The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

What's happening at Evans Head?

Old 23rd Dec 2022, 11:12
  #21 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,588
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
It's also pretty weird - I mean, when aircraft damage themselves at an airport it's normally some type of landing accident, well away from other buildings.

Yes, there's hangar rash and taxi accidents, but they are all pretty low speed (i.e. almost impossible to be in the tens of millions in damage).

I wonder what event they think they are insuring against?
Checkboard is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2022, 11:47
  #22 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 5,823
Received 83 Likes on 41 Posts
"It is absolutely standard and prudent for an organisation which owns or operates a facility to require someone who wants to the use that facility to have a prudent level of insurance for third party liability. It is likely to be a requirement of their own public liability insurer."

All I can add is that worldwide this is becoming more and more the norm - the rise of legal firms on a no win no fee basis means everyone reaches for the lawyers if anything happens - and they go looking for people to sue. The requirements are often buried deep in the T&C's you sign up for.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2022, 12:50
  #23 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
601, you mean there is a little man who comes out to check your insurance?
No but a nice young lady will ask you either when you book, when you call by radio or when you berth.

I wonder what event they think they are insuring against?
Whatever an KC can dream up.
601 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 8th Feb 2023, 08:47
  #24 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Aus
Posts: 131
Received 9 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by extralite View Post
Wrote about this back in the day. This airfield with infrastructure, at least covering 100 hectares and a lot of it prime development land in a booming north coast tourist town, was sold quietly by Richmond Valley Council for less than the cost of many houses in the town. Just under $3m. (You can find the sale price buried in the council minutes of the time about 4 years ago. Like barely a few paragraphs.)

There was no recent public tender for this public asset. No advertising that it was for sale. It was sold to a party of just a few guys (maybe just 2) that it quietly negotiated with. There was a heritage listing in the original agreements, but somehow the details of that are now a bit murky and appear to be very watered down. The gates went up on the airport shortly after it was sold and most of the tenants booted from their hangars. These were only low impact flyers...a few gyros, a few RA aircraft etc.

I am no lawyer, but the fact that this didn't go to tender, wasn't advertised, and sold for what is blatantly millions below market value seemed a breach of process to me. Sale of public assets are supposed to go to tender and this is the process that is supposed to be followed: .

So i wrote to NSW ICAC and also the Council for Local Government. Well you can guess the response. They would rather sit on their asss's and collect a salary then do their actual job. Why bother? Unless it is in the media and there is political pressure, why would you look at it? ICAC won't look at anything unless you can prove corruption which for the average person would be impossible...and also isn't that their job? If nothing else, it is very "odd".

Ultimately a very small group of people got their hands on a lot of development land for peanuts and are now are very wealthy because of it. They don't want the airfield used,. And the public? They lost a public asset and they got very little money for the community in return.
It's absolutely shameful that the community allowed this to happen, and that Council wasn't investigated over this. Can you post the response you received? Would be good to have it here for posterity when things inevitably play out as you say.

It'd be one thing if the airfield's presence was a nuisance, and perhaps it is as far as developers and some NIMBYs are concerned. But from visiting in/around the township more than a few times I always felt that Evans Head was part of the town's identity and that folks were proud of the heritage there. Maybe that's just some cognitive bias on my part?

MagnumPI is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.