci-fo.org/submit-a-complaint/
Here is a direct quote from Sovereign Trust Guernsey Limited viewable on the aircrewprotection.org website since 2016:
"INTRODUCTION FROM THE API TRUST
Introduction from the API Trust
August 2016
Dear LIPS members,
My name is Stephen Hare and I represent Sovereign Trust (Guernsey) Limited which acts as the Trustee of the Aircrew Protection International (API) Trust in Guernsey, UK.
As you may be aware, in May of 2015 the Emirates Pilot’s Loss of Income Protection Scheme (LIPS) was rebranded as Aircrew Protection International. Over the past year the API leadership has been instrumental in making your loss of license plan and the fund, where you have been making your contributions, more secure and an important part of that effort was the establishment of the API Trust.
Before I go further, let me explain what a trust is. A trust is a legal relationship whereby property (the fund) is held by one party (the trustee) for the benefit of another (the members, who are all beneficiaries of the Trust). While the trustee is given legal title to the fund, in accepting it the trustee owes a number of fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries including:utmost good faith, impartiality and acting in the best interests of the beneficiaries. The Trustee is licensed and regulated by the Guernsey (UK) Financial Services Commission.”
end of quote
What is 'Doctrine Of Utmost Good Faith'
The Doctrine Of Utmost Good Faith, also known as uberrimae fidei, is the minimum standard requiring transacting parties to act honestly and not mislead or withhold critical information from one another. The doctrine of utmost good faith applies to many everyday financial transactions and is one of the most fundamental doctrines in insurance law.
Squandering notice of entitlement sanctioned beneficiary funds (funds already allocated to disabled pilots) on extortionate legal liability costs cannot be in the best interest of those beneficiaries.
Members pay their premiums monthly and believe this money is kept securely to support them should they lose their medical and their employment is terminated:
No one pays their monthly premium knowing this money is now being used as a legal fund to fight liabilities incurred by the API board and Sovereign Guernsey Limiteds choice to solely (without question) accept and consequently defend opinions made by Harvey Watt & Co contracted doctors at astronomical cost to the fund.
Last edited by Thunderbirds54321; 5th Mar 2018 at 19:23.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Dubai
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Everyone.
This is David with API. I’m new to this, but I’ve been with EK for over 10 years. If you ever have any questions, concerns, or want clarification on anything (rumour or otherwise) you’ve read or heard about API, feel free to PM me, or just ask me here. I’ll do my best to answer quickly and accurately. Thank you.
This is David with API. I’m new to this, but I’ve been with EK for over 10 years. If you ever have any questions, concerns, or want clarification on anything (rumour or otherwise) you’ve read or heard about API, feel free to PM me, or just ask me here. I’ll do my best to answer quickly and accurately. Thank you.