The CAA "threat" to Jet2,Whizair and Air Lingus

Vauban

JPears wrote: »

Its "tow the line" box ticking, be seen to be doing one thing "correctly", when really another is being done, or not.

I'll tell you exactly what this is - it's an exercise in back-covering by the CAA so when airlines are finally hauled up for failure to implement the Regulation properly, the CAA can say they had been fully assured to the contrary and it's not their fault.

They've cut Jet2 loose - much to the latter's chagrin - but in actual fact this whole exercise appears to be just an effort to transfer presentational liability for failure to adhere to the Regulation to the airlines instead of the Regulator. What mechanisms have the CAA established to check the veracity of what they've been told by the airlines? Oh, yes: none.

JPears

Same old, same old from CAA.

NoviceAngel

Well The two year limitation is very interesting because they have sided on the six years as being correct and that airlines should not attempt to deny liability through cleverly worded T & C's...

...So what's the response from Jet2, two fingers right up at the CAA, they're not exactly quivering with fear. We should start to see the response from the Courts on the 2 year limitations, way before any enterprise action from the CAA.

Vauban

The CAA have no intention of taking any British airline to court. All the offending airline has to do is, as JP describes it, tick the right box. The whole exercise is Alice Through the Looking Glass in its absurdity ...

NoviceAngel

Is it really completely worthless ? Is there nothing in it worth using ?

I personally think it will be useful as a slightly persuasive document to Jet2 Claimants that are fighting the 2 year time bar, knowing that where previously they've had help and backing from the CAA, now finally, they've spoken out against them, surely of some use?

JPears

NoviceAngel wrote: »

So we can't copy the airlines replies to the questions in the individual airline threads? Because of copyright ?

© Civil Aviation Authority 2015
All rights reserved. Copies of this publication may be reproduced for personal use, or for
use within a company or organisation, but may not otherwise be reproduced for
publication.
To use or reference CAA publications for any other purpose, for example within training
material for students, please contact the CAA for formal agreement.
CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE
www.caa.co.uk

:mad:

Strictly, it says "copies" - to me that implies the whole document, not little excerpts from it.
It also says within an organisation. I would contend that MSE as an organisation. And its a company.

stevemej

Vauban wrote: »

The CAA have no intention of taking any British airline to court. All the offending airline has to do is, as JP describes it, tick the right box. The whole exercise is Alice Through the Looking Glass in its absurdity ...

I'm not as skeptical as you guys. After the Huzar/Dawson cases The CAA realized the error of its ways, completely siding with the airlines, then asked the airlines if they would now be complying with the Huzar/Dawson cases (using the questionnaire).
They have received the replies and collated their results and NOW are acting on the results.

Vauban

Not in a court of law.

When you go to court, the only thing that matters is the law.

The CAA have no privileged position or authority in this respect. They've been saying they think it's six years not two since Dawson - and in fact before, I think.

But you'll remember when the CAA inspired "list of extraordinary circumstances" was bandied about. Many judges ignored it (as did Platts in Huzar I) saying it was irrelevant to determining the legal position, which only the courts could do.

We can't have our cake and eat it.

NoviceAngel

JPears wrote: »

Strictly, it says "copies" - to me that implies the whole document, not little excerpts from it.
It also says within an organisation. I would contend that MSE as an organisation. And its a company.

Ok I'll go with it, all they can do is ask for it taking down, MSE Helen posted in this thread anyway, so I'm sure she'll ask the Mods to look at anything we post...

Cheers JP

Vauban

stevemej wrote: »

They have received the replies and collated their results and NOW are acting on the results.

Really Steve? What are they actually doing?

Do you share the CAA's assessment that Monarch, Ryanair, Thomas Cook are all now adhering to UK law in matters of the Regulation? (Because anyone reading these forums would struggle to come to that conclusion, I think.) Simply ticking a box to say "I do" really doesn't make it so.