Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1857718
Apologies for the thread drift: curious on this one, but when I skim-read the headline (without any detail), the accusation appears to be that he did not have the requisite licence to enable him to fly lawfully.

But that got me thinking: if he isn't correctly licenced, then (out of curiosity), what legislation gives the CAA the jurisdiction over this particular case (as opposed to the police)?

If he were a licenced pilot breaching the ANO, then I get that the CAA are enforcers, but presumably the CAA have no power to clamp down on someone who isn't actually a pilot, whether that's because they hold no licence (at all), or that they've falsified documents to suggest otherwise?

Not suggesting that this guy doesn't deserve the book being thrown at him, but just curious as to what the CAA's role in the prosecution is. I used to work with the RSPCA and I seem to remember at the time that the RSPCA were the only non-police body to be able to bring charges against an individual (though I believe that power has since been revoked).

In the press release, it's very specifically referred to as the 'Civil Aviation Authority's prosecution'.
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857724
For driving offences, the Crown Prosecution Service handles this sort of thing after a referral from the Police.
For aviation offences, the enforcement team at the CAA (who carries out ramp checks, audits, etc.) and their lawyers represent the prosecuting side.

Certain offences carry unlimited fines as per the link I sent. Whilst the number seems huge, it sends a strong message that not even wealthy individuals can live above the law.

Can/should the CAA in future refer such matters to the police/CPS in the way the DVLA does? I suppose it can, but that would require changes to law.
#1857726
James Chan wrote:For driving offences, the Crown Prosecution Service handles this sort of thing after a referral from the Police.
For aviation offences, the enforcement team at the CAA (who carries out ramp checks, audits, etc.) and their lawyers represent the prosecuting side.

Certain offences carry unlimited fines as per the link I sent. Whilst the number seems huge, it sends a strong message that not even wealthy individuals can live above the law.

Can/should the CAA in future refer such matters to the police/CPS in the way the DVLA does? I suppose it can, but that would require changes to law.


Very interesting, thank you. I had always assumed (wrongly!) that it was only that these bodies could initiate the prosecution, which would then be handled by the CPS (with the CAA/RSPCA/DVLA support etc) as an ongoing case.
By MikeE
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857728
flyingearly wrote:
...

But that got me thinking: if he isn't correctly licenced, then (out of curiosity), what legislation gives the CAA the jurisdiction over this particular case (as opposed to the police)?

If he were a licenced pilot breaching the ANO, then I get that the CAA are enforcers, but presumably the CAA have no power to clamp down on someone who isn't actually a pilot, whether that's because they hold no licence (at all), or that they've falsified documents to suggest otherwise?



The CAA sets this out in a press release -

https://www.caa.co.uk/News/Pilot-fined- ... e-licence/


Best wishes

Mike
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857739
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:@flyingearly By your logic who would prosecute people without a driving licence?

The CAA can prosecute without having to go through the CPS, ditto the Animal folks.


Can you imagine any situation where, provided he's only committed a licence 'paper offence' and not killed anyone/destroyed a puppy farm/school, a motorist would be fined £175k?

Smacks of 'lets screw him for all he's got'.
TopCat, Ibra, flybymike and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Bald Sparrow
#1857740
James Chan wrote:Certain offences carry unlimited fines as per the link I sent. Whilst the number seems huge, it sends a strong message that not even wealthy individuals can live above the law.


The problem with headlines of this nature is that Joe Public will assume that all pilots are very wealthy.......
The fine is a huge amount. I wonder how much it would be if we make a mistake on a PMD or similar?
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857741
It's a very expensive mistake - my mind boggles as to why he didn't just go for the ME/IR revalidation and support the flight training industry. It would cost him far less money and hassle.

That said I do think it's a bit unwise for the CAA to publish a successful prosecution via a press release without more detail. Those who are unfamiliar with the legal/enforcement process may think there is a draconian regulator sniffing opportunities to get pilots committing seemingly mild offences to sell up their own homes.
Last edited by James Chan on Fri Jul 09, 2021 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857745
James Chan wrote:That said I do think it's a bit disingenuous for the CAA to publish a successful prosecution via a press release without more detail.


Aimed at the great unwashed perhaps, who would all be nodding in agreement that the force of the law has come down on rich boys* and their toys.

* figuratively speaking- he's mid 70s

For the avoidance of doubt I do not condone his actions and agree with the guilty verdict, given the scant info published.

I just think the punishment was wildly disproportionate and, with apols to G & S, 'the punishment didn't fit the crime'.
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Fri Jul 09, 2021 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By 2Donkeys
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857746
I don't know any particular details of the case beyond what has been reported, but I do note that this is not the pilot's first encounter with enforcement

AS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED BY FLYER

I also see via companies house (as suggested by @Flyin'Dutch') that he has less than salubrious business associates as the man that stepped into the shoes of Robert Murgatroyd in 2013 when Murgatroyd resigned the majority of his directorships.

Harbottle was at the helm when two of these Murgatroyd vehicles, British Northwest Airways Ltd, Flyblackpool Ltd were struck off for non-filing at Companies House and another, Blackpool Northwest Handling Ltd went into receivership.

I suspect that there is a good deal more to the background to this case and the severity of the enforcement action than has been reported.
Last edited by 2Donkeys on Fri Jul 09, 2021 10:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
Ibra, Iceman, Charles Hunt liked this
User avatar
By flyingearly
#1857747
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:@flyingearly By your logic who would prosecute people without a driving licence?


The CPS. In fact - happy to admit my ignorance - I didn't realise the DVLA prosecuted either; I had assumed that everything routed through the CPS with the exception of the RSPCA who could 'initiate' a prosecution, but handed it over to the CPS thereafter.

My point really was: if I don't have a licence, what's the CAA got to do with me?

My assumption was that the CAA regulate pilots; the DVLA regulate drivers, the RSPCA regulate animal owners/carers. But if I am not a qualified pilot, do not hold a driving licence and have nothing to do with animals, then any prosecution coming my way would be from the CPS (perhaps leaning on the relevant experts from those bodies as required).

But, as others have pointed out, I'm wrong and so this has been a very interesting learning opportunity!
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1857748
Just to clarify - anybody can bring a prosecution under English law. https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/p ... osecutions
And there are other prosecuting agencies than the Crown Prosecution Service https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/r ... g-agencies of which the CAA is one.
When the RSPCA prosecute they are doing it as a private individual, not a prosecuting agency.
And again - its the court the decides the penalty, not the prosecuting agency.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1857750
flyingearly wrote:My point really was: if I don't have a licence, what's the CAA got to do with me?


It is said that when the Victor at Bruntingthorpe got airborne by mistake doing a fast taxi run, the CAA declined to prosecute anyone on the basis that it wasn't an aeroplane any more, just a jet propelled roller skate, so nothing to do with them.
(someone will be along in a minute to tell me this is untrue - but I think it's a good story :thumleft:)
flybymike liked this
User avatar
By nallen
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857753
PeteSpencer wrote:Can you imagine any situation where, provided he's only committed a licence 'paper offence' and not killed anyone/destroyed a puppy farm/school, a motorist would be fined £175k?


Some Premier League footballers have had mighty speeding fines because of the fining formula that can charge you up to 175% of weekly income.

https://www.carbuyer.co.uk/tips-and-advice/171938/speeding-fines-2020-how-much-will-you-have-to-pay