Legal action against the CAA and examiner
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough already.
I hate the current environment where the student makes a mistake, the examiner watches (gives enough rope) to the student to see if a correction is made. When no correction is made the exam is not passed. Wrong says the student 'you can't do that!'.
But no, now the student is always right and the examiner doesn't know what they are doing and therefore the only recourse is to legal action for some dreampt up reason such as 'defamation'.
You screwed up the test, the CAA were, IMHO, gracious enough to waive the re-test fees. The examiner treated you how they felt you required to be treated on the day. Flying around with the wrong QNH, irrespective of parallax, which I personally think is a weak excuse, is a fail. Pure simple.
The world and the job owe you nothing, far, far better people have made mistakes, taken it on the chin and got on with it. What makes you so special.
Take responsibility for your own actions, the 'defamation' for failing a CPL check ride will be nothing next to the damage your reputation will take for taking the CAA to court over this childish tantrum. The aviation world is very small from a professional point of view and names get very well known. The airlines all talk to the CAA and such stupid cases are often a talking point over a coffee or around the water fountain. Just a word of caution you understand.
Unless you can categorically prove, as in Luke Skytoddlers case, that you set the correct QNH and not the wrong one then the Examiner is in the right and you are in the wrong. Unfortunately for you there is no external agency that can confirm you set the correct altimeter setting therefore you are in the wrong.
Welcome to life.
P.S. Please don't ever try an I.R.
I hate the current environment where the student makes a mistake, the examiner watches (gives enough rope) to the student to see if a correction is made. When no correction is made the exam is not passed. Wrong says the student 'you can't do that!'.
But no, now the student is always right and the examiner doesn't know what they are doing and therefore the only recourse is to legal action for some dreampt up reason such as 'defamation'.
You screwed up the test, the CAA were, IMHO, gracious enough to waive the re-test fees. The examiner treated you how they felt you required to be treated on the day. Flying around with the wrong QNH, irrespective of parallax, which I personally think is a weak excuse, is a fail. Pure simple.
The world and the job owe you nothing, far, far better people have made mistakes, taken it on the chin and got on with it. What makes you so special.
Take responsibility for your own actions, the 'defamation' for failing a CPL check ride will be nothing next to the damage your reputation will take for taking the CAA to court over this childish tantrum. The aviation world is very small from a professional point of view and names get very well known. The airlines all talk to the CAA and such stupid cases are often a talking point over a coffee or around the water fountain. Just a word of caution you understand.
Unless you can categorically prove, as in Luke Skytoddlers case, that you set the correct QNH and not the wrong one then the Examiner is in the right and you are in the wrong. Unfortunately for you there is no external agency that can confirm you set the correct altimeter setting therefore you are in the wrong.
Welcome to life.
P.S. Please don't ever try an I.R.
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 26th Mar 2012 at 08:26.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the outrage here down to the idea that authority has been questioned or the OP has a weird concept of defamation?
We are also all aware that poling the aircraft around the sky is not the most demanding aspect of a skill test. The ability to be aware of your position in the 3d space and the ability to maintain a high level of situational awareness with respect to other GA/OA traffic is also paramount. The mis-setting of an altimeter is, IMHO, irrelevant. What is relevant is that the setting was never checked again during the flight.
The examiner in this case had his reasons not to pass the student and, regardless of debriefing technique, those reasons must have been communicated back to the CAA on the relevant forms and the student as to the reason why they didn't pass. End of story. Unless there was a blindingly obvious reason to question the decision ( i.e. Luke Skytoddlers tale where a mistake was obviously made) then get on with the re-test. There is no 'shame' and, in my experience, an employer will perhaps ask why you needed to re-test but that's about it. They certainly will ask why a student felt it necessary to sue the CAA and that would put me on guard as to the suitability of the person in front of me.
We live in a time where many people think they have a right to sue for whatever reason they feel necessary. In some cases justified, in this case not.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the OP has gone above and beyond with his/her claim and that legal action is going to cost. He/she seems to be doing the level best to travel the self defamation route...
BUT - why did the examiner allow the whole test to be completed, when at the first available moment in section II the opportunity was available to mitigate to partial was missed? I think this is where the CAA said fair do's.
