Josh Hoch found guilty on 13 charges of unlicenced flying and fraud

[onetrack]

Well, it looks like one Nth Qld aviator will be grounded for a while to come. Bail for Hoch has been rescinded, and he will be sentenced next week.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-18/queensland-pilot-found-guilty-chartering-flights-unlicensed/101656012

[jackc]

So, he flies for some 4 years before he gets busted?  All I can say is WOW……

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, jackc said:

So, he flies for some 4 years before he gets busted?  All I can say is WOW……

Was this the flying off the grid cloak and dagger flying you were talking about?

 

 

[jackc]

How could someone fly charters unlicensed for so long until he was busted?  Every week, people fly unlicensed in remote areas and never get found out, until they crash and it ends up fatal.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, jackc said:

How could someone fly charters unlicensed for so long until he was busted?  Every week, people fly unlicensed in remote areas and never get found out, until they crash and it ends up fatal.

Not necessarily; when someone is to be successfully prosecuted is is necessary to have evidence. If someone reports something to you it might be true, but it doesn't carry in the court, it's hearsay. Wiretaps have to be approved and set up. Mobile Phone transmission collection has to be approved. Photos have to be verified, people who have regular contact have to be wired, video of meetings, flights, conversations have to be obtained, if passengers were involved, they have to be interviewed, undercover passengers have to go through the whole process of responding to ads or FB pages etc, travelling to the take off point, being asked for money, handing over marked money, recording audio for the flight, photographing, video taping key identifications to locate where the flight wents, on what date at what time. 

 

I've probably missed a few dozen more things, so it can take months to years, and often depends on sheer luck, when the person committing the crime makes a mistake.

 

Right now any one of us could be being assessed for things we've done or said.

[jackc]

So, we take months to set up all this stuff that they never used years ago because the technology was not around back then.

This guy used a radio,  Avdata would have him nearly everywhere he landed and took off.  The moment they had basic evidence which would have been easy to get, should have nailed him.  In the 4 years of fluffing around by the authorities, he could have crashed and taken 6 or so people with him,  saved money from prosecuting him, killed 6 or so people? 

Happens  with cases of all types these days.  Strike while the iron is hot for best results

[turboplanner]

53 minutes ago, jackc said:

So, we take months to set up all this stuff that they never used years ago because the technology was not around back then.

This guy used a radio,  Avdata would have him nearly everywhere he landed and took off.  The moment they had basic evidence which would have been easy to get, should have nailed him.  In the 4 years of fluffing around by the authorities, he could have crashed and taken 6 or so people with him,  saved money from prosecuting him, killed 6 or so people? 

Happens  with cases of all types these days.  Strike while the iron is hot for best results

Well you answered your own question: Strike while the iron is hot = when you have enough evidence to make the charge stick.

[facthunter]

He was carrying Bob Katters's team around wasn't he? While he may not have been properly licenced. He wasn't definitely unsafe . There would be plenty of private Pilots who could fly well. and have a PIFR.   My understanding is he didn't hold an AOC.  Air Operator Certificate. which is something CASA have pulled to get people out of the Air if a check finds discrepancies.  Nev

[Garfly]

1 hour ago, jackc said:

 In the 4 years of fluffing around by the authorities, he could have crashed and taken 6 or so people with him,  saved money from prosecuting him, killed 6 or so people? 

He did have a licence to fly passengers so he may not have been all that dangerous as a pilot per se.

He was convicted basically of fraud and of running a charter business without an Air Operators Certificate.   

 

https://www.theislanderonline.com.au/story/7987752/qld-pilot-guilty-of-illegally-flying-mps/

"Hoch had a private pilot licence but was not certified with an AOC when he engaged in charter and cost-sharing services with the KAP politicians."

 

He had, though, been charged with far more serious offences in the past:

 

https://www.avweb.com/news/australian-pilot-accused-of-sabotaging-rivals-planes/

 

 

[turboplanner]

20 minutes ago, facthunter said:

He was carrying Bob Katters's team around wasn't he? While he may not have been properly licenced. He wasn't definitely unsafe . There would be plenty of private Pilots who could fly well. and have a PIFR.   My understanding is he didn't hold an AOC.  Air Operator Certificate. which is something CASA have pulled to get people out of the Air if a check finds discrepancies.  Nev

Where's your proof?

[Bruce Tuncks]

I don't like any of this stuff. It reeks of excessive use of power to me, like you would expect from a fascist state.

Nobody was hurt, yet a bloke is going to jail for bureaucratic reasons.

