Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1857754
But it's not "an expensive mistake". The court decided at trial that it was a deliberate fraudulent act; a forgery (two actually).

Checking the ANO for these offences (OK, nerdy), if the magistates had considered the offences to be really so serious, they could have sent them up to the Crown Court for sentence where the option of up to two years nick would be available for each offence. They clearly didn't think it was all that bad.

He was convicted at trial (ie he pleaded not guilty), so that will have put the penalty and the costs up a chunk too.

As others have pointed out, best guess is this offender is a significantly wealthy man. The fine is intended to be a punishment so it's supposed to smart, however rich the offender is.

If he really feels badly done by he can appeal either or both of the conviction or sentence.
lobstaboy liked this
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857757
But it's not "an expensive mistake".


Sorry when I meant "mistake", I meant the act to conduct fraud / forgery deliberately is the mistake. He could have paid orders of magnitude less to revalidate his MEP and IR and be licensed, rather than be caught up having to pay the prosecution's costs, his own legal costs, the fine to the court, and other fees - for what reason? His future aircraft insurance costs could go up too.

This is something strange which makes the mind boggle. Maybe he'll appeal the conviction or sentence and get a new legal team. I don't know.
HedgeSparrow liked this
By Ibra
#1857764
2Donkeys wrote: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.


Thanks for the background, I guess it’s only the tip of the iceberg !

I find it hard to believe 175k£ is just lack of valid rating or what was written on his PPL (or maybe our 12h/year pilots flying without valid papers are in deep troubles, well many of them have that ugly SEP signeoff by some FI/CRI who have no clue what the LAPL rolling currency is, it’s not their fault neither :lol: )
Last edited by Ibra on Fri Jul 09, 2021 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857766
Ibra wrote:...the lack of valid rating or what was written on his PPL (or maybe our 12h/year pilots flying without valid papers are in deep troubles, many of them have that ugly SEP signeoff by some FIs who have no clue what LAPL rolling currency :lol: )


Unless they deliberately forged their documents, that's not valid comparison though!
Ibra liked this
By Ibra
#1857768
Yes indeed it’s not a valid comparaison: forged & conscious with load of dirt under his rug but a simple lack of valid rating/currency does not justify 175k£ fine IMO, most of us have to look at the rating/currency table by DaveW to figure out if we are legal to fly and how to renew :lol:
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857771
I'm not sure that still flying several years after the ratings expired is "simple", that's not an oversight, that's deliberate disregard of the rules. It also seems pretty likely there's more to this than is being openly reported.

G
2Donkeys, G-BLEW liked this
By Ibra
#1857773
Of course flying with an expired rating is illegal (who did not know that?) but I would like to believe his 175k£ fine is related to the other serious stuff the guy has under his belt…

Just wait until you see how many “dormants FAA IR rated pilots” are flying IFR illegally in the UK in the next 6 month without valid UK PPL & IR, I bet the first fined pilot will show up in the press by Feb22, I seriously hope it’s not 200k£ fine :wink:
User avatar
By 2Donkeys
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857777
Ibra wrote:Just wait until you see how many “dormants FAA IR rated pilots” are flying IFR illegally in the UK in the next 6 month without valid UK PPL & IR:


On a point of detail, if they are flying at any point between now and 21December, they are perfectly lawful in not holding a CAA PPL/IR.
G-BLEW liked this
By Rjk983
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857806
Ibra wrote:
TopCat wrote:
Dave W wrote:Yes: See above.
Forgery and deliberate back-dating.

Yeah but other than that.


I think he was this guy? who paid in Conventry more than a TBM visiting Ukraine :lol:

I think he had one of the lost comms incidents when 8.33khz frequencies got rolled (people not checking Notams or not using SkyDemon) but apparently he knows how to open hell doors with ATC/CAA :twisted:

https://www.flyer.co.uk/pilot-fined-aft ... -coventry/


Knowing nothing about either case I feel eminently qualified to jump in to the discussion.

It’s a shame the CAA haven’t released more details, but maybe they are waiting to see if there is an appeal.

Is it possible to get the court records, or is there a time period before they are released?

And now for the wild speculation… it appears to me that the report above was the initial incident, I note that many comments seemed to say he was hard done by and it was a bit harsh for him not checking the notams.

A slightly different complexion on it now though, I wonder if any of the original comments will be withdrawn or updated? It seems like he was either wilfully not following the rules or, due to being out of currency/validity had forgotten to check notams etc. How many other mistakes had he made in that flight.

It also appears that had the authorities not taken the appropriate action after the Coventry incident then he would not have been caught with his forged documents.
By Ibra
#1857827
UK courts are public, so someone will have more details without CAA releasing them?

Anyway the guy is probably on high horse all the time with lot of dirt & attention on him (he is not our average Joe landing in Sandown on wrong 8.33khz frequency or bimbling around on 25khz) but the amount of the fine is clearly unprecedented, he just beat two US drone guys (one is YouTube star, obviously :lol: )

https://www.cined.com/faa-charges-18200 ... one-pilot/
https://www.cined.com/company-fined-200000-by-faa/
User avatar
By Rob L
#1857843
lobstaboy wrote: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:)


Good post (whether true or not is not the point), but it's worth a re-run of the few videos:



This one below you have to watch on YouTube (it won't allow embedding, apparently):

MikeB, Spooky liked this
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857851
flyingearly wrote: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).



The CAA regulate the ANO and flying without a licence is an offence against the ANO.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1857854
PeteSpencer wrote:
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'.


Pete, that is the reality of the UK justice system (and a fair few other jurisdictions) that penalties are metered out in accordance with income, so poor GPs would not have to pay as much as Consultants.

This chap clearly has previous, which means that there is no place for any leniency and clearly little faith in 'lessons learned) Another thing I noted was the awarding of a huge amount of costs to the CAA; probably a fair indication that there was a lot of work involved and no conceding on the part of the pilot; not your usual squabble over a few hundred feet here or there.

Another factor is probably that this chap has been flying a long time at a level well beyond that of the average bumbling PPL, so the view that someone of that seniority should know better will also have played a role.
Cub, kanga liked this