Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Thread Starter
Negligent Misstatement
17/08/20
To the relevant person within the Law Institute of Victoria,
My name is Glen Buckley and I am seeking some guidance on a Victorian based Legal Firm that will have experience or expertise in matters relating to "Negligent Misstatement".
I previously operated a business operating in the area of flight training for a period of 15 years. I depended on the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for advice and guidance to continue operating that business.
Without any prior notice and not on the basis of safety or regulatory breaches, CASA "changed their mind" and placed limitations on the business's ability to trade.
Ultimately those restrictions lead to the failure of the business, and I along with a number of other businesses and individuals lost many millions of dollars of investment.
I am seeking the opportunity to meet with a legal firm with expertise in the area of negligent misstatement.
I have strong supporting evidence, and I am well prepared. I am wanting to move forward as quickly as practical to commence litigation against CASA.
Any guidance on identifying a suitable legal firm would be appreciated.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
To the relevant person within the Law Institute of Victoria,
My name is Glen Buckley and I am seeking some guidance on a Victorian based Legal Firm that will have experience or expertise in matters relating to "Negligent Misstatement".
I previously operated a business operating in the area of flight training for a period of 15 years. I depended on the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for advice and guidance to continue operating that business.
Without any prior notice and not on the basis of safety or regulatory breaches, CASA "changed their mind" and placed limitations on the business's ability to trade.
Ultimately those restrictions lead to the failure of the business, and I along with a number of other businesses and individuals lost many millions of dollars of investment.
I am seeking the opportunity to meet with a legal firm with expertise in the area of negligent misstatement.
I have strong supporting evidence, and I am well prepared. I am wanting to move forward as quickly as practical to commence litigation against CASA.
Any guidance on identifying a suitable legal firm would be appreciated.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Victoria
Age: 59
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glen, Craig Martin is still at CASA and you are correct that he is no longer working in his ‘previous role’. His new role is TBA. The halls at sleepy hollow are bustling at the moment as the heat in the kitchen has been turned up a notch, well done good Sir. Keep it coming.
As for the two new Board members, I don’t want to dash your hopes but they are part of the ‘system’. You won’t get a listening ear or a modicum of sympathy from then. They may be new, but they have been well briefed on activities within CASA along with a rundown on any serial pests, of which you fit the mould! ( and I mean that respectfully mate!).
As has been mentioned by many, CASA deserves nothing short of a Royal Commission. It is the only channel from which the truth can be gleaned. But the Government knows what has been going on and they will never sanction that. While the Loyola lunatic remains at Fort Fumble our aviation industry remains doomed and anybody challenging the powers of CASA will be crushed.
As for the two new Board members, I don’t want to dash your hopes but they are part of the ‘system’. You won’t get a listening ear or a modicum of sympathy from then. They may be new, but they have been well briefed on activities within CASA along with a rundown on any serial pests, of which you fit the mould! ( and I mean that respectfully mate!).
As has been mentioned by many, CASA deserves nothing short of a Royal Commission. It is the only channel from which the truth can be gleaned. But the Government knows what has been going on and they will never sanction that. While the Loyola lunatic remains at Fort Fumble our aviation industry remains doomed and anybody challenging the powers of CASA will be crushed.
Thread Starter
CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner process- fundamentally flawed
If there is any doubt about the lack of integrity and effectiveness of CASA having an Industry Complaints Commissioner that is internal, compared to having an independent body such as the Commonwealth Ombudsman investigate matters. Here it clearly is.!!
I want to be very clear. At this stage, I have no doubt at all about the integrity of Mr. Hanton in the role of the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner. My allegation is that he is being misled, and deliberately so by members of CASAs Executive Management.
I initially submitted this complaint to the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner in December of 2018, and much later to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.
It is interesting to see the two very distinctive outcomes that resulted. I had fought with CASA on this matter, and finally CASA and after two months CASA admitted to me verbally that they had erred. Nevertheless, they maintained the restrictions on the business's ability to trade for a further 6 months, until the business was unable to continue.
The complaint was significant and in fact, the use of the Aviation Ruling was the trigger that CASA used to bring down my business. My submitted complaint to the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner follows:
APTA REFERENCE- MATTER “F” FOXTROT
DATE OF SUBMISSION- 31/12/18
COMPLAINT LODGED BY Glen Buckley-CEO- Australian Pilot Training Alliance ARN 759217
Email (preferred contact) [email protected]
Mobile 0418772013
Address – Hangar 17, Northern Avenue, Moorabbin Airport, 3194
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
CASA initiated action against my Business on 23/10/18, and at the time of writing CASA seems some way off from resolving this matter. To date, this has cost my Business approximately $200,00 and has significantly impacted on my ability to continue operating.
I advised CASA very clearly and repeatedly throughout the process of the cost impact.
Such a substantive action would usually be due to a grave and imminent risk to aviation safety.
CASA has raised no concerns at all about Safety but drew on the Aviation Ruling to initiate this significant action.
COMPLAINT
Significant harm has been brought to me and my business as a result of CASA using the Aviation Ruling as the basis of their action, which I have repeatedly objected to and asked guidance on how I can have this “tested”.
I do not believe that the Aviation Ruling applies and have repeatedly highlighted that to CASA over the last 10 weeks.
EXPECTED OUTCOME
My understanding is that the Aviation Ruling does not have a “Head of Power”. Can CASA specifically confirm whether my understanding is correct?
The Aviation Ruling is for “CAR 206 operations”. My understanding is that Flying Training organizations were specifically removed from CAR 206 operations in September 2014. Can you confirm that: for the purposes of action against my business has CASA elected to slip it back in, or is it an “oversight” on CASAs behalf.
The Aviation Ruling refers to a Chief Pilot, and this position does not exist in a flying training environment. Can you confirm that the Chief Pilot (Charter Organisations) and Head of Operations (Flying Training) are interchangeable throughout the legislation, or is this a peculiarity to CASAs action against me only?
The Aviation Ruling was written for a completely different regulatory environment in early 2006. With the complete overhaul of legislation in September 2014, I felt that this may have become redundant. Can you confirm that it does apply?
If the Aviation Ruling does apply, why specifically has CASA turned a blind eye to it for almost 13 years and has reactivated it against my Business so aggressively?
