Timothy wrote:
Me & co.? Who is in my co.?
NATS, GASCO, Cub, CAA, MOR, ATC or some other acronym, I don’t know. It was slightly tongue in cheek, but reading the thread it seems as if you think the situation is “normal” somehow, or “as expected” or “nothing to make a fuzz about”, and this is rather funny 
We in UK Airspace have the rights guaranteed by the EU. Can the Prosecution refuse access to their information? At present. Soon we’ll no longer be Citizens but Subjects with no written Constitution to provide rights.
JasonC wrote:
There must be an appeal to the administrative appeal system.
That’s what I would have thought, too. To me it is almost inconceivable that in a western democracy a government agency can make decisions about an individual for which there is no appeal. (Except possibly in special cases.)
If someone can find the reference…
No such process seems to exist.
Probably the usual regulation 6 of the Civil Aviation Authority Regulations 1991 followed by a judicial review if warranted.
AIUI, Reg 6 is an appeal if the laid down procedure (laid down by the CAA ) has not been followed.
In recent years, due to a massive loss of competent people, the CAA has been on the receiving end of lots of Reg 6 appeals.
But if the CAA follows CAP1404, there is no route for Reg 6. There is also no route for a judicial review. The fact that the same guy who wrote CAP1404 is also running the committee (behind closed doors) makes no difference.
And a JR will take longer than selling a 2002 TB20GT for 300k € 
IANAL, obviously.
All the actual indications I have seen point in the same direction: up to the license suspension stage, you can’t do anything. Once it is suspended, you can sue. And that is your only option.
One thing for which there is very little data is what happens when your license is suspended. My recollection, from years ago and not under the process operated by the current incumbent [name requested to not be revealed here, though widely known], is that they got you to sit some PPL exams and do a skills test with a CAA staff examiner. A snippet confirming this was in a video played at the Gasco session, where one CAA examiner said that c. half of the people sent to him were not able to get as far as a planned flight (so presumably were grounded until they did, or permanently).
Peter wrote:
My recollection, from years ago and not under the process operated by the current incumbent [name requested to not be revealed here, though widely known], is that they got you to sit some PPL exams and do a skills test with a CAA staff examiner. A snippet confirming this was in a video played at the Gasco session, where one CAA examiner said that c. half of the people sent to him were not able to get as far as a planned flight (so presumably were grounded until they did, or permanently).
Oh the irony if this is true, because the best way to plan, fly and then infringe is using the current PPL VFR methodology of map, compass & stopwatch!! Anybody going anywhere in a light aeroplane anywhere near any controlled airspace should be using an electronic flight planning app and moving map GPS.
Regards, SD..
For some reason nobody from France has posted any of this (and similarly for some reason nothing from Germany, except that Germany has a max fine of €30k/50k; clearly irrelevant with typical fines being below €1k) but I came across the following on a French site (google translation) which provides a useful data point for a European thread:
You should that that is is from an official government website (despite name being a bit confusing): It is the equivalent of the Ministry of Transports.
The puzzling thing is that this must have been well known. I guess people are worried about being identified by the DGAC or the LBA?
