Paperwork

You often hear or read complaints about the service levels at the South African Civil Aviation authority (SACAA). Whether these are justified or not, there is an important issue which any aircraft owner or pilot overlooks at his or her peril.

Amongst its many functions, the SACAA is responsible for the issue, or reissue, of various licenses and permits, whether these are flying licenses, certificates of airworthiness, “authority to fly” certificates, etc.

In these cases, the SACAA’s function is a purely administrative one. In other words, provided the prescribed requirements have been met (i.e. that tests or maintenance, etc., have been carried out), the SACAA merely issues the appropriate document against the payment of the applicable fee.

So the question that is often raised is whether an aircraft accident, which occurs in the absence of a certificate of airworthiness, “authority to fly”, or a pilot license for that matter, would or should prejudice insurance coverage if all the requirements have been met?

Take the renewal of a pilot licence, for example.

Your licence expires on 4^th July. You know you need to have a medical and do a flight test. You do both, passing with flying colours. You now need to submit the certificates from the doctor and the instructor, together with the prescribed fee, to the SACAA so they can renew the licence.

Provided you have passed the medical and the flight test, and provided you have completed the form correctly and attached a cheque for the prescribed fee, your licence WILL be renewed. There is nothing further you need do: no further examinations, no further flight tests, nothing. So, in this context, the SACAA’s role is purely an administrative one.

You send off the paperwork a week ahead of time. You might post it, hand-deliver it or have it collected by a courier service.

Either way, you immediately forget all about it and, a week later, on 5^th July, you have an accident in your aircraft.

At that point, the SACAA has either not yet received your paperwork or has received it but has not processed it.

Clearly, your licence has expired. Are you insured?

Is there, or should there be, a distinction to be drawn between the pilot whose licence has lapsed because he did not undergo a medical and one who didn’t wait for the renewal to be issued by the SACAA?

If so, why don’t the regulations say so?

We do occasionally have to handle claims which arise under these circumstances. A pilot has flown without a licence because he either forgot to submit the paperwork, or the SACAA had not yet issued the renewal. In a recent case, a Microlight crashed and it was established that the “authority to fly”, had expired and had not been renewed.

In both cases, the required tests and/or maintenance had been properly completed and certified. However, the renewal application, together with the prescribed fee, had not been submitted to the SACAA.

Insurers are reluctant to be seen as “secondary regulators” and will, in general terms, try to act in as fair and impartial a manner as possible. But aircraft owners and pilots who fail to deal with the paperwork promptly place Insurers in a very difficult position.

If an Insurer decides to overlook the absence of a licence under the circumstances I have described, it will be criticised by the SACAA for condoning a blatant disregard for the regulations. If, on the other hand, the Insurer takes the view that, irrespective of the circumstances, the absence of a valid licence, certificate of airworthiness or authority to fly, are grounds for instant denial of coverage, they (and the insurance brokers concerned!) will be accused of being unfair and mean, always looking for technicalities on which to wriggle out of valid claims!

Perhaps Insurers should seek the views of the industry at large? How do pilots feel about pilots who overlook the paperwork? Is that OK, or does it indicate a potentially dangerous attitude towards authority? Should Insurers pay claims where a certificate of airworthiness has elapsed where the circumstances of the loss were in no way connected with the airworthiness of the aircraft? Or is a certificate of airworthiness an absolute requirement, irrespective of the circumstances?

If you were an Insurer, faced with a claim for the loss of an aircraft, and potential claims by passengers running into millions, how would you feel if you discovered that the “authority to fly” had lapsed three months ago? Does it matter why?

In South Africa, for all its faults, the SACAA is the ultimate authority for all matters relating to aviation activity. Regulations are introduced to facilitate the oversight and administrative duties of the SACAA. Insurance coverage requires compliance with applicable regulations. It also requires pilots to be licensed and aircraft to be airworthy.

So, Dear Reader, here’s your chance. Let me know how you feel and what you would do in an Insurers’ shoes. Write to me at speller@jankelow.co.za.