PPL application rejected
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might have been better if you had said that in your first post.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CAA has numerous different IT systems that do not talk to one another. It is quite easy for a left hand, right hand disconnect to occur as organisations continue to have more and more dysfunctional IT. In the days of the Cardex and Quill Pen, this would never have occurred. It is the price or illusion of progress!
It is not as if they are presiding over 20 million car drivers. There are only about 20k active private pilots in the UK (evidenced by valid medicals) and probably at most a few k commercial pilots.
A database of that size could be stored on my Nokia E51 phone
I suspect a bigger reason for this is that a lot of competent people have left in recent years. The smart ones have got jobs elsewhere, and the cynical gravy train riders have got jobs at EASA
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Jupiter
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it seems it could easily have been cleared up by a quick phone call along the lines of:
"Bob, the CAA say your FE has expired and accordingly they've rejected my licence application. Must be some misunderstanding, can you shed any light?"
Let's say though that Bob's FE really had expired and it was a genuine oversight from him and/or the FTO. And the CAA refused to make an exception and recognise the test as valid.
If Bob is an employee of the FTO, then a cosy little meeting with our hero, Bob and the CFI (let's call him Bill) would probably have cleared things up. Our hero would politely explain how disappointed he was at not yet having his license, and that he thought between them Bob and Bill ought to be putting things right without him paying any more money. Bob (newly revalidated) would then take our hero for a pleasant little 2 hour flight, after which he'd fill out the test pass form just like he did the first time.
The paperwork would go off to the CAA and our hero would get his licence. Bob and Bill would discuss behind closed doors who'd cover the aircraft costs for the second 'test', but it's fairly clear that Bob would have to forego his fee.
"Bob, the CAA say your FE has expired and accordingly they've rejected my licence application. Must be some misunderstanding, can you shed any light?"
Let's say though that Bob's FE really had expired and it was a genuine oversight from him and/or the FTO. And the CAA refused to make an exception and recognise the test as valid.
If Bob is an employee of the FTO, then a cosy little meeting with our hero, Bob and the CFI (let's call him Bill) would probably have cleared things up. Our hero would politely explain how disappointed he was at not yet having his license, and that he thought between them Bob and Bill ought to be putting things right without him paying any more money. Bob (newly revalidated) would then take our hero for a pleasant little 2 hour flight, after which he'd fill out the test pass form just like he did the first time.
The paperwork would go off to the CAA and our hero would get his licence. Bob and Bill would discuss behind closed doors who'd cover the aircraft costs for the second 'test', but it's fairly clear that Bob would have to forego his fee.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we all knew the 'facts' there would be no need for any Forums such as PPRuNe or Facebeek ( some might say What a Good Idea ! ) as there would be no indecisions or ignorance, we'd all run along in straight lines waving the Rule Book, in the manner of the Red Guards of the '60s who ran around holding up the Little Red Book of The Thoughts of Mao, attempting to convert everyone in their path
Not knowing the facts means we have to enquire, suggest, discuss, argue, hypothesise, maybe even insult providing it doesn't get too nasty, and so we probably learn something as a result of it all ?
Not knowing the facts means we have to enquire, suggest, discuss, argue, hypothesise, maybe even insult providing it doesn't get too nasty, and so we probably learn something as a result of it all ?
Being serious, I do feel a bit sorry for the FE. Some of the comments levelled at him in this thread border on slander and were made by individuals who hide behind internet anonymity and then try to use 'discussion' to justify their false and baseless claims.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever the 'logistical issues" were- the FE was still able to find the time to conduct check rides for that 6 week period - but it seems - unable to get his currency sorted out.
Also quite surprised that the CAA permitted such an extension.
Also quite surprised that the CAA permitted such an extension.
I know of a number of examiners who are in this situation. At my last renewal it took nearly 2 months to be able to get it sorted. Fortunately I tend to do stuff early rather than late so it was not an issue for me but I can see how this situation can easily arise. At least the CAA are pragmatic enough to issue an extension.
What did surprise and dismay me with this thread is the willingness of people to automatically assume the guy was a fraudster, conman or just plain negligent.......
There is no excuse for the lack of joined up communication at the CAA but it is the way it is.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mmmmmm
bose-x
Don't be surprised - the poor guy selling his aircraft on the 'Funny Ebay Advert' thread got a similar pasting cos his spelllinnggg & grama was a bit off 
Perhaps this is the new way to behave - believe everyone is up to no good until they [the accused] can prove otherwise 
What did surprise and dismay me with this thread is the willingness of people to automatically assume the guy was a fraudster, conman or just plain negligent.......
Perhaps this is the new way to behave - believe everyone is up to no good until they [the accused] can prove otherwise
This thread brings back memories of a visit to PLD in June 1993. Back then I was a 17-year old lowly ops assistant and my employer sent me down to Gatwick to hand deliver an urgent 1179 application. Pilot in question was required to commence line training the following day.
Arrived at PLD around 11am, handed said application over and went to the CAA library to kill some time. Returned to the PLD counter at 12pm, where I was told that the application could not be processed, due to the 1179 being incomplete.
I gently pointed out the copy of a letter, in the application pack, from PLD to my employer confirming they, PLD, would process the incomplete application, on the proviso the missing element was covered during line training and that a copy of said letter must be in the application pack. The missing element was a crosswind take-off/landing on the aircraft - the weather did not co-operate during circuit training.
Cue red faced CAA clerk, who muttered something about having to confirm that the letter had originated from PLD and whether the application could be processed.
Two hours later, licence handed back with type-rating on it.
Arrived at PLD around 11am, handed said application over and went to the CAA library to kill some time. Returned to the PLD counter at 12pm, where I was told that the application could not be processed, due to the 1179 being incomplete.
I gently pointed out the copy of a letter, in the application pack, from PLD to my employer confirming they, PLD, would process the incomplete application, on the proviso the missing element was covered during line training and that a copy of said letter must be in the application pack. The missing element was a crosswind take-off/landing on the aircraft - the weather did not co-operate during circuit training.
Cue red faced CAA clerk, who muttered something about having to confirm that the letter had originated from PLD and whether the application could be processed.
Two hours later, licence handed back with type-rating on it.
Don't be surprised - the poor guy selling his aircraft on the 'Funny Ebay Advert' thread got a similar pasting cos his spelllinnggg & grama was a bit off 
Perhaps this is the new way to behave - believe everyone is up to no good until they [the accused] can prove otherwise
Perhaps this is the new way to behave - believe everyone is up to no good until they [the accused] can prove otherwise
In the present discussion, strong opinions were published before any error was visible.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cue red faced CAA clerk, who muttered something about having to confirm that the letter had originated from PLD and whether the application could be processed.
A database of that size could be stored on my Nokia E51 phone
I suspect a bigger reason for this is that a lot of competent people have left in recent years.
Absolutely! It is a well-known fact that at the core of all learning is idle speculation and gossip!
I bet Icarus wished he'd listened to idle gossip about how the Sun was hot.
Sorting the facts from the gossip is the trick.
How many times do you have to ring your Council, Bank, Insurance Co. Plumber, the CAA, etc. getting a different answer each time, before you eventually have enough information to work it out for yourself ?.
Even Einstein is being questioned now !
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 11th Oct 2011 at 21:08.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When conducting a test, the Examiner is acting on behalf of the CAA who issue the authorisation to a specific person. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the FTO/RF, who are acting as a third party in recommending an examiner.
Under the sale of goods act in the UK (feel free to look it up) the person doing the selling forms a contract with the person doing the buying. The contract cannot be abrogated to a third party in the UK without the buyers consent.
If Joe Bloggs pays Fred Carno Flying School Ltd for a flight examination, his contract is with Fred Carno Flying School Ltd and they are responsible for providing said goods and services.
If Joe Bloggs has entered into a private arrangement with Holden MaGroin Esq (Flight Examiner par excellence), then said HM is responsible for providing the goods and services.
It's not rocket science, it's not negotiable and the CAA/Flying Schools do not have a remit to do any thing different.
If the OP paid the FTO, they have the buck. If the OP entered a private arrangement with the FE, the FE has the buck.
