Read the forum code of contact
By: - 9th November 2012 at 20:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What is the purpose of the contracts? Is it to bring the standards of the inspectors in to line? Is it to remove liability issues should an amateur builder do something stupid? Is it just a re-definition of roles and responsibilities?
Wish I'd read the magazine now......
By: - 9th November 2012 at 20:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
JT442
I don't think that anyone knows. As far as I'm aware, none of the proposals have seen the light of day so far as the membership are concerned.
By: - 9th November 2012 at 22:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Got it, I think - Its to do with the Third Party Passenger Flying (Young Aviators) activities. Essentially at the moment, the organised flying of groups was suspended in 2011. I THINK the charters seek to re-implement this with certain safeguards in place so as to remove liability for accidents and injuries to the LAA or the Struts.... unless that's old news...
By: - 12th November 2012 at 18:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I failed to mention the most potentially damaging part of the article published in Light Aviation and discussed by the LAA Managing Director.
It seems that if you are an owner of a Permit a/c, in future you will receive your new Owners Permit only subject to your signature of acceptance of the terms and conditions of the proposed new Contracts, which you then return to the LAA who then send you your Permit.
If you do not like the terms and conditions of the new Contract - tough ! To get your Permit you'll still have to sign. This means that you will be acting under duress which then renders the signed contract invalid.
The Managing Director of the LAA confirms that these Owners Contracts will form part of the Permit application process and the grant of Permit.
By: - 12th November 2012 at 19:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It looks as if they are embarking on a huge **** covering exercise.
Standby for a round of fee increases to cover the cost of their legal expenses. :mad:
By: - 12th November 2012 at 19:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ahh... I can see EASA looming over the horizon. Depending on the wording of the contracts, it could be viewed as a flight safety issue, and therefore you have no option but to accept the contract - in effect, if you've done everything correctly it shouldn't be a major deal. If you've cut corners (I'm thinking maintenance here) then your permit will be invalid, and with good reason.
First one to post a contract so we know what we're talking about wins one million internet points.....
By: - 12th November 2012 at 20:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Permit a/c do not come within EASA control. The existing Permit application document is a thorough and detailed affair requiring not only a visual inspection by an approved LAA Inspector but also requires support by documentary evidence culminating in a an exhaustive flight test.
At the very least existing Permit holders should not have to subscribe to a new regime. When they bought into the system they bought into a system that did not include Owner Contracts, if they had, they might well have decided that Owners contracts were not for them - they might have exercised choice and gone elsewhere.
I find it strange that this subject has been aired with no attendant publication of these Contracts - of which I am aware.
By: - 12th November 2012 at 21:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Permit a/c do not come within EASA control.
YET................
By: - 30th November 2012 at 10:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Further to the above. I wrote to the Managing Director of the LAA, Richard Dunevein-Gordon, the content of which repeated that contained in my first comment on this subject.
I received a lengthy reply which is too long to be quoted in detail here. The Managing Director sticks to his description of the proposed changes as a 'Charter' and not a 'Contract' and thinks that one of the issues is 'semantics'. He goes onto write that the LAA chose the title Charter because they thought the term Contract was too 'onerous'. The presumption is that he means for the membership. If so, that is instructive.
Mr. Dunevein-Gordon thinks that my letter contained some suggestion of the presence of a 'conspiracy theory' but insists that the proposed Charters/Contracts contain no hidden agenda and propose nothing that is new, merely setting out to clarify members responsibilities and re-packaging existing rules and regulations.
I think that the M.D's reference to a 'conspiracy theory' is based upon my mention of the possibility of a 'hidden agenda'. When Permit holders sign the Permit application form, they sign to verify the accuracy and honesty of the replies therein. On that basis of honesty and trust lies the acceptance of the completed application. The LAA M.D. writes that the proposed Charters/Contracts 'will bring greater clarity to that process'. That bit does puzzle me !
It is now almost December and there has been no sign that these Charters/Contracts are about to be published for our examination. According to the LAA they are to be in use by the 'early part of 2013'. Time is getting short. The LAA must be aware that we, the users, must have sufficient time between publication and use, to scan these documents both for acceptance and potential problems.
