[MattL]

It is complete hoop and unfortunately is a licensing officer trying to follow some poor checklist they have been given. I have had far too many battles recently on this - especially with military candidates being told they have to copy their entire logbooks (which are all irrelevant in many cases anyway for a chinook pilot getting a PPL(A)). I believe the actual requirement is a verified copy of the last page of logbook confirming the relevant total hours but this is being misinterpreted/ communicated differently.

[low&slow]

You need to get an image of your signature on a transparent background & use a pdf editor that allows you to place an image; do several different versions if you care enough to be subtle about it. Skip the whole print, sign & scan faff & just add an image wherever required.

[Genghis the Engineer]

So basically you're saying that I need a dodgy electronic workaround to meet a pointless CAA requirement that I have every few years, and so should everyone else?

G

[AndyR]

Challenge it!

As MattL says, a verified copy of the last page of your logbook should suffice.

Hopeless.

[Mz Hedy]

The next joke will be about who's acceptable to verify the copy.

[cotterpot]

There is now a list of acceptable 'trades' that can sign I understand

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can verify your Logbook copies yourself.

G

[low&slow]

Genghis the Engineer wrote:
> So basically you're saying that I need a dodgy electronic workaround to
> meet a pointless CAA requirement that I have every few years, and so should
> everyone else?
>
> G

If it's more convenient for me, absolutely. Were I in your situation I could have done the whole lot in about 30 seconds. I haven't owned a printer for at least 10 years and that's how I've been signing every document sent to me. Nothing dodgy about it at all, you're giving them what they want.

By all means raise an official complaint but remember, they're an institutional monopoly, they will do what's convenient for them, not what's convenient for you.

[MattL]

Genghis the Engineer wrote:
> You can verify your Logbook copies yourself.
>
> G

If they have asked for certified copies of a paper logbook you need to get someone on the approved list to do it, you can’t do it yourself. It suggests you can sign electronic prints yourself, I guess because a verifier can’t see the original hard copy!

https://www.caa.co.uk/commercial-indust ... -logbooks/

[AlanC]

Addition of details for existing licence holders has been a bugbear of mine for a while - largely down to how the forms are based on a one size fits all initial page or 2. Having spent the last decade repeatedly pushing the idea of "if Bloggs has a CPL/ATPL that you issued, is there any value in Bloggs digging back through 15-20 logbooks to find the one day they did a 300nm cross country flight landing at 2 other airfields, that you verified back in the mists of time" or similar, it has become clear that the institution is incapable of change at that level. Harsh, and not a fair reflection of the good people within the system, but sadly true of the overall licensing process and the understanding within.

A previous FI student had real issues finding the evidence of his 300nm cross country, because after 32 years flying the 747 the company still balked at the idea of him landing one of their aircraft at 2 airfields within a single day under VFR...

[Genghis the Engineer]

low&slow wrote:
> Genghis the Engineer wrote:
> > So basically you're saying that I need a dodgy electronic workaround to
> > meet a pointless CAA requirement that I have every few years, and so should
> > everyone else?
> >
> > G
>
> If it's more convenient for me, absolutely. Were I in your situation I could have
> done the whole lot in about 30 seconds. I haven't owned a printer for at least 10
> years and that's how I've been signing every document sent to me. Nothing dodgy about
> it at all, you're giving them what they want.
>
> By all means raise an official complaint but remember, they're an institutional
> monopoly, they will do what's convenient for them, not what's convenient for you.

Oh I have of-course already done it (twice, as my first go wasn't legible enough for CAA and, to be fair, it wasn't). As I said at the start, I was just having a whinge about the pointless effort.

G

[townleyc]

One could perhaps question the legality of requiring print copies to be signed. ISTR the Electronic Communication Act 2000 gave equal status to electronic signing.

KE

[TLRippon]

Just had a former student finish his LAPL to PPL upgrade and with the help of the examiner, send off his application. They take his money and a couple of days later a notice that 1. They couldn’t read his scanned copy of his certified logbook, which was pristine and hi res when it left us and 2. He needed to send in his proof of passing his PPL exams, which of course he did two months ago when they issued a LAPL despite all his exams being on the quadrant system. Aside from their apparent lack of access to their own exam system, why can’t the officer put two and two together and realise if they issued a LAPL a few months ago he must have passed the 9 PPL exams.

[Irv Lee]

I suspect if enough people wrote to their MP putting their complaint into a pdf attachment to be passed to the DfT and taken up with the CAA, AND copied every member of the CAA board, that would be far better than complaining to any CAA coalface worker or their supervisor.
MPs love 'work' which merely passes on stuff, very quick tick in the box of doing something for a constituent.
Then wait a few weeks and ask the MP to ask the DfT what happened

[TLRippon]

Ha ha! Irv, my MP is a Conservative Boris apologist with a 23,000 majority. Wears a Union Jack Suit when canvassing and goes on the attack if you make any criticism of a government agency.
No point and no chance unless I shave my head raise my blood pressure to make my face crimson and blame the CAA’s shortcomings somehow on Angela Rayner.