It's really ****ing simple...why don't you get it??
Which may well be the reason that the CAA tell the Examiner to collect the fee from the candidate prior to the test. A school cannot contract to sell a service it has no authority to provide. If by allowing the school to collect monies on behalf of an examiner it assumes liability, then there is a salutary lesson for us all.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Shropshire
Age: 48
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the benefit of the obviously intellectually challenged silverknapper.
Please could you explain to me where in my first post I was actually bleating about anything?
I made it clear I was disappointed, who wouldnt be?
I made it clear that the whole point of my post was to ascertain if anyone had had this happen before, and if so could they shed some light on the outcome for me?
Where is the bleating?
Please feel free to enlighten all of us with further witless comments. Alternatively engage your small mind before posting insulting s*** on here and shut the f*** up.
Please could you explain to me where in my first post I was actually bleating about anything?
I made it clear I was disappointed, who wouldnt be?
I made it clear that the whole point of my post was to ascertain if anyone had had this happen before, and if so could they shed some light on the outcome for me?
Where is the bleating?
Please feel free to enlighten all of us with further witless comments. Alternatively engage your small mind before posting insulting s*** on here and shut the f*** up.
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rule 1 of Pprune
For the benefit of the obviously intellectually challenged silverknapper.
Please could you explain to me where in my first post I was actually bleating about anything?
I made it clear I was disappointed, who wouldnt be?
I made it clear that the whole point of my post was to ascertain if anyone had had this happen before, and if so could they shed some light on the outcome for me?
Where is the bleating?
Please feel free to enlighten all of us with further witless comments. Alternatively engage your small mind before posting insulting s*** on here and shut the f*** up.
Please could you explain to me where in my first post I was actually bleating about anything?
I made it clear I was disappointed, who wouldnt be?
I made it clear that the whole point of my post was to ascertain if anyone had had this happen before, and if so could they shed some light on the outcome for me?
Where is the bleating?
Please feel free to enlighten all of us with further witless comments. Alternatively engage your small mind before posting insulting s*** on here and shut the f*** up.
Any topic more than 4 pages long shall be an argument with bickering.
Direction of internet argument.
It is hear by declared that an internet argument be conducted thus:
Initiation of confrontation
1. A series of statements shall be made
2. A single statement from the series be dissected and responded to in a ferociously strong manner.
NB Remember if you would be prepared to say what you are writing in real life then it is not nearly ferocious enough.
3. Original poster is to to then dissect one of the statements in response and pick that out to post a ferocious response to
It can be help if some misunderstanding of the statements and counter statements can occur.
Weight of evidence is unimportant "nobody does that" can be gloriously, greyly, disputed by showing 1 person in a population of 4 Billion DID do that. It neither proves or disporves and is awesome internet argument fodder.
Boring Cycling
In this phase it is important to keep the statements and counter statement flowing.
Remember millions of people change their opinions, and even the way they live, based on internet forums so keep going!
Willy measuring
After pages and pages of discussion the willy measuring section is entered upon. At this juncture, hirtherto unannounced qualifications that validate everything you are saying should be revealed.
Think of it as the "reveal" in poker as somebody announces they are from the CAA or a Pilot or flew the space shuttle or something.
Biggest willy wins, unless you are the looser.
End of argument
The officially sanctioned endings are:
1. Thread locked.
That is the ONLY officially sanctioned way. If you stop for any other reason then be aware:
a) Everybody is reading it, it will jeopordise your chances of work
b) Your wife won't love you anymore
c) You won't be allowed to fly aircraft ever again.
I hope that clears things up.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Up North
Age: 57
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why did the jobs worth at the CAA not call either the applicant or examiner before simply sending a rejection letter?
Because most of them are only trained to tick boxes. Using initiative is beyond the scope or remit of any of them.
Because most of them are only trained to tick boxes. Using initiative is beyond the scope or remit of any of them.
What could have been sorted in 10 minutes, without bothering the applicant, took over a week and resulted in a (justifiably) slightly miffed customer.
I fully accept that the initial mistake was ours, however their response just made it worse.