The Aviation Ruling specifically refers to Organisations operating with an “arm's length contractual arrangement”. This is, in fact, the exact opposite of what APTA is, and highlights the confusion that exists within casa. I have highlighted this repeatedly to CASA throughout the process. Can CASA specifically state whether or not they are of the opinion that I operate with an “arms-length contractual arrangement” as opposed to a contract?
Can CASA please clearly state the link between applying the Aviation Ruling and Safety.
END OF COMPLAINT
So as a response to that complaint, how did they respond?
Here is the CASA response from the Industry Complaints Commissioner.
"Because APTA advised CASA has taken the Aviation Ruling "off the table", I continue to be of the view that there is no utility in making an assessment of issues that are no longer in contention"
In other words, CASA can make scurrilous allegations against someone over a protracted period. When the individual lodges a complaint, CASA simply takes it "off the table" and the person lodging the complaint loses their opportunity to have their complaint considered by CASAs Industry Complaints Commissioner.
Yet when the Commonwealth Ombudsman conducts an investigation he finds;
"The Ruling was not amended to reflect that legislative change from 1 September 2014, meaning that the CAR and the Ruling were no longer aligned in material ways"
"In my concluded view there was an administrative deficiency due to an absence of a direct relationship between the activity being regulated and the policy said to regulate it. That gave rise to ambiguity and uncertainty with the potential to cause detriment to those relying on the accuracy of the regime or conversely prevent detriment from occurring"
"It is my concluded view that CASA should have made a concurrent amendment to its ruling at the entry into force of the 1 September 2014 compilation of the CAR because of the practical effect of the change to those relying on the regulatory regime."
Thank goodness we have a Commonwealth Ombudsman and don't need to solely rely on CASA to act with integrity when they investigate themselves. The function and accountability of the CASA ICC process need a complete overhaul if stakeholders in this industry are to have access to a well-intentioned ICC who is determined to arrive at fair and transparent outcomes.
Later today (time permitting) i intend to post another example of the CASA internal dispute resolution process i.e. the ICC being completely flawed,
I want to be very clear. At this stage, I have no doubt at all about the integrity of Mr. Hanton in the role of the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner. My allegation is that he is being misled, and deliberately so by members of CASAs Executive Management.
I initially submitted this complaint to the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner in December of 2018, and much later to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.
It is interesting to see the two very distinctive outcomes that resulted. I had fought with CASA on this matter, and finally CASA and after two months CASA admitted to me verbally that they had erred. Nevertheless, they maintained the restrictions on the business's ability to trade for a further 6 months, until the business was unable to continue.
The complaint was significant and in fact, the use of the Aviation Ruling was the trigger that CASA used to bring down my business. My submitted complaint to the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner follows:
APTA REFERENCE- MATTER “F” FOXTROT
DATE OF SUBMISSION- 31/12/18
COMPLAINT LODGED BY Glen Buckley-CEO- Australian Pilot Training Alliance ARN 759217
Email (preferred contact) [email protected]
Mobile 0418772013
Address – Hangar 17, Northern Avenue, Moorabbin Airport, 3194
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
CASA initiated action against my Business on 23/10/18, and at the time of writing CASA seems some way off from resolving this matter. To date, this has cost my Business approximately $200,00 and has significantly impacted on my ability to continue operating.
I advised CASA very clearly and repeatedly throughout the process of the cost impact.
Such a substantive action would usually be due to a grave and imminent risk to aviation safety.
CASA has raised no concerns at all about Safety but drew on the Aviation Ruling to initiate this significant action.
COMPLAINT
Significant harm has been brought to me and my business as a result of CASA using the Aviation Ruling as the basis of their action, which I have repeatedly objected to and asked guidance on how I can have this “tested”.
I do not believe that the Aviation Ruling applies and have repeatedly highlighted that to CASA over the last 10 weeks.
EXPECTED OUTCOME
My understanding is that the Aviation Ruling does not have a “Head of Power”. Can CASA specifically confirm whether my understanding is correct?
The Aviation Ruling is for “CAR 206 operations”. My understanding is that Flying Training organizations were specifically removed from CAR 206 operations in September 2014. Can you confirm that: for the purposes of action against my business has CASA elected to slip it back in, or is it an “oversight” on CASAs behalf.
The Aviation Ruling refers to a Chief Pilot, and this position does not exist in a flying training environment. Can you confirm that the Chief Pilot (Charter Organisations) and Head of Operations (Flying Training) are interchangeable throughout the legislation, or is this a peculiarity to CASAs action against me only?
The Aviation Ruling was written for a completely different regulatory environment in early 2006. With the complete overhaul of legislation in September 2014, I felt that this may have become redundant. Can you confirm that it does apply?
If the Aviation Ruling does apply, why specifically has CASA turned a blind eye to it for almost 13 years and has reactivated it against my Business so aggressively?
The Aviation Ruling specifically refers to Organisations operating with an “arm's length contractual arrangement”. This is, in fact, the exact opposite of what APTA is, and highlights the confusion that exists within casa. I have highlighted this repeatedly to CASA throughout the process. Can CASA specifically state whether or not they are of the opinion that I operate with an “arms-length contractual arrangement” as opposed to a contract?
Can CASA please clearly state the link between applying the Aviation Ruling and Safety.
END OF COMPLAINT
So as a response to that complaint, how did they respond?
Here is the CASA response from the Industry Complaints Commissioner.
"Because APTA advised CASA has taken the Aviation Ruling "off the table", I continue to be of the view that there is no utility in making an assessment of issues that are no longer in contention"
In other words, CASA can make scurrilous allegations against someone over a protracted period. When the individual lodges a complaint, CASA simply takes it "off the table" and the person lodging the complaint loses their opportunity to have their complaint considered by CASAs Industry Complaints Commissioner.
Yet when the Commonwealth Ombudsman conducts an investigation he finds;
"The Ruling was not amended to reflect that legislative change from 1 September 2014, meaning that the CAR and the Ruling were no longer aligned in material ways"
"In my concluded view there was an administrative deficiency due to an absence of a direct relationship between the activity being regulated and the policy said to regulate it. That gave rise to ambiguity and uncertainty with the potential to cause detriment to those relying on the accuracy of the regime or conversely prevent detriment from occurring"
"It is my concluded view that CASA should have made a concurrent amendment to its ruling at the entry into force of the 1 September 2014 compilation of the CAR because of the practical effect of the change to those relying on the regulatory regime."