Edited November 19, 2022 by Bruce Tuncks

[jackc]

People are incentivised not to break rules etc by authorities  enforcing the law in harsh ways making an example of an offender and taking them to the cleaners.  That way it makes others think before they do similar, what the resulting consequences could be. 

It’s a wonder they did not drag people in who did the maintenance on the aircraft as well? 

The publicity is good for the authorities, makes them look like they are doing their job in the public eye.

[turboplanner]

35 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I don't like any of this stuff. It reeks of excessive use of power to me, like you would expect from a fascist state.

Nobody was hurt, yet a bloke is going to jail for bureaucratic reasons.

Well it's unlicensed flying, but also fraud to the value of $30,000.00

We'll know the penalty and reasons this week.

[jackc]

I would like the whole story warts and all, but as usual we won’t get to see it 😞 

[turboplanner]

3 minutes ago, jackc said:

I would like the whole story warts and all, but as usual we won’t get to see it 😞 

Yes you will; there will be a transcript of the Court Proceedings, the judges decision and his reasons.

[Ian]

1 hour ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I don't like any of this stuff. It reeks of excessive use of power to me, like you would expect from a fascist state.

Nobody was hurt, yet a bloke is going to jail for bureaucratic reasons.

I'm not so sure, my take is the guy is simply a clown and thought he could make a quick buck. Until he was caught he was boasting about how clever his scam was. Not much different from a someone pretending that they're a doctor, policeman or engineer.

It's not a simple case of bending a few rules, he was actively recruiting work that he knew he was unqualified to offer without the correct training or permits.

 

 

 

[aro]

16 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Where's your proof?

As far as flying charter without an AOC goes, it's probably as simple as asking the passengers if they paid for the flight, and checking CASA records of who has an AOC. Unless the passengers are prepared to lie on his behalf, it's pretty open and shut. A political party (or any business) probably has detailed records, invoices etc. for the payments.

 

The more detailed investigations probably were around the fraud aspects.

[aro]

2 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I don't like any of this stuff. It reeks of excessive use of power to me, like you would expect from a fascist state.

Nobody was hurt, yet a bloke is going to jail for bureaucratic reasons.

I think overall it is a good thing that people who fly for money are held to a higher standard than is required for a private pilot.

 

On one hand you need to make sure that people with no knowledge of aviation are protected when they pay for a flight.

 

On the other hand, I don't want to have to demonstrate the ability to e.g. plan a flight from Moorabbin to Bankstown via Broken Hill with commercial pressures just to keep doing my simple private flying, or to do the level or maintenance that is required for e.g. charter operations.

[onetrack]

4 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Yes you will; there will be a transcript of the Court Proceedings, the judges decision and his reasons.

Turbo - But is that transcript publically available? My experience is that Court Proceedings and transcripts in civil cases are readily available publically on the AUSTLII site database, but Criminal Court proceedings and transcripts are not readily available, and an application must be made citing the exact reasons for which the transcript is needed, and the intended use of the transcript. In other words, just nosey interest in a trial will not get you a transcript of the criminal proceedings.

 

https://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/T/transcripts.aspx

 

Like it or not, CASA control aviation in this country with strict control. There are obviously more than a few pilots who have an aversion to any form of "Govt control" over their flying.

It's a fact of life we have to put up with "Govt control", in many areas of our daily life. A reluctance to submit to those controls is rooted in the unfair application of rules and regulations, and what often appears to excessive and heavy interference into one's everyday activities.

Flying is an activity with a greatly heightened risk of injury or death - and with passenger-carrying flights, a relatively high risk of injury or death to passengers, that must be managed, and have oversight by a controlling body.

 

CASA issue AOC's after ensuring the operator meets all the rules and regulations set for holding an AOC. Hoch was never issued an AOC simply because he never applied for one, as required under law - and he obviously believed that AOC's were "excessive Govt control", and he could avoid scrutiny by CASA by carrying out fare-paying passenger operations by being devious and indulging in fraud and lying.

 

Courts are set up simply to determine the truth of subjects in dispute. They are very good at drilling down and uncovering BS and lies and devious behaviour, that are all designed to avoid complying with laws where serious penalties exist under those laws.

Hoch thought he was pretty smart, but he wasn't as smart as he thought he was - and if he had had an aircraft crash, and injured or killed fare-paying passengers, all his assets would have been destroyed in the ensuing court cases - which isn't very clever thinking at all.

There are ways to conduct business in a time-proven satisfactory manner, which involve complying with all relevant laws and rules and regulations, and carrying all the necessary insurances.

In this case, Hoch decided he would be a maverick and refuse to comply with the necessary laws for the carrying out of commercial aviation activities, and he's been found guilty in a properly-established court of law, and he now has to pay the penalty. Some people just like gaining life experiences the hard way.

Edited November 20, 2022 by onetrack

[jackc]

5 hours ago, Ian said:

I'm not so sure, my take is the guy is simply a clown and thought he could make a quick buck. Until he was caught he was boasting about how clever his scam was. Not much different from a someone pretending that they're a doctor, policeman or engineer.

It's not a simple case of bending a few rules, he was actively recruiting work that he knew he was unqualified to offer without the correct training or permits.

 

 

 

I pretended to be a Radio And Electronics Engineer for 30 years in my own business, self taught and not a piece of paper to my name, my reputation got me my projects both in Australia and Overseas. I was a Defence Dept contractor, worked for Govt departments and was involved in Legislative changes within a Govt Dept.  Multimillion dollar mining projects.  I did design work, carried out radio survey work.  I was asked to Tender on a Military project, one that I gave  a riding statement that none of what would work that was tendered for.  I provided a second tender to my design guaranteeing a working system.  I even fronted Army Headquarters Russel Offices in Canberra personally and presented my reports, system plans and MY tender design and got the job.  
I have proved you don’t need to be qualified in ANYTHING,  to succeed.  

So, am I a fraud?  None asked for my Diplomas so I did not have to tell lies, I just did my work to my best ability. Did any of my jobs fail, was anybody killed?  I will go to my grave proud.   Any that think I am a fraud can go f….themselves!!

I consider myself to be FIGJAM in this life 🙂 

[pmccarthy]

Engineer is not a protected title. Any spanner man can call himself an engineer. So what you did is fine!

[turboplanner]

48 minutes ago, jackc said:

I pretended to be a Radio And Electronics Engineer for 30 years in my own business, self taught and not a piece of paper to my name, my reputation got me my projects both in Australia and Overseas. I was a Defence Dept contractor, worked for Govt departments and was involved in Legislative changes within a Govt Dept.  Multimillion dollar mining projects.  I did design work, carried out radio survey work.  I was asked to Tender on a Military project, one that I gave  a riding statement that none of what would work that was tendered for.  I provided a second tender to my design guaranteeing a working system.  I even fronted Army Headquarters Russel Offices in Canberra personally and presented my reports, system plans and MY tender design and got the job.  
I have proved you don’t need to be qualified in ANYTHING,  to succeed.  

So, am I a fraud?  None asked for my Diplomas so I did not have to tell lies, I just did my work to my best ability. Did any of my jobs fail, was anybody killed?  I will go to my grave proud.   Any that think I am a fraud can go f….themselves!!

I consider myself to be FIGJAM in this life 🙂 

While nothing happens nothing happens, and what you are talking about is not unusual at all. I've submitted many government tenders and never been asked for any qualifications.

 

Where it kicks in, and is very unfair is when something goes wrong.

 

When that happens, the person who was good at remembering what he read and answering exam questions for five years, gets a tick and nothing more is said.

 

When you are asked you're a qualified Engineer and you have to say no, it's all over; you weren't qualified to design the thing.

So Insurance cover will be denied on those grounds, and if someone has been injured or killed, your almost cetain to be paying.

 

Where it's not fair is the person with the Diploma, who was good at memorising what he read, may have little or no experience whereas you might be qualified by 40 years of experience building the same thing over and over again, and never had a failure, and on this occasion it was someone else's mistake anyway.

 

A survey done on Monash University a couple of years ago identified that 40% of what the University was teaching was not useable by Industry - so how good would their diplomas be.

 

Australia is long overdue in going for a teaching regime of modules where the starting point was the base academics, but the person could pass practical modules in his workplace like an Apprentice does, and have the credentials to show he was one of the top engineers in his industry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Yenn]

The bloke who caused the death of a passenger several years ago in a beach landing near Agnes Waters is still flying as far as I know and CASA were loudly trumpeting that they were going to take him to court.

[old man emu]

Go back to the original story and I think you will find that you have misinterpreted the report and therefore overlooked what offences were misdemenaours and which were indictable. I looked at the penalties for a number of offences in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and most penalties are a maximum of 50 units. One unit = $220, maxing the maximum $11,000. Imprisonment is not one of the penalties provided for in the Regulations. That would make any of the CASR offences misdemeanours.

 

The indictable offences would be those relating to obtaining benefit (money) by deception ( fraud). If convicted of an indictable offence, bring your toothbrush with you to the sentencing, cause you'll be sleeping in the King's Arms for a good while.

[turboplanner]

11 hours ago, old man emu said:

The indictable offences would be those relating to obtaining benefit (money) by deception ( fraud).

Is attempting to obtain benefit by deception an indictable offence?