This testimonial describes the author's positive experience with the Independent Pilots Association (IPA) over the past 3 years. After feeling disillusioned with their previous association, the author joined IPA and has since received helpful legal advice and representation from IPA on employment matters. The IPA General Secretary personally represented the author during a company hearing, which resulted in the best possible outcome. The author has found IPA to be responsive and provide timely, balanced advice via email and phone on various issues within the author's company. The author would recommend IPA based on this positive experience receiving support.

1. July 2016 www.ipapilot.com Issue 113
SKYPOINTER
2 PERSONS IN THE COCKPIT 8
THE REALITY OF 4
FLEXIBLE WORKING
THE DANGERS OF 18
UNREGULATED ADVICE FOR
PILOTS OVERSEAS
JUST CULTURE
IN AVIATION
SAFETYsee pages 14-16

2. 2 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
CONTENTS
3 Union Newsletter
4 The Reality of
Flexible Working
8 2 Persons in the Cockpit
10 Testimonial
12 Project Propeller - Update
13 Read Arrows Wings
14 Just Culture in
Aviation Safety
18 The Dangers of
Unregulated Advice
for Pilots Overseas
Published by:
The Independent Pilots
Association
38 – 42a South Road
Haywards Heath
RH16 4LA
Chairman: Phillip Petitt
Treasurer: Noel Baker
Company Secretary:
Richard Lotinga
Directors:
Greg Cassar
Damon Hart
Paul Howard
James West
email:
office@ipapilot.com
The IPA accepts no
responsibility in respect of
advertisements appearing
in this newsletter.
The opinions expressed
in any of the articles are
not necessarily those of
the IPA.

3. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 3
W
ell it has been a busy two months for the
industry. There has been more tragic loss of lives
and aircraft around the world, airport safety and
security is a continuing cause of concern and operators still
face huge financial pressure. With the oil price slowly rising
again the financial pressures will likely only grow. Despite
these facts the industry as a whole is growing
It seems that aviation is always at the forefront of
political and economic pressure, and being a glamorised
industry one that the media focus on. So it’s not
surprising that some of the bigger stories in our industry
go unreported and / or that the truth does not come
out and politicians fail to address the problems quickly.
Take for example the continuing pressing need for
additional runway capacity in the South East of the UK.
We still don’t have a decision on the building of another
runway and no real indication of when that will be made.
I personally doubt one will be enough and believe that
the only sensible thing to do is to build a new runway
at both LGW and LHR. If we don’t we are handing the
business and economic opportunities that the industry
offers in the future on a plate to our competitors.
The biggest threat to future growth may not though
be growth of airport capacity, it might be a serious lack
of pilots. As the sector has picked up we have seen some
companies struggling to keep pilots and recruit new pilots
so much so that those who are employed are working
longer hours and facing repeated shift changes.
The industry needs to accept that expecting a person
to take on £100k of debt to pursue their passion for flight
will not result in either enough or enough of the right
people to fly their planes in the future. The personal
economics of an aviation career will exclude it as an option
for the vast majority of people. Things need to change
quickly and companies need to start recruiting trainees. If
not the industry will no doubt suffer because of a serious
shortage of suitable pilots.
Happy flying.
UNION NEWSLETTER
By Philip Flower
The biggest
threat to future
growth may
not though
be growth
of airport
capacity, it
might be a
serious lack
of pilots.

4. 4 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
THE REALITY OF FLEXIBLE
WORKING
By Claire Pickford
I
n recent months we have received
a steady stream of enquiries
regarding pilots making requests
for flexible working. In some cases,
pilots are fully informed – knowing
their options, their entitlements;
in other cases substantial advice is
required where employees have not
fully understood the concept, how
it might apply to them, and most
importantly, what they can
expect to achieve.
The right to request
flexible working was
introduced by section 47
of the Employment Act
2002. On 30 June 2014 the
Children and Families Act
2014 extended the right
to request flexible working
to all employees. The right
to request flexible working
is set out in Part 8A and
section 47E of the Employment Rights
Act 1996 (as amended).
Flexible working is a way of
working that suits an employee’s
needs. All employees with 26 weeks
continuous service with the same
employer have a legal right to request
flexible working – note that the right
is to make a request, not to get what
you request.
Types of flexible working include
job shares, working from home,
part time work, compressed hours,
flexitime, and annualised hours. This
in itself illustrates that some forms
of flexible working will not meet the
needs of pilots, such as working from
home or compressed hours. Limitations
such as FTLs, rostering systems, flight
schedules, and even the timing of an
application for flexible working may
impact on the prospects of success.
So, how and when does an
employee apply for
flexible working? An
employee can only make
one application in any
12 month period. On
a practical level, check
whether your employer
has a pro-forma (this will
ensure that you include
all the information your
employer requests to
consider your application).
If so, use this form; if not,
prepare a letter that incorporates the
following information:
• Date
• Statement that it is a statