Ex-SonicBlue Manager Sues Transport Canada - TC Individuals

[safetywatch]

This was posted at the end of another topic, but it probably deserves its own heading as it raises a whole new set of issues. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse!!!

Manager of airline whose plane crashed in 2006 sues Transport Canada
5 hours ago

VANCOUVER - The operations manager of a company that lost a pilot and two passengers when one of its aircraft crashed is suing Transport Canada and three public servants, claiming defamation of character and negligence.

Nikolas Todd Chapman filed a writ of summons Monday in B.C. Supreme Court naming Transport Canada and three employees in the suit that claims damages for loss of earnings and reputation.

In the writ, Chapman outlines the events that led to his suit, beginning with the crash Jan. 21, 2006, of a SonicBlue Airways Cessna Caravan 208B owned and operated by International Express Aircharter Ltd.

Chapman had been authorized by Transport Canada in April 2005 to serve as the company's operations manager.

But after the crash, he says in his writ, Transport Canada decided to revoke his status as operations manager because he had "failed to fulfil his responsibility as operations manager to control the operations and operational standards of all aircraft operated by IAE."

At the time of the meeting, he said in the writ, the cause of the accident had not been established.

"It has subsequently been determined that the cause of the accident was the failure of an engine component which was not the fault of either (Chapman) or IAE," he states in the writ.

In a Transportation Safety Board report released last week, the agency found a piece of equipment already mandatory in other countries possibly could have prevented the crash on Vancouver Island that killed the pilot and two passengers.

Pilot Edward Huggett died in the crash while trying to find a safe spot to land after the engine failed on a flight to Vancouver from Tofino, on Vancouver Island.

Huggett wanted to make an emergency landing at nearby Port Alberni but with visibility poor he ended up in a mountainous area and crashed on a snowy hillside while trying to land on a logging road.

Huggett was killed, along with passengers Terry Douglas, 58, and Braeden Hale, 3. Five others survived.

Chapman said a letter from Transport Canada dated Jan. 22, 2006, revoking his employment, contained statements that were defamatory "and made with malice and with the full knowledge that they would cause harm to (Chapman)."

In February 2006, Chapman appealed the decision to the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada.

It found that Transport Canada did not establish that Chapman "failed to meet his responsibilities for the operation standards of the aircraft on the basis of the maintenance findings of Jan. 11, 2006, because it cannot be established that Mr. Chapman was responsible for those findings."

Despite that ruling, Chapman said the defendants did not reconsider their decision, which he said has him suffering losses and damages.

"The defendants' decision to revoke (his job) caused the plaintiff an immediate loss of income and continuing and ongoing loss of earning capacity in his chosen profession," the write states.

Also named as defendants are Trevor Heryet, Transport Canada's regional manager of commercial and business aviation; David Nowzek, regional director of civil aviation; and Bruce Hutchings, regional superintendent of commercial and business aviation.

None the allegations in the statement of claim have been proven and those Chapman is suing have not yet filed a statement of defence.

The Canadian Press

[Cat Driver]

This was posted at the end of another topic, but it probably deserves its own heading as it raises a whole new set of issues. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse!!!

At the time I was gobsmacked that they sewered this guy so quickly.

Remember these guys ( TCCA ) are the ones who approve these positions and the process is such as they are supposed to be 100% sure about who they approve for these positions...

.....until now I never could figure out why this guy didn't fight back.

Maybe, just maybe there is a God after all and maybe just maybe justice will prevail and TC will get a housecleaning.

[Widow]

I wonder if this has contributed to the STALL on Nowzek's reply to (or acknowledgement of) my letter of December 5th.

[safetywatch]

One of the oddest things about this issue, that nobody could understand was why, if TC didn't think Sonicblue was fit to fly, didn't they just remove the operating licence. Instead they chose to suspend the Operations Manager's licence. In the Transportation Appeal Board hearing nobody, including a whole parade of TC officials could explain why they chose to take that very specific action. You could see from the look of the lady who chaired the Appeal Board that she was confused as anybody. It didn't help that Sonicblue was represented by one of Vancouver's best lawyers who was his usual articulate self, while TC was represented by in-house counsel who left all of us with the distinct feeling that he had no idea what was going on any more than we did! Well perhaps now we can get to the bottom of all this.

This whole issue is in danger of mushrooming into a huge prolonged legal fight involving a large number of separate but inter-related issues that will take years to sort out. One can only hope that eventually this will lead to what is long overdue - a complete overhaul of the regulation of the small airline industry.

[safetywatch]

Just coincidence - but today is exactly 2 years since the crash.

[Widow]

They used him as a scapegoat. Pretty obvious if you ask me. That's the whole purpose of having an Ops Manager be the "responsible party". Using Bill C-45 (Criminal Code), the owner should be the one responsible. Hey, did Sonicblue have SMS???

One can only hope that eventually this will lead to what is long overdue - a complete overhaul of the regulation of the small airline industry.

Quite a few of us hoping for this safetywatch.

[Cat Driver]

In the Transportation Appeal Board hearing nobody, including a whole parade of TC officials could explain why they chose to take that very specific action.

I wonder if even the courts will get to the bottom of these issues?

The inept management of TCCA in the Pacific Region is truly beyond belief.

Safetywatch go after the Bonita Smith Report ( the original, not the doctored one. ) that will give you a real insite into how Dave runs the Pacific Region....through fear.

FOI might get it...if not I think I can get my copy back from the person that I gave it to.

The report is well worth the read.

[trey kule]

If Mr. Chapman happens to be reading this, please PM me. I think I might be able to help you some.

[Dust Devil]

They used him as a scapegoat. Pretty obvious if you ask me. That's the whole purpose of having an Ops Manager be the "responsible party". Using Bill C-45 (Criminal Code), the owner should be the one responsible. Hey, did Sonicblue have SMS???

One can only hope that eventually this will lead to what is long overdue - a complete overhaul of the regulation of the small airline industry.

Quite a few of us hoping for this safetywatch.

If Air Canada has a crash should the share holders be responsible individually?

[Widow]

This was hardly Air Canada, D.D.

[Dockjock]

As much as I hate to side with scumbag managers of terrible companies like Sonicblue, it seems that Mr. Chapman has a point.

Even though this particular accident proved out to be a mechanical failure, it was glaringly obvious to the rest of the industry well before the accident (certainly well back in the Regency days), that this company, the people who owned it, and the people who ran it were complete scumbags and not fit to be in aviation. An accident waiting to happen was the consensus. Lo and behold we got one, but lucky for Mr. Chapman et al. it just didn't turn out to be their "fault".

Despite the fact that as ops manager he was responsible for the operation, I guess the "I just worked there" defense is as much as could be expected from a person like this...

[snoopy]

Dockjock,

Interesting signature/disclaimer...

It's no wonder few people identify themselves on these forums, particularly when an anonymous user won't even be accountable for their opinion!

[ScudRunner]

Just Throwing this out there isnt the Ops Manager/CP responsible for flight crews doing the trend monitoring or enforcing other policy's such as this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypotheticaly situation, (lets say a well known shitty operator that makes people pay to fly, who treats there employees like shit.)

So Pilot A who hates the company already accidently over torques the engine, fearing he will get in shit and not be aloud to fly, Pilot A doens't report it. This Happens again to Pilot B fearing the same it goes unreported again. Now if proper trend monitoring and inspection had been taking place especially if the aircraft had a functioning ETM that the AMO could down load the info and see the over torques and comply with the inspections that need to be done as per maintenence. Some time later, there is an accident due to engine failure of this plane.

So in this hypothetical situation: Would the operations manager / DOM having let this go and not complying with said regualtion where legally does the fault lay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: -Is trend monitoring mandatory if you want to run an engine on a Single engine Turbine IFR.
-Is trend monitoring mandatory for an On Condition Engine (I hope so, ETM should be mandatory IMHO)
-Could overtorqing lead to an Engine failure similar to the Sonic Blue PT6
-Was in the Case of the Sonic Blue crash the Engine on Condition

[Cat Driver]

Until there is credible evidence to remove a Ops Manager said Ops. Man. has the right to due process under law...

....I'm sure that will be addressed through his lawyer...

...and it will come as no surprise if it is found that he was denied due process....Judging from what he did in my case Nowzek does not have the faintest idea of what that means. Or does not care.

[2R]

How many accidents and deaths would you consider to be credible evidence ???
If management is not responsible ,Who is ??? The Janitor Or someone not in the building during operations ???
If the misiffs that are signed at the front of the MPM,MCM,COM,mean nothing then they might as well have the hanger cat or dog sign them .
In any licensed profession you can expect to lose the privilages of exercising your license when you are involved in the death of another human .

[Widow]

Ops Mgr at MJM was not held responsible in any way when five men died on his watch, even though MJM was equally viewed (if on a smaller scale) as being an "accident waiting to happen". (Oh, and the owner already had one death on him, and was not held accountable in any way either).