By: - 30th November 2012 at 23:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It still sounds to me as if it is just a bit of house-keeping, outlining roles and responsibilities of the LAA, its engineers and its pilots/builders. If it makes things safer, its a good thing whether those involved like it or not.
By: - 1st December 2012 at 10:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I may agree to a certain extent with JT442 however, if it is just a bit of housekeeping and tidying up administration-wise, then why the big stick if we don't sign. As the big stick is in evidence and the contract/charter seeming to be a fundemental juncture for us all, then why has the membership not been consulted; after all, the LAA is there for us and not the other way round. What would be the problem for the LAA to print it in the Light Aviation magazine and/or their web-site prior to implementation; not too much to ask methinks.
Richard
By: - 1st December 2012 at 12:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
JT442
Can't argue with those sentiments. We all want to do 'safe'. But, what do these Contracts actually say? No one knows. Why not. Why leave it so late in the day to publish? It creates a suspicion that there might be some unpalatable content.
By: - 1st December 2012 at 13:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As the big stick is in evidence and the contract/charter seeming to be a fundemental juncture for us all, then why has the membership not been consulted; after all, the LAA is there for us and not the other way round. What would be the problem for the LAA to print it in the Light Aviation magazine and/or their web-site prior to implementation; not too much to ask methinks.
Richard
'fraid the LAA (and PFA before) is not an organisation noted for openess and consulatation with it's members. Usually works on the "this is the is the way its going to be" principle. Keeps it all under wraps and then announces it to the membership who are expected accept what is handed down with great gratitude.
Been a member since 1976.
Planemike
By: - 25th December 2012 at 21:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Surely most people join the LAA because it is the cheapest way to own and operate a PFA type aircraft or build one,so in fairness there is no alternative,unless you want to own and fly a C of A aeroplane,which would certainly be a whole lot more expensive and you wouldn't have the variety of choice.So basically I don't see what the problem is.The LAA is very good value and flexible.
By: - 26th December 2012 at 12:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sopwith.
That's all very well but, why the seeming secrecy and delay in publishing the Contracts?
By: - 26th December 2012 at 12:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sopwith.That's all very well but, why the seeming secrecy and delay in publishing the Contracts?
I'll be honest John,that was the first that I had heard of it when I saw your post,there is such a lot of insignifigant stuff in the magazine I only read the engineering section and the adverts or the occasional flight test.The rest I don't bother with.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 9th November 2012 at 18:53
This could affect all who own, fly or maintain Permit aircraft. The LAA have announced via their Managing Director, Richard Dunevein-Gordon that what the LAA calls Charters or Contracts are to be issued starting early next year. There seems to be some contradiction between the term 'Charter' and the term 'Contract'. A Charter is an undertaking or series of undertakings on the part of the issuer and a Contract is an agreement or number of agreements or conditions to which two or more parties agree and approve.
These Charters or Contracts - all of which, according to the LAA have been legally vetted by LAA lawyers - that alone should ring alarm bells, are allegedly for the benefit of LAA Inspectors, builders, owners and Clubs or Struts.
According to the LAA these contracts are to codify the rights and responsibilities of the respective parties removing existing ambiguities thus defining what is acceptable and unacceptable in their relationship.
Before proceeding to interfere with an existing system that appears to be working there should, perhaps, be some effort directed to clarifying the wishes of the LAA membership. Perhaps a poll conducted via the LAA magazine.
A template of each individual contract should be published for examination by the membership.
The membership needs confirmation that there is no ulterior motive driving these proposals and that the reasons given for their propagation are as stated.
If these LAA proposals are a contract and not a charter then each member or organisation signing has a duty for their own protection to have the terms of the contract independantly legally vetted, the costs of which should be to the account of the LAA.
Two further points. Do these contracts contradict any of the provisions of the Human Rights Act? We should be very careful before making any assumptions.
I'm not aware of any attempt by the LAA to indulge the democratic instinct by consulting the membership before issuing these proposals almost as a fait accompli. Offering these - for all I know - worthy proposals on a one year probationary period would at least have the merit of giving the membership an opportunity to test them for worth.