There is, however, a worrying trend of '...examiner is always right, pipsqueak' coming out in this thread. If the examiner isn't man/woman enough to accept criticism (and then, hopefully, shoot it down in flames with their superior knowledge), should they be examiners? We haven't knowingly heard from the examiner in this case - it might be so!
BUT - why did the examiner allow the whole test to be completed, when at the first available moment in section II the opportunity was available to mitigate to partial was missed? I think this is where the CAA said fair do's.
There is, however, a worrying trend of '...examiner is always right, pipsqueak' coming out in this thread. If the examiner isn't man/woman enough to accept criticism (and then, hopefully, shoot it down in flames with their superior knowledge), should they be examiners? We haven't knowingly heard from the examiner in this case - it might be so!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aberdeen, UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the setting was wrong throughout the entire flight, and it wasn't subsequently adjusted due to a change in pressure or flight through a different asr, why didn't the OP simply invite the examiner back out to the aircraft to visually check the subscale setting to confirm what it was actually set to?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]BUT - why did the examiner allow the whole test to be completed, when at the first available moment in section II the opportunity was available to mitigate to partial was missed? I think this is where the CAA said fair do's.
There is, however, a worrying trend of '...examiner is always right, pipsqueak' coming out in this thread. If the examiner isn't man/woman enough to accept criticism (and then, hopefully, shoot it down in flames with their superior knowledge), should they be examiners?/QUOTE]
It's a fair point but I think Wirbelsturm has clarified the likely reason for failure of the test in the examiners mind - not checking the correct sub-scale for the whole of the flight. And the trend in the answers on this thread I would agree supports the examiner in his decision but not to the extremes of "the examiner is always right." Clearly the concern for many is the attitude and false sense of entitlement displayed by the OP and his misguided decision to pursue the CAA through the courts.
The examiner most likely decided that in light of the OP's self claimed "excellent flying" there was value in allowing him to complete the test, probably in the hope that the altimetry error would be (very belatedly) spotted at some point. As a result the CAA have agreed a free re-test, but that does not mean the examiner was incorrect to allow the test to be flown to completion.
As he hasn't received the response he was probably looking for I doubt cookiemonster is still reading this thread but comments like "I never back down from a fight, even in the pub" and "a little thing like mis-setting the QNH" do him no favours. I'm fairly certain anyone involved in selection for any type of commercial flying enterprise will agree!
There is, however, a worrying trend of '...examiner is always right, pipsqueak' coming out in this thread. If the examiner isn't man/woman enough to accept criticism (and then, hopefully, shoot it down in flames with their superior knowledge), should they be examiners?/QUOTE]
It's a fair point but I think Wirbelsturm has clarified the likely reason for failure of the test in the examiners mind - not checking the correct sub-scale for the whole of the flight. And the trend in the answers on this thread I would agree supports the examiner in his decision but not to the extremes of "the examiner is always right." Clearly the concern for many is the attitude and false sense of entitlement displayed by the OP and his misguided decision to pursue the CAA through the courts.
The examiner most likely decided that in light of the OP's self claimed "excellent flying" there was value in allowing him to complete the test, probably in the hope that the altimetry error would be (very belatedly) spotted at some point. As a result the CAA have agreed a free re-test, but that does not mean the examiner was incorrect to allow the test to be flown to completion.
As he hasn't received the response he was probably looking for I doubt cookiemonster is still reading this thread but comments like "I never back down from a fight, even in the pub" and "a little thing like mis-setting the QNH" do him no favours. I'm fairly certain anyone involved in selection for any type of commercial flying enterprise will agree!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where I am told
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my IR, heading down the ILS as Bournemouth, the headwind gusted strongly and the glideslope indicator dropped down to half scale deviation. Obviously parallax error made it look to the examiner that it was out of limits but it wasn't and I will fight anyone who says that it was. I'm going to sue the Examiner, Aircraft manufacturer, Instrument manufacturer and the CAA because it cost me a fortune and I need to blame somebody...
Get a grip!
Examiners look very carefully at certain items. I remember mine, leaning over a couple of times to check at certain stage of the flight. They won't guess!
You will have had ample opportunity to demonstrate that you had the right qnh set. What did you write down for your initial atis, what did you set on standby, what checks did you make in the air, what qnh did you get and set for your approach and what for your return? Did you SAY IT OUT LOUD?
'You never back down from a fight'...right, Ok, in that case you should be prepared to take one on the chin.