Thank goodness we have a Commonwealth Ombudsman and don't need to solely rely on CASA to act with integrity when they investigate themselves. The function and accountability of the CASA ICC process need a complete overhaul if stakeholders in this industry are to have access to a well-intentioned ICC who is determined to arrive at fair and transparent outcomes.
Later today (time permitting) i intend to post another example of the CASA internal dispute resolution process i.e. the ICC being completely flawed,
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For there to even exist a CASA Complaints Commissioner, when the Commonwealth Ombudsman performs the exact same service (more efficiently and independantly), is a useless and wasteful resource.
There will always be a perceived, potential or actual conflict of interest while the CASA Complaints Commissioner derives their pay from CASA; I think you've proven this point Glen.
There will always be a perceived, potential or actual conflict of interest while the CASA Complaints Commissioner derives their pay from CASA; I think you've proven this point Glen.
Thread Starter
Some clarification
For added clarity
Mr Hanton consistently and repeatedly encouraged me to take my complaints to the Commonwealth Ombudsman from very early on in the process. It was me that chose not to follow his suggestion.
I felt that the CASA ICC would have more efficient access to the documents and a higher level of expertise on these matters. I felt that a more transparent finding would result. Sadly, in my opinion, it didn't.
I also thought it a fairer process if I exhausted all avenues for an internal resolution within CASA.
Mr. Hanton has been an exceptional individual to liaise with. His integrity and intention are not questioned by me at all.
My concerns are only with the CASA Executive Management who I allege have provided misleading information to him to pervert the course of justice. They are strong allegations and I do not step away from them.
Regarding Mr. Hanton, he is truly a well-intentioned gentleman and his conduct is not in any way the focus of my allegations.
Mr Hanton, i hope you read this, and i implore you to reach out and contact me if this post causes you any angst at all. You have my eternal respect, cheers. Glen
Mr Hanton consistently and repeatedly encouraged me to take my complaints to the Commonwealth Ombudsman from very early on in the process. It was me that chose not to follow his suggestion.
I felt that the CASA ICC would have more efficient access to the documents and a higher level of expertise on these matters. I felt that a more transparent finding would result. Sadly, in my opinion, it didn't.
I also thought it a fairer process if I exhausted all avenues for an internal resolution within CASA.
Mr. Hanton has been an exceptional individual to liaise with. His integrity and intention are not questioned by me at all.
My concerns are only with the CASA Executive Management who I allege have provided misleading information to him to pervert the course of justice. They are strong allegations and I do not step away from them.
Regarding Mr. Hanton, he is truly a well-intentioned gentleman and his conduct is not in any way the focus of my allegations.
Mr Hanton, i hope you read this, and i implore you to reach out and contact me if this post causes you any angst at all. You have my eternal respect, cheers. Glen
Last edited by glenb; 20th Aug 2020 at 23:03.
Thread Starter
Comfirmed. CASA resignation
I still standby a change to Mr. Martins role, but what I can confirm. Jason McHeyzer the gentleman that wrote to my Employer that my "position was untenable based on comments i was making publicly" will hand in his resignation by 5PM today.
Could there finally be some accountability?
Could there finally be some accountability?
Thread Starter
Suggestion of suitable replacement
There is a significant pool of talent within CASA.
Due to the Pandemic, there is also an enormous pool of aviation talent available.outside of CASA.
I hope that the Deputy PM who is responsible for CASA recognizes that fact, and takes advantage of this unique opportunity to "update" the organization with a few changes of key personnel in the CASA executive.
A very real opportunity sits before the Deputy PM. Bow to the pressure of a Royal Commission or simply instigate change and employ personnel that can deliver professionalism. The change of less than 5 staff, replaced by "new blood" may well achieve more than a Royal Commission.
Horrible time to be "resigning" though. Nota lot of aviation jobs around.
Due to the Pandemic, there is also an enormous pool of aviation talent available.outside of CASA.
I hope that the Deputy PM who is responsible for CASA recognizes that fact, and takes advantage of this unique opportunity to "update" the organization with a few changes of key personnel in the CASA executive.
A very real opportunity sits before the Deputy PM. Bow to the pressure of a Royal Commission or simply instigate change and employ personnel that can deliver professionalism. The change of less than 5 staff, replaced by "new blood" may well achieve more than a Royal Commission.
Horrible time to be "resigning" though. Nota lot of aviation jobs around.
Thread Starter
Vladoviano
As this matter escalates, im sure that it will end up there or somewhere similar. I will keep dumping info on here, and eventually, there will be enough for an investigative piece. Im very confident
Thread Starter
Letter to the CASA Board toi determine where to from here.
22/08/20
To the Board of CASA, comprising the following Individuals
Mr. Anthony Mathews (Chairperson), Mr. Shane Carmody (CEO of CASA), Mr. Mark Rindfleish, Mr. Michael Bridge, Ms. Donna Hardman, Ms. Elizabeth Hallet, and Ms. Marilyn Andre. In your roles, you are responsible for ensuring that CASA performs its role in a "proper, efficient, and effective manner."
You will be fully aware of the significant allegations I have bought against CASA Employees;
I have had discussions with a number of legal firms, and I am confident that I have a valid basis for a claim against CASA on behalf of affected Parties, and it appears that case would be based around misfeasance, malfeasance and negligent misstatement
I am now at a point in this process where I need to clearly ascertain whether I proceed with my legal case or, do we arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution with a less combative approach. The latter clearly being my preferred option.
Should you choose the path of litigation, I need to be very clear that once that journey commences, the opportunity for a negotiated settlement is lost, and I will pursue my matter through to a legal determination.
The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a very clear direction from the Board of CASA, in conjunction with your insurance company being Comminsure.
The more combative approach will be the more costly, divert valuable CASA resources from primary tasks, and expose CASA to a far higher level of public scrutiny. In my opinion, it should be an unnecessary approach, but that decision now rests with the CASA Board.
