I Am A Member? But Really I Am A Shareholder?

[turboplanner]

.

Edited Tuesday at 11:31 PM by turboplanner

[turboplanner]

6 minutes ago, T510 said:

If a plane is unregistered how does RAAus administer it?

 

The RAAus Flight Ops manual says their only form of enforcement is to suspend or apply a variation to a licence and they need to inform CASA.

 

Can't take a licence off someone who doesn't have one and is flying an unregistered plane

 

 

• 
• Members
• •  23.5k
• Aircraft: PA28 LSA55, J160, J170, V115, AA5B, C210
• Location: Moorabbin
• Country: Australia

Posted just now

I actually posted a photo of the documents and briefly explained things. I'm not going to publish any details.

[facthunter]

In a group I see regularly I learn   Today  it seems Temora is going defunct for a similar reason.  They have had to move away from  VH EXP   for Warbirds.   Nev

[jackc]

Recently I have fielded a flurry of phone calls that tell me, that under the impending circumstance we are now been subject to, the pathway exists to transfer to VH rego, do the Class 5 medical (that RAAus won’t recognise) go RPL and do Maintenance under SAAA.

Since I have been in SAAA for 4 years, I don’t have to join.

Apparently there will be a lot of discussion, at their Wentworth Fly In. 

[PureCaboose]

Am I reading it wrong that I have to be the builder under SAAA to do my maintenance?

 

[facthunter]

I was with them for MANY years but they seem to implode now and again..   I'd suggest RAAus is still needed. .Nev

[jackc]

50 minutes ago, PureCaboose said:

Am I reading it wrong that I have to be the builder under SAAA to do my maintenance?

 

Not anymore 👍

[T510]

I just enquired with SAAA, you can not maintain a VH registered amateur built aircraft unless you where the builder or you have built an essentially similar aircraft.

 

If CASA part 43 regulations get up you would be able to.

[jackc]

I am not a member? I am not a shareholder?  RAAus CEO says I am a STAKEHOLDER in an email she sent me.  Go figure…….

[facthunter]

That could be ONE interpretation. I wonder what he LEGAL interpretation  of THAT is.?  I looked it up. Quite nebulous. You are entitled to Be told the Limits of your liability as a Member.  Nev

Edited 20 hours ago by facthunter

[jackc]

She sent me a copy of the Constitution, too. 

[facthunter]

Was  that Helpful?  It's not too big a hope that Members do feel they have a stake in the RAAus continuing to exist. . IF it doesn't what's next?  Warbirds are in a similar position regarding the extent of possible liability. IF it's too high It's just NOT affordable, by Normal people.  Nev

[jackc]

Well I asked for an update on the current standing of the organisation, given the outcome of the Coroners report on th Jabiru crash near Mt Beauty.?

I was told some information should be forthcoming soon.

Something has to give, I would allege that some people in the RAA hierarchy past and present stand to possibly lose their houses, to cover increasing legal charges. 
I am told by several in phone calls I have received, Ita a looming horror story, if the potential outcome is correct.  The Coroner has apparently instructed the DPP to lay charges.

Sad days ahead if all this is correct 🤢 

[turboplanner]

34 minutes ago, jackc said:

I am not a member? I am not a shareholder?  RAAus CEO says I am a STAKEHOLDER in an email she sent me.  Go figure…….

Stakeholder in the Gen Y/Gen Z word for shareholder where they're not sure just as "reach out" is a BS word for Emailing or phoning someone.

[BrendAn]

1 hour ago, jackc said:

She sent me a copy of the Constitution, too. 

its all in your member portal.  lots of info there.

[Love to fly]

1 hour ago, jackc said:

The Coroner has apparently instructed the DPP to lay charges.

Sad days ahead if all this is correct 🤢 

The Coroner made a referral to the DPP. It's stated in his report. He didn't make an instruction to the DPP because this isn't something a Coroner does. 🤦‍♂️ 

[jackc]

38 minutes ago, Love to fly said:

The Coroner made a referral to the DPP. It's stated in his report. He didn't make an instruction to the DPP because this isn't something a Coroner does. 🤦‍♂️ 

That interpretation was given to me, that it WILL happen and organisations are planning for it to happen. 

[Love to fly]

5 minutes ago, jackc said:

That interpretation was given to me, that it WILL happen and organisations are planning for it to happen. 

