Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1559268
Nope not a troll at all.. sorry I have been working away all week, long hours and shifts and have not been home much to be able to reply.

I am currently reading up on all the replies and taking in the advice / information and will reply as soon as i get the chance.

The letter however was sent from the 'office of the general counsel - investigations and enforcement team.' if that helps prove the legitimacy of my post at all.
G-BLEW, Lockhaven, Cub and 1 others liked this
#1559290
Some details of what you think happened, and what they're specifically asking would be helpful to offer any meaningful opinion.

But my opinion for now would be pull together every scrap of evidence you have about what you were doing (PLOG, logbook, thoughts by any passengers, drop the GPS track into Google earth and use that to show heights), if need be get expert legal advice.

Then meet, without a lawyer (which does make it seem like you have something to defend!), have all the evidence to hand, record the conversation in case that comes in useful, by all means have a friendly grown-up with you but make it clear they're there as a supportive (and ideally knowledgeable) friend, not a legal representative.

And be as open and honest as possible. If you have clear evidence that you weren't low flying (and remember, 501ft separation at 150ft agl is still not a breach of any rules) table it and explain it. Ask for their evidence (almost certainly it'll be sketchy) and the time and opportunity to analyse it.

And if you did "inadvertently" breach rule 5 (or whatever the hell it's now called under SERA) admit it, apologise - give them every opportunity to send you off with a bollocking swapped for a contrite apology and not an appearance in court.

I've dealt with CAA enforcement a few times, mostly to support their work, a couple of times helping defend against a CAA prosecution, and once I reported myself after an inadvertent regulation bust that I decided it was best to be open and honest about. My experience is that *usually* if you do behave like this, they won't make your life any worse than they absolutely need to. Get difficult, and so do they.

If it does turn into a prosecution, then there are a few very good law firms who have a good track record with aviation cases, and I or a few others here can point you to them.

G

(Not a lawyer, have worked for quite a few as a consultant, usually related to the aftermath of air accidents.)
Danny, Bobcro, seanjd liked this
#1559361
It has been interesting to see how this has developed and I agree with much that G has written. I have been called as an expert witness in many commercial disputes and criminal prosecutions and given advice to others who had breached the ANO.

The accuracy of the evidential paper trail is important, check exactly what you did that day prior to, during and after the flight, print and retain it in a secure place.

Be friendly but not over so, have someone with you at all times but not as a legal advisor but as someone who is known to be experienced, you not he are being interviewed and it your words that will be written down. Do not enter into casual conversation or expand anything you may have said.

Try and sit somewhere comfortable so that the investigator is lower than you and that you and your colleague are some distance apart so that he cannot view or address you as one and he has to turn his head to talk to you. In turn either of you can fix your eyes on him. Don't make it easy for him to arrange his paper ask if they are a pilot.

Now get him to present his case and before you reply to produce his evidence, make notes and ask him to explain and justify everything he says. Test, test and test again his 'evidence' and make notes. He will be making notes and may ask you to sign a statement as to what you said, I would not sign any such statement as I don't believe that you are legally required to do so at that stage.

Get him/her to summarise what has been said, his findings and intended course of action. If you feel that his case is weak then say so and that you will fight it and it will be a waste of CAA resources and not in the public interest to bring any prosecution.

Never admit liability unless it has reached the stage where they say if you do then they will take no further action other than they will issue a warning letter and require 2 HR of briefing by an FI. Her/ her cannot make that decision at that time as it has to be approved by review. at a higher level.

De-brief yourselves, record and print your notes.

I just love low flying but am very conscious as to where and when I do it.
flybymike, youngman1, Sooty25 and 1 others liked this
By reubeno
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1559647
It looks like the CAA used to publish details of prosecutions, see:

https://www.caa.co.uk/Data-and-analysis ... t-actions/

but it hasn't been updated since 2012.

[Updated post a 2nd time]

Finally, found all the recent prosecutions at:

https://www.caa.co.uk/Our-work/About-us ... secutions/

Under further reading.
Last edited by reubeno on Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dave W liked this
By reubeno
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1559650
Sooty25: "What surprises me is the relatively lenient sentences." - agreed. It also doesn't tell you if a pilots license was suspended or revoked, pending re-training or similar. I continue to be surprised by videos posted online, flying down to the Dome / Canary Wharf. I thought that was subject to enforcement action being taken by the CAA.
#1559898
Thread drift here but in the 2015-2016 documentthe fines for occurrence 2 and 3 seem like they should be the other way round! Landing at a large outdoor event in a heli without permission and interrupting a display vs. blowing over a parasol from a patio table...
Last edited by JonnyS on Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
#1559919
JonnyS wrote:Thread drift here but in the 2015-2016 [url=file:///C:/Users/jons/Downloads/CAA%20Prosecutions%202015-16.pdf]document[/url]the fines for occurrence 2 and 3 seem like they should be the other way round! Landing at a large outdoor event in a heli without permission and interrupting a display vs. blowing over a parasol from a patio table...

The parasol caused harm to a "young person" in the process of blowing over. Presumably minor, as no details in the report.