As you are aware i have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter, but until this point, the Board has resolutely refused those offers. I am now calling on you to make your decision and advise me of that decision.
As the Board already has the facts in front of them, I anticipate that you should be able to arrive at a prompt and well-considered opinion.
Could you please advise me by 5 PM on Friday 4th September of the Board's decision.
In assisting you to arrive at your decision, I re-extend my offer to meet with the Board at any time prior to that date.
Yours respectfully, Glen Buckley
To the Board of CASA, comprising the following Individuals
Mr. Anthony Mathews (Chairperson), Mr. Shane Carmody (CEO of CASA), Mr. Mark Rindfleish, Mr. Michael Bridge, Ms. Donna Hardman, Ms. Elizabeth Hallet, and Ms. Marilyn Andre. In your roles, you are responsible for ensuring that CASA performs its role in a "proper, efficient, and effective manner."
You will be fully aware of the significant allegations I have bought against CASA Employees;
- Mr. Jonathan Aleck CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs
- Mr. Graeme Crawford, CASA Executive Manager of the Aviation Group,
- Mr. Craig Martin, CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and Surveillance.
I have had discussions with a number of legal firms, and I am confident that I have a valid basis for a claim against CASA on behalf of affected Parties, and it appears that case would be based around misfeasance, malfeasance and negligent misstatement
I am now at a point in this process where I need to clearly ascertain whether I proceed with my legal case or, do we arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution with a less combative approach. The latter clearly being my preferred option.
Should you choose the path of litigation, I need to be very clear that once that journey commences, the opportunity for a negotiated settlement is lost, and I will pursue my matter through to a legal determination.
The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a very clear direction from the Board of CASA, in conjunction with your insurance company being Comminsure.
The more combative approach will be the more costly, divert valuable CASA resources from primary tasks, and expose CASA to a far higher level of public scrutiny. In my opinion, it should be an unnecessary approach, but that decision now rests with the CASA Board.
As you are aware i have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter, but until this point, the Board has resolutely refused those offers. I am now calling on you to make your decision and advise me of that decision.
As the Board already has the facts in front of them, I anticipate that you should be able to arrive at a prompt and well-considered opinion.
Could you please advise me by 5 PM on Friday 4th September of the Board's decision.
In assisting you to arrive at your decision, I re-extend my offer to meet with the Board at any time prior to that date.
Yours respectfully, Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
Correspondence to my lawyer
Dear Alex,
Thank you for establishing contact to ascertain whether I wish to proceed with my defamation action against CASA.
Please accept this as my response; that I do wish to proceed with that litigation, noting that the person who sent that direction, CASA Region Manager Mr. XXXXX XXXXXXXX resigned from CASA last week. I'm not sure how that impacts on any case but am advising you, nevertheless. i.e. is the litigation against him as an individual, or against his employer being CASA, or possibly both.
I would also point out that this matter is also being investigated by the Commonwealth Ombudsman and I anticipate that his findings when released, will add significant weight to my case.
Regarding CASAs' previous offer, it is totally unacceptable, and I wish to proceed on the basis that any claim would have to far exceed the paltry and rather mischievous offer that CASA put forward previously. CASA has clearly demonstrated that they are not acting with good intent.
Regarding the reputational damage which also led to a period of 8 months of unemployment, it has been significant. It has extended to my reputation with peers in the industry, my past employees, work colleagues, my suppliers, neighbors, school community, and indeed my own family i.e. wife, children, parents, and siblings.
The nation's Aviation Safety Regulator, CASA, has directed that my employment was "untenable" based on comments I was making publicly. There is no safety case for that direction at all.
The reasonable assumption of many in the industry, and outside of the aviation industry is that I must have done something wrong on the basis of a safety-related matter when that is clearly not the case, and CASA will be unable to refute that statement. For clarity, CASA actions had no basis in safety, and the direction was made to my employer on "comments that I was making publicly".
I have asked CASA to identify those comments that I allegedly made, which led to the direction to terminate my employment. CASA has steadfastly refused to respond to those requests. Their action was in my opinion unlawful, unfair, and unjust.
For clarity, there is no position in the legislation for a "deputy Head of Operations". My position was the Head of Operations, and I operated as the "Alternate Head of Operations". That is to say that the position was a CASA approved position as the Head of Operations. , I was fully approved by CASA to immediately step into the role of the Head of Operations.
The CASA Enforcement Manual (link follows) outlines procedures required in Administrative Law if CASA wishes to remove me from that CASA approved position of Head of Operations. These procedures were completely ignored. https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...f/009rfull.pdf
After having spent 25 years in the industry and earning an impeccable reputation for safety, regulatory compliance, and acting with good intention, it was destroyed in an instant with that direction from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. I was chased out of an industry that I loved and had committed my life to.
The impact has been far too disproportionate, and the ramifications substantial.
Please note that I have written to the Board of CASA and that correspondence is included at the tail end of this letter. My hope is that the Board of CASA will act with ethics to direct that this matter be resolved, although based on past experience I do not feel that they will, and for that reason, I do wish to proceed to an independent determination via the legal system.
If you think it prudent, however, and I will follow your learned advice, you may elect that one last attempt to reach out to CASA is the best way forward. I will leave it to you to determine how best to resolve this matter as efficiently and fairly as practical.
On other matters and on high-level advice, I will also be proceeding with a case of negligent misstatement/ misfeasance and malfeasance against CASA for the significant commercial damage inflicted on my business, and several other businesses and individuals as part of this process.
I have no doubt that the CASA actions were vindictive and vexatious, so I can assure you that you have an energized litigant that you will be representing.
For your information, the Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) provided an opportunity to begin telling my story, and that presentation a couple of weeks ago attracted 17,000 views and 80,000 shares. I have been presented with another opportunity on Tuesday 7th September at 7 PM, I anticipate an even larger audience for that presentation, and I will send a copy of that to you for consideration.
I look forward to guidance from you on the next step, and please find my recent correspondence to the Board of CASA, thank you for your ongoing support.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
"To the Board of CASA, comprising the following Individuals
Mr. Anthony Mathews (Chairperson), Mr. Shane Carmody (CEO of CASA), Mr. Mark Rindfleish, Mr. Michael Bridge, Ms. Donna Hardman, Ms. Elizabeth Hallet, and Ms. Marilyn Andre. In your roles, you are responsible for ensuring that CASA performs its role in a "proper, efficient, and effective manner."