Get a grip!
Examiners look very carefully at certain items. I remember mine, leaning over a couple of times to check at certain stage of the flight. They won't guess!
You will have had ample opportunity to demonstrate that you had the right qnh set. What did you write down for your initial atis, what did you set on standby, what checks did you make in the air, what qnh did you get and set for your approach and what for your return? Did you SAY IT OUT LOUD?
'You never back down from a fight'...right, Ok, in that case you should be prepared to take one on the chin.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Somewhere close to me
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"never back down from a fight"
Seem the OP has backed down from PPRUNE, as he has not updated any information of what happen, very sparse information given by OP! Probably saving the info for his "big day in court"
Seem the OP has backed down from PPRUNE, as he has not updated any information of what happen, very sparse information given by OP! Probably saving the info for his "big day in court"
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: 30W
Age: 40
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't normally make harsh comment on prune as I don't believe it helps anyone involved BUT on this instance I make an exception.
Maybe he failed you because you were just a bit s
T and that almighty up seems like as good excuse as any!
Couple of points.
If you had the incorrect mb set on both altimeters, which are going to be in different positions, that kind of rules out parallax. You probably busted your MDA to.
I would imagine you were passable but just needed a bit of extra work and if you busted the mda due to having the incorrect pressure set and cross checked on the main and stby altimeter, that's a big mistake to miss and defiantly a just fail! The examiner with more experience and much more mental capacity was probably sat there checking the altimeters out from all angles for quite sometime while watching you sweat bouncing around the hold as I'm sure he has heard of parallax error.
Just chill and moven on.
Taking legal action against the CAA, grow up!
Maybe he failed you because you were just a bit s
T and that almighty up seems like as good excuse as any!Couple of points.
If you had the incorrect mb set on both altimeters, which are going to be in different positions, that kind of rules out parallax. You probably busted your MDA to.
I would imagine you were passable but just needed a bit of extra work and if you busted the mda due to having the incorrect pressure set and cross checked on the main and stby altimeter, that's a big mistake to miss and defiantly a just fail! The examiner with more experience and much more mental capacity was probably sat there checking the altimeters out from all angles for quite sometime while watching you sweat bouncing around the hold as I'm sure he has heard of parallax error.
Just chill and moven on.
Taking legal action against the CAA, grow up!
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Methinks he/she was a troll. 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't have all the information, but consider for a moment if the examiner has made an error in the conduct of the test which leaves the 'fail' result tenuous.
Putting the issue of costs (and any bruised ego) aside for a moment, cookiimonstar1 is going to spend the next few years filling out airline applications for his first job, and he will be ticking the "Yes" box to the question "Have you ever failed a flight test?". He will be excluded from any airline selection process which only accept a first series pass (why else is the box there but to act as a filter for the thousands of applications).
I know from personal experience it's on nearly every application for cadet positions, that box is a sore point for me and I royally screwed up my flight test entirely on my own, without any help from an examiner
.
So I can understand why he doesn't want to 'take it on the chin'.
Unfortunately I think the way he has presented himself in this thread suggests a failed CPL test is going to be the least of his worries in the future.
Putting the issue of costs (and any bruised ego) aside for a moment, cookiimonstar1 is going to spend the next few years filling out airline applications for his first job, and he will be ticking the "Yes" box to the question "Have you ever failed a flight test?". He will be excluded from any airline selection process which only accept a first series pass (why else is the box there but to act as a filter for the thousands of applications).
I know from personal experience it's on nearly every application for cadet positions, that box is a sore point for me and I royally screwed up my flight test entirely on my own, without any help from an examiner
. So I can understand why he doesn't want to 'take it on the chin'.
Unfortunately I think the way he has presented himself in this thread suggests a failed CPL test is going to be the least of his worries in the future.
Putting the issue of costs (and any bruised ego) aside for a moment, cookiimonstar1 is going to spend the next few years filling out airline applications for his first job, and he will be ticking the "Yes" box to the question "Have you ever failed a flight test?". He will be excluded from any airline selection process which only accept a first series pass (why else is the box there but to act as a filter for the thousands of applications).
As someone else has already said, the course of action he plans to undertake may stick to him like s**t on a blanket and if he tries to explain to a potential employer what happened the way he has here, he won't stand a chance.