You stated it was an instruction. Now its an interpretation. 🤦‍♂️ 

[jackc]

Well we wait and see what happens next

[Red]

12 hours ago, jackc said:

I am not a member? I am not a shareholder?  RAAus CEO says I am a STAKEHOLDER in an email she sent me.  Go figure…….

"Stakeholder", is just one of those cover-all terms that basically means anyone who has an interest in or is a user of the service/operation/investment etc.

It's deliberately vague business/organisation speak

Edited 7 hours ago by Red

[onetrack]

The referral for potential legal action by the DPP, by the Coroner in this Mt Beauty case, is to see whether the actions of one particular member of the board of RA-Aus indulged in criminal behaviour that warrants charges and a trial.

The DPP has to consider the merits of the case, and whether there is any chance of success. A referral to the DPP does not necessarily mean charges will be laid. The courts are full at the best of times, and the merits of the case need to be weighed, as to its outcome, and whether it's in the public interest and benefit.

 

IF a charge (or charges) are proceeded with, and a case mounted and the defendant is found guilty, then the costs and penalties would normally be borne only by the defendant, not the organisation he/she works for.

I would expect that for the outcome of any legal decision that lays blame and costs and penalties on the entire organisation, then the prosecution would have to prove that there was a concerted and planned effort by the entire board (or a majority of the board) to indulge in criminal or obstructive behaviour that impeded a coronial inquiry. 

 

In my personal opinion, I struggle to see how the entire RA-Aus organisation could be held accountable for the actions of one board member, if that board member is found guilty of criminal behaviour.

[Love to fly]

4 minutes ago, onetrack said:

The referral for potential legal action by the DPP, by the Coroner in this Mt Beauty case, is to see whether the actions of one particular member of the board of RA-Aus indulged in criminal behaviour that warrants charges and a trial.

The DPP has to consider the merits of the case, and whether there is any chance of success. A referral to the DPP does not necessarily mean charges will be laid. The courts are full at the best of times, and the merits of the case need to be weighed, as to its outcome, and whether it's in the public interest and benefit.

 

IF a charge (or charges) are proceeded with, and a case mounted and the defendant is found guilty, then the costs and penalties would normally be borne only by the defendant, not the organisation he/she works for.

I would expect that for the outcome of any legal decision that lays blame and costs and penalties on the entire organisation, then the prosecution would have to prove that there was a concerted and planned effort by the entire board (or a majority of the board) to indulge in criminal or obstructive behaviour that impeded a coronial inquiry. 

 

In my personal opinion, I struggle to see how the entire RA-Aus organisation could be held accountable for the actions of one board member, if that board member is found guilty of criminal behaviour.

I am no expert. But I thought the referral would cover more than the one board member? Perhaps those that knowingly tried to conceal information from the Coroner, including a senior employee who he was scathing about in the report? 

[facthunter]

Who is a LEGAL Expert? The rest are uselessly speculating.   The recent CBUS case (political) Just FINED the  "Organisation " Millions of dollars". That was MEMBERS FUNDS. .

  RAAus should have  Indemnity insurance for their Officers of some kind. No one in their right mind would do the Job without it . The Coroner is involved when some one dies to look into the cause of the death.  That was the plane losing control and descending at a high Vertical speed probably due to Icing and spatial disorientation.   No one forced the Pilot to fly that day.  Coroners are often not full bottle on aircraft or medical etc. One said Motorbikes would be safer IF they didn't lean over so much. Nev

[BrendAn]

i don't believe any raaus people will be charged with anything. 

maybe a payout  for the fiance .

there may be some repercussions from casa, they have been cracking down on ra since that accident anyway.

the operations manual has already been rewritten to close the paraglider conversion loophole.

from what i heard originally raaus was going to be shutdown altogether but they have been toeing the line

doing what big brother have requested so they should survive.

i was hoping a version of part 103 would come out of it but it doesn't look like it.

at least with raaus i know the people i deal with and they are very helpful when ever i talk to them.

if they were shut down we might not like what replaces them.

[turboplanner]

People are not understanding what they are hearing. There is a normal sequence going on in cases like this one and one process needs top finish before the next one starts.

 

Just at the moment nothing is in progress, but if there is an announcement that legal proceedings are going ahead then it's live and should not be discussed publicly.

 

Best to just let it all unfold one way or the other and learn from any processes.