You will be fully aware of the significant allegations I have bought against CASA Employees;
I have had discussions with a number of legal firms, and I am confident that I have a valid basis for a claim against CASA on behalf of affected Parties, and it appears that case would be based around misfeasance, malfeasance and negligent misstatement
I am now at a point in this process where I need to clearly ascertain whether I proceed with my legal case or, do we arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution with a less combative approach. The latter clearly being my preferred option.
Should you choose the path of litigation, I need to be very clear that once that journey commences, the opportunity for a negotiated settlement is lost, and I will pursue my matter through to a legal determination.
The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a very clear direction from the Board of CASA, in conjunction with your insurance company being Comminsure.
The more combative approach will be the more costly, divert valuable CASA resources from primary tasks, and expose CASA to a far higher level of public scrutiny. In my opinion, it should be an unnecessary approach, but that decision now rests with the CASA Board.
As you are aware I have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter, but until this point, the Board has resolutely refused those offers. I am now calling on you to make your decision and advise me of that decision.
As the Board already has the facts in front of them, I anticipate that you should be able to arrive at a prompt and well-considered opinion.
Could you please advise me by 5 PM on Friday 4th September of the Board's decision.
In assisting you to arrive at your decision, I re-extend my offer to meet with the Board at any time prior to that date.
Yours respectfully, Glen Buckley
Thank you for establishing contact to ascertain whether I wish to proceed with my defamation action against CASA.
Please accept this as my response; that I do wish to proceed with that litigation, noting that the person who sent that direction, CASA Region Manager Mr. XXXXX XXXXXXXX resigned from CASA last week. I'm not sure how that impacts on any case but am advising you, nevertheless. i.e. is the litigation against him as an individual, or against his employer being CASA, or possibly both.
I would also point out that this matter is also being investigated by the Commonwealth Ombudsman and I anticipate that his findings when released, will add significant weight to my case.
Regarding CASAs' previous offer, it is totally unacceptable, and I wish to proceed on the basis that any claim would have to far exceed the paltry and rather mischievous offer that CASA put forward previously. CASA has clearly demonstrated that they are not acting with good intent.
Regarding the reputational damage which also led to a period of 8 months of unemployment, it has been significant. It has extended to my reputation with peers in the industry, my past employees, work colleagues, my suppliers, neighbors, school community, and indeed my own family i.e. wife, children, parents, and siblings.
The nation's Aviation Safety Regulator, CASA, has directed that my employment was "untenable" based on comments I was making publicly. There is no safety case for that direction at all.
The reasonable assumption of many in the industry, and outside of the aviation industry is that I must have done something wrong on the basis of a safety-related matter when that is clearly not the case, and CASA will be unable to refute that statement. For clarity, CASA actions had no basis in safety, and the direction was made to my employer on "comments that I was making publicly".
I have asked CASA to identify those comments that I allegedly made, which led to the direction to terminate my employment. CASA has steadfastly refused to respond to those requests. Their action was in my opinion unlawful, unfair, and unjust.
For clarity, there is no position in the legislation for a "deputy Head of Operations". My position was the Head of Operations, and I operated as the "Alternate Head of Operations". That is to say that the position was a CASA approved position as the Head of Operations. , I was fully approved by CASA to immediately step into the role of the Head of Operations.
The CASA Enforcement Manual (link follows) outlines procedures required in Administrative Law if CASA wishes to remove me from that CASA approved position of Head of Operations. These procedures were completely ignored. https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...f/009rfull.pdf
After having spent 25 years in the industry and earning an impeccable reputation for safety, regulatory compliance, and acting with good intention, it was destroyed in an instant with that direction from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. I was chased out of an industry that I loved and had committed my life to.
The impact has been far too disproportionate, and the ramifications substantial.
Please note that I have written to the Board of CASA and that correspondence is included at the tail end of this letter. My hope is that the Board of CASA will act with ethics to direct that this matter be resolved, although based on past experience I do not feel that they will, and for that reason, I do wish to proceed to an independent determination via the legal system.
If you think it prudent, however, and I will follow your learned advice, you may elect that one last attempt to reach out to CASA is the best way forward. I will leave it to you to determine how best to resolve this matter as efficiently and fairly as practical.
On other matters and on high-level advice, I will also be proceeding with a case of negligent misstatement/ misfeasance and malfeasance against CASA for the significant commercial damage inflicted on my business, and several other businesses and individuals as part of this process.
I have no doubt that the CASA actions were vindictive and vexatious, so I can assure you that you have an energized litigant that you will be representing.
For your information, the Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) provided an opportunity to begin telling my story, and that presentation a couple of weeks ago attracted 17,000 views and 80,000 shares. I have been presented with another opportunity on Tuesday 7th September at 7 PM, I anticipate an even larger audience for that presentation, and I will send a copy of that to you for consideration.
I look forward to guidance from you on the next step, and please find my recent correspondence to the Board of CASA, thank you for your ongoing support.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
"To the Board of CASA, comprising the following Individuals
Mr. Anthony Mathews (Chairperson), Mr. Shane Carmody (CEO of CASA), Mr. Mark Rindfleish, Mr. Michael Bridge, Ms. Donna Hardman, Ms. Elizabeth Hallet, and Ms. Marilyn Andre. In your roles, you are responsible for ensuring that CASA performs its role in a "proper, efficient, and effective manner."
You will be fully aware of the significant allegations I have bought against CASA Employees;
- Mr. Jonathan Aleck CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs
- Mr. Graeme Crawford, CASA Executive Manager of the Aviation Group,
- Mr. Craig Martin, CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and Surveillance.
I have had discussions with a number of legal firms, and I am confident that I have a valid basis for a claim against CASA on behalf of affected Parties, and it appears that case would be based around misfeasance, malfeasance and negligent misstatement
I am now at a point in this process where I need to clearly ascertain whether I proceed with my legal case or, do we arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution with a less combative approach. The latter clearly being my preferred option.
Should you choose the path of litigation, I need to be very clear that once that journey commences, the opportunity for a negotiated settlement is lost, and I will pursue my matter through to a legal determination.