Although it does seem Nowzek and his cohorts went about it in a questionable way (read scapegoat), at least they held SOMEONE accountable. They should have suspended the OC, or the CTA should have suspended the OL ... would have had more or less the same effect on the OM.

[Cat Driver]

2R it is the way they removed him and the timing that is suspect here..

....in other words it appears to be just another reactive ass covering action by Nowzek and his crew.

My bet is this guy is going to cost TCCA a few dollars before this is all over....read you and me the taxpayers.

[Dust Devil]

This was hardly Air Canada, D.D.

So how do you determin which owners are responsible for the operations of which corporations? All companies should be treated on a level playing field. Ownership is simply a result of investment. It does not nessasarily mean operational control. That is what the 4 key positions are for. Now if the owner was named the "Accountable Executive" as I am in my company then by all means have at 'em.

[Widow]

Unfortunately, DD, TCCA may not always be judicious in approving the "accountable executive". Was Mr. Chapman the "accountable executive" for Sonicblue? I would expect the lawyers will/would try to establish who was/was not complicit.

[2R]

He would be better off spending his money in Las Vegas .
Lawyers will argue black is white so long as you are paying them.
And if TC left him in charge of a company with a history of accidents and deaths someone would argue they were negligent .
Was it not Mark Twain who said "when you find youself in a hole stop digging" ???

[xsbank]

"Transport Canada Raises Cost of Pilot Medical to Cover Lawsuit Costs"

Vancouver Sun. Transport Canada announced today that they are raising the price of the little blue piece of paper they send to every pilot after they have paid their doctor and the doctor sends the paper on to TC so they can file it in their special government file. A spokesman for TC was quoted as saying "I'm not going to use my name! Is that a camera? Get away you scum or I'll taser you!" as he slammed the door in this reporter's face. Another spokesman, who spoke to us with a paper bag on his head from behind a giant desk, said that due to the recent rise in lawsuits against TC, "those lousy pilots will have to pay! We'll make 'em pay so much their heads will spin! If they don't pay up we'll drop so much paper-work on 'em they'll never see daylight again! Stephen said I could have whatever I wanted if I would just go....no no no that's enough, get out!"

None of the sources quoted would commit to a figure, but rumours have it that "the guy in the big office has ordered new furniture."

[2R]

[86583]

Nick Chapmen was terminated as ops mgr by transport for allowing maintenance over sight. when it was pointed out to transport at the tribunal that the MCM showed that the PRM reported directly to the president and not the ops mgr they indicated that's not the way they like to see it even though they had approved the MCM...and that, in their opinion mr chapman should wear the can even though all the legal documents showed that it had nothing to do with mr chapman...when pressed by the lawyer about provisions in the CARS to appoint the chief pilot as a temporary ops mgr Mr TH said as much that they don't care what it says in the CARS they will not allow that to happen. so the ops cert was suspended because sonic blue did not have an ops mgr and transport wanted it that way...all you had to do was listen to all the crap from TC on the first day of the tribunal and you could see it was a kangeroo court...I think some one else here pointed out the lady judge of the tribunal was often flabbergasted by some of the TC testamony

[Cat Driver]

Nick Chapmen was terminated as ops mgr by transport for allowing maintenance over sight. when it was pointed out to transport at the tribunal that the MCM showed that the PRM reported directly to the president and not the ops mgr they indicated that's not the way they like to see it even though they had approved the MCM...and that, in their opinion mr chapman should wear the can even though all the legal documents showed that it had nothing to do with mr chapman...

86583 I was hoping you would comment here.

The problem with this forum is there are not to many who understand how the system works in the back rooms so to speak, but we do.

Even if Chapman's lawyer is asleep it should be a given that TC has denied him the basic right of every Canadian " Due process "

I hope they finally nail Dave on this one.

[CID]

AvCanada is a funny place sometimes. People often post statements about Transport Canada’s inability to suspend unsafe operators even though everyone in the industry knows they are unsafe. Prescribed procedures and legal due process are often dismissed as obstacles in achieving the this goal.

So here we have an example of TC stepping in and doing it in an arguably questionable fashion that may not follow accepted processes and with legal implications. Everyone seems to agree that even though ultimately an unrelated engine failure was to blame for the fatal accident, we are all much better off without the company in question. The astounding thing is that many opinions have spun around and now people are questioning TC’s motives and processes.

I’ll state the obvious. It’s quite clear to me that many posters on this forum don’t have a pro-safety agenda. They have an anti-TC agenda.