The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a very clear direction from the Board of CASA, in conjunction with your insurance company being Comminsure.
The more combative approach will be the more costly, divert valuable CASA resources from primary tasks, and expose CASA to a far higher level of public scrutiny. In my opinion, it should be an unnecessary approach, but that decision now rests with the CASA Board.
As you are aware I have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter, but until this point, the Board has resolutely refused those offers. I am now calling on you to make your decision and advise me of that decision.
As the Board already has the facts in front of them, I anticipate that you should be able to arrive at a prompt and well-considered opinion.
Could you please advise me by 5 PM on Friday 4th September of the Board's decision.
In assisting you to arrive at your decision, I re-extend my offer to meet with the Board at any time prior to that date.
Yours respectfully, Glen Buckley
Last edited by glenb; 25th Aug 2020 at 21:13.
Thread Starter
A message for everyone
To every one of you that is involved in aviation anyway, whether that be as a pilot, a maintenance person, a business owner, student, etc.
If you are a well-intentioned CASA employee who believes the Authority is not operating to the highest standards of ethics, integrity, and professionalism.
If you are a law firm that would potentially be able to handle litigation against CASA on the basis of negligent misstatement/malfeasance/misfeasance, and on behalf of a number of affected Parties.
If you are an investigative journalist able to develop an appropriate story.
If you are a politician prepared to act with ethics.
The Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) recently provided an opportunity to present my situation via a Facebook live conference. It was viewed 17,000 times and shared 80,000 times.
AOPA has presented me with a further opportunity at 7 PM on Tuesday 8th September.
I intend to use that 90-minute presentation as my submission to the current Senate Inquiry into CASA.
In that Submission, I intend to make substantive allegations that will be well supported. Those allegations will be against three of the CASA Executive Management, and most specifically Mr. Crawford, Mr. Aleck, and Mr. Martin.
If my allegations can be substantiated, these personnel will no longer be able to remain in the employ of CASA.
If my claims are found to be false, vindictive, or vexatious, I could face a term of imprisonment. Whilst I am confident that will not be the case, my decision is a well-considered one.
The misconduct by these personnel has negatively impacted on aviation safety, it has caused the closure of several businesses, and an associated loss of jobs.
Their conduct has been unlawful, unfair, and unjust.
I am compelled to name them as this is a matter of aviation safety. Furthermore, I do not want to harm the wider reputation of CASA and the many well-intentioned and professional employees who work within CASA.
I hope that you can spread this correspondence to anyone in the aviation industry, as I record my Submission via AOPAs Facebook live conference at 7 PM Tuesday 8th September.
If you are a well-intentioned CASA employee who believes the Authority is not operating to the highest standards of ethics, integrity, and professionalism.
If you are a law firm that would potentially be able to handle litigation against CASA on the basis of negligent misstatement/malfeasance/misfeasance, and on behalf of a number of affected Parties.
If you are an investigative journalist able to develop an appropriate story.
If you are a politician prepared to act with ethics.
The Australian Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) recently provided an opportunity to present my situation via a Facebook live conference. It was viewed 17,000 times and shared 80,000 times.
AOPA has presented me with a further opportunity at 7 PM on Tuesday 8th September.
I intend to use that 90-minute presentation as my submission to the current Senate Inquiry into CASA.
In that Submission, I intend to make substantive allegations that will be well supported. Those allegations will be against three of the CASA Executive Management, and most specifically Mr. Crawford, Mr. Aleck, and Mr. Martin.
If my allegations can be substantiated, these personnel will no longer be able to remain in the employ of CASA.
If my claims are found to be false, vindictive, or vexatious, I could face a term of imprisonment. Whilst I am confident that will not be the case, my decision is a well-considered one.
The misconduct by these personnel has negatively impacted on aviation safety, it has caused the closure of several businesses, and an associated loss of jobs.
Their conduct has been unlawful, unfair, and unjust.
I am compelled to name them as this is a matter of aviation safety. Furthermore, I do not want to harm the wider reputation of CASA and the many well-intentioned and professional employees who work within CASA.
I hope that you can spread this correspondence to anyone in the aviation industry, as I record my Submission via AOPAs Facebook live conference at 7 PM Tuesday 8th September.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glen you are an amazing individual who has sacrificed so much to right the injustice of CASA's duplicity in its handling of your livelihood!!! I am so pleased that AOPA is providing a platform to get your story across but you need to think even bigger!!! I am absolutely amazed that not one of the major networks has latched on to your story. So why not have your Pprune following, as there are many of us supporting you, literally deluge the media with a referral of your case as represented via this platform and get it on the big screen as television is still considered the most powerful medium available. Good media people are capable of revealing genuine stories of hardworking Australians fighting bureaucracy without even a snowflake in hell's chance of winning against the system unless there is a groundswell of opinion from ordinary folk like us.
So on Monday 31 August let's all write to the following journalist / TV programs saying something succinct like this: "
So on Monday 31 August let's all write to the following journalist / TV programs saying something succinct like this: "
- One man's fight against the Government's Bureaucracy - a story of injustice just waiting to be told - see Pprune reference Buckley for details!!"
- Peta Credlin: SKyNew via Facebook
- Alan Jones: SkyNews via mobile sms / Facebook
- Four Corners: ABC TV
- This Day Tonight: Channel 9
- 7:30 Report: ABC
- Australian Story: ABC
- 60 Minutes: Channel 9
The majors are focussed on Covid19 and the sexual antics of football players. Your story is too long and convoluted to tell. The public have a thirty second attention span. Either sex it up and shorten your pitch or forget it. Sorry to be blunt.
The only group you might get interested are the politicians and only then if you can threaten the Governments re-election chances.
Having said that, if you pitch it as “government Minister makes war on successful business” you might have a chance with the murdoch press/ credlin/ bolt/ etc.
The only group you might get interested are the politicians and only then if you can threaten the Governments re-election chances.
Having said that, if you pitch it as “government Minister makes war on successful business” you might have a chance with the murdoch press/ credlin/ bolt/ etc.
Thread Starter
Sunfish
I have to be fairly brief because about to sit down for dinner (and footy) with the family.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. While a media investigative piece into CASA would be ideal, it may distract me from my primary focus. Similarly contacting the Minister has proved impossible. My letters continually go unacknowledged, and my simple requests go unanswered.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. Irrespective of whether I win or lose, the conduct of a small group of CASA personnel will be exposed during the discovery of documents. This is the path that CASA has chosen. The truth is that no one will win because the diversion of CASA resources to such a task is inexcusable, but they will have no hesitation in using their arsenal. Similarly, I will have to direct a lot of my time.
This has highlighted the complete failure of the CASA Board. Whether it be by bad intention or just an ineffective structure, the Board has no control. My hope is that by getting this matter to Court, I will be able to expose it.
On my Facebook Conference on Tuesday week at 7PM.
I intend to outline
Why i think Mr Aleck and Mr Martin chose to target Glen Buckley in particular
A brief factual biography on their role, and their previous history. All factual.
Outline my specific allegations against the conduct of these two CASA personnel
Provide evidence to support my allegations.
The impact of Mr Martins and Mr Alecks conduct on safety, businesses, and jobs.
I look forward to the opportunity to present it to you. Cheers. Glen
The legal action will proceed.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. While a media investigative piece into CASA would be ideal, it may distract me from my primary focus. Similarly contacting the Minister has proved impossible. My letters continually go unacknowledged, and my simple requests go unanswered.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. Irrespective of whether I win or lose, the conduct of a small group of CASA personnel will be exposed during the discovery of documents. This is the path that CASA has chosen. The truth is that no one will win because the diversion of CASA resources to such a task is inexcusable, but they will have no hesitation in using their arsenal. Similarly, I will have to direct a lot of my time.
This has highlighted the complete failure of the CASA Board. Whether it be by bad intention or just an ineffective structure, the Board has no control. My hope is that by getting this matter to Court, I will be able to expose it.
On my Facebook Conference on Tuesday week at 7PM.
I intend to outline
Why i think Mr Aleck and Mr Martin chose to target Glen Buckley in particular
A brief factual biography on their role, and their previous history. All factual.
Outline my specific allegations against the conduct of these two CASA personnel
Provide evidence to support my allegations.
The impact of Mr Martins and Mr Alecks conduct on safety, businesses, and jobs.
I look forward to the opportunity to present it to you. Cheers. Glen
The legal action will proceed.
I have to be fairly brief because about to sit down for dinner (and footy) with the family.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. While a media investigative piece into CASA would be ideal, it may distract me from my primary focus. Similarly contacting the Minister has proved impossible. My letters continually go unacknowledged, and my simple requests go unanswered.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. Irrespective of whether I win or lose, the conduct of a small group of CASA personnel will be exposed during the discovery of documents. This is the path that CASA has chosen. The truth is that no one will win because the diversion of CASA resources to such a task is inexcusable, but they will have no hesitation in using their arsenal. Similarly, I will have to direct a lot of my time.
This has highlighted the complete failure of the CASA Board. Whether it be by bad intention or just an ineffective structure, the Board has no control. My hope is that by getting this matter to Court, I will be able to expose it.
On my Facebook Conference on Tuesday week at 7PM.
I intend to outline
Why i think Mr Aleck and Mr Martin chose to target Glen Buckley in particular
A brief factual biography on their role, and their previous history. All factual.
Outline my specific allegations against the conduct of these two CASA personnel
Provide evidence to support my allegations.
The impact of Mr Martins and Mr Alecks conduct on safety, businesses, and jobs.
I look forward to the opportunity to present it to you. Cheers. Glen
The legal action will proceed.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. While a media investigative piece into CASA would be ideal, it may distract me from my primary focus. Similarly contacting the Minister has proved impossible. My letters continually go unacknowledged, and my simple requests go unanswered.
This will have to be decided in the Courts. Irrespective of whether I win or lose, the conduct of a small group of CASA personnel will be exposed during the discovery of documents. This is the path that CASA has chosen. The truth is that no one will win because the diversion of CASA resources to such a task is inexcusable, but they will have no hesitation in using their arsenal. Similarly, I will have to direct a lot of my time.
This has highlighted the complete failure of the CASA Board. Whether it be by bad intention or just an ineffective structure, the Board has no control. My hope is that by getting this matter to Court, I will be able to expose it.
On my Facebook Conference on Tuesday week at 7PM.
I intend to outline
Why i think Mr Aleck and Mr Martin chose to target Glen Buckley in particular
A brief factual biography on their role, and their previous history. All factual.
Outline my specific allegations against the conduct of these two CASA personnel
Provide evidence to support my allegations.
The impact of Mr Martins and Mr Alecks conduct on safety, businesses, and jobs.
I look forward to the opportunity to present it to you. Cheers. Glen
The legal action will proceed.
And if we ever meet - I will buy the beer.
Not saying the Commonwealth Ombudsman is necessarily a better approach than court, but the article might be food for thought:
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/two-d...12-gdiwmr.html
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/two-d...12-gdiwmr.html
Thread Starter
30/08/20
Dear Mr. Tony Mathews, Chair of the Board of CASA,
You have recently received correspondence from me that gave CASA two clear and concise options.
In that correspondence, I expressed my strongly held preference for a well-intentioned discussion about fair and reasonable compensation for affected Parties.
I also expressed my clear and concise intention to initiate litigation against CASA for commercial and reputational damage caused to me and others, should CASA deny me the opportunity presented in the first option.
You are aware that Phase One of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's office has been released, and CASA clearly erred. When Phase Two is released, I am confident that further deficiencies will be highlighted in the conduct of some personnel within CASA.
You are also aware that the CASA Region Manager directed my Employer that my continuing unemployment was "untenable based on comments that I was making public".
There can be no doubt in the minds of any well-intentioned person, that CASA has erred, and quite substantially so. I am calling on CASA to act in a well-intentioned manner.
It is quite reasonable to expect that your insurance provider will ask what compensation I am seeking, and that is the purpose of this correspondence.
I am asking for a payment to be made promptly available to the value of $1.2 Million dollars.
My understanding is that this could be disbursed under an "Act of Grace" payment, or alternatively under the "Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) .
None of that $1.2 Million dollar payment would be held by myself and it would be disbursed within 14 days to the other Parties that have been affected. That payment would repair the damage that has been done to many small businesses, individuals, customers, and staff that have been affected by this. For clarity, not one cent will be retained by me after that 14 days.
Prompt payment of this manner would somewhat "take the wind out of my sails" and make the matter somewhat less public. In fact, I would seriously consider no further public comment on this matter.
Furthermore, payment of this amount would limit my case to the one litigant only, being myself. It would assist me to restore my reputation, and undo the commercial detriment caused to so many.
The only parties affected by this action would then be, Glen Buckley and his family. On that matter, I would enter into a confidential and well-intentioned discussion with CASAs insurers. The purpose of that discussion would be to ensure that my wife and children were returned to the same position that they were in, prior to this matter commencing. Noting that I have lost my home, business, and livelihood.
On the personal and reputational impact, which has been enormous, and had me in a state of depression last Christmas, I would make no claim. I would put that to one side and make my claim against the commercial impact only. Should I be forced into litigation, and the use of a legal firm, that impact would form a component of any claim.
I anticipate the meeting for my compensation could be somewhat delayed, and we could attend to the more important matter of minimizing the impact on other Parties. That would be my clear preference.
Please be assured that if CASA chooses to adopt the more combative approach, I will make one final appeal directly to the National Party as a whole, and to the Deputy PM, Mr. Michael McCormack specifically.
In the Minister's Statement of Expectations of CASA, he clearly states that you are to keep him "fully informed". Therefore I assume you have done so, and he should be able to exercise his judgment promptly.
I do also note that either an Act of Grace Payment or payment under the CDDA scheme would have to be submitted through the Department of Finance. I do not wish to direct resources to that process if the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs would prevent that process from being undertaken. I have made significant allegations against his professional conduct, and perhaps understandably, he may oppose the process, which he can do in his role.
Thank you for your consideration and I hope that this will bring some clarity to the matter.
I hope that you can accurately convey my good intention to CASAs liability insurer being Commsure I believe that a more optimal outcome can be achieved by a well-intentioned discussion with minimal input from lawyers.
As this correspondence is addressed to the Board in its entirety, can I direct you to my Facebook Live conference that I will broadcast at 7 PM on Tuesday 8th September. By watching that 90-minute presentation the CASA Board and CASAs insurer will be able to arrive at better and potentially more informed decisions.
At any time, the Board Members or insurers can avail themself of my thread running on a pilot's chat forum, which has attracted over 600,000 views. This outlines the case in its entirety. Admittedly it would take several hours to work through, but is the primary source of information, and would be mandatory reading I suggest.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Dear Mr. Tony Mathews, Chair of the Board of CASA,
You have recently received correspondence from me that gave CASA two clear and concise options.
In that correspondence, I expressed my strongly held preference for a well-intentioned discussion about fair and reasonable compensation for affected Parties.
I also expressed my clear and concise intention to initiate litigation against CASA for commercial and reputational damage caused to me and others, should CASA deny me the opportunity presented in the first option.
You are aware that Phase One of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's office has been released, and CASA clearly erred. When Phase Two is released, I am confident that further deficiencies will be highlighted in the conduct of some personnel within CASA.
You are also aware that the CASA Region Manager directed my Employer that my continuing unemployment was "untenable based on comments that I was making public".
There can be no doubt in the minds of any well-intentioned person, that CASA has erred, and quite substantially so. I am calling on CASA to act in a well-intentioned manner.
It is quite reasonable to expect that your insurance provider will ask what compensation I am seeking, and that is the purpose of this correspondence.
I am asking for a payment to be made promptly available to the value of $1.2 Million dollars.
My understanding is that this could be disbursed under an "Act of Grace" payment, or alternatively under the "Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) .
None of that $1.2 Million dollar payment would be held by myself and it would be disbursed within 14 days to the other Parties that have been affected. That payment would repair the damage that has been done to many small businesses, individuals, customers, and staff that have been affected by this. For clarity, not one cent will be retained by me after that 14 days.
Prompt payment of this manner would somewhat "take the wind out of my sails" and make the matter somewhat less public. In fact, I would seriously consider no further public comment on this matter.
Furthermore, payment of this amount would limit my case to the one litigant only, being myself. It would assist me to restore my reputation, and undo the commercial detriment caused to so many.
The only parties affected by this action would then be, Glen Buckley and his family. On that matter, I would enter into a confidential and well-intentioned discussion with CASAs insurers. The purpose of that discussion would be to ensure that my wife and children were returned to the same position that they were in, prior to this matter commencing. Noting that I have lost my home, business, and livelihood.
On the personal and reputational impact, which has been enormous, and had me in a state of depression last Christmas, I would make no claim. I would put that to one side and make my claim against the commercial impact only. Should I be forced into litigation, and the use of a legal firm, that impact would form a component of any claim.
I anticipate the meeting for my compensation could be somewhat delayed, and we could attend to the more important matter of minimizing the impact on other Parties. That would be my clear preference.
Please be assured that if CASA chooses to adopt the more combative approach, I will make one final appeal directly to the National Party as a whole, and to the Deputy PM, Mr. Michael McCormack specifically.
In the Minister's Statement of Expectations of CASA, he clearly states that you are to keep him "fully informed". Therefore I assume you have done so, and he should be able to exercise his judgment promptly.
I do also note that either an Act of Grace Payment or payment under the CDDA scheme would have to be submitted through the Department of Finance. I do not wish to direct resources to that process if the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs would prevent that process from being undertaken. I have made significant allegations against his professional conduct, and perhaps understandably, he may oppose the process, which he can do in his role.
Thank you for your consideration and I hope that this will bring some clarity to the matter.
I hope that you can accurately convey my good intention to CASAs liability insurer being Commsure I believe that a more optimal outcome can be achieved by a well-intentioned discussion with minimal input from lawyers.
As this correspondence is addressed to the Board in its entirety, can I direct you to my Facebook Live conference that I will broadcast at 7 PM on Tuesday 8th September. By watching that 90-minute presentation the CASA Board and CASAs insurer will be able to arrive at better and potentially more informed decisions.
At any time, the Board Members or insurers can avail themself of my thread running on a pilot's chat forum, which has attracted over 600,000 views. This outlines the case in its entirety. Admittedly it would take several hours to work through, but is the primary source of information, and would be mandatory reading I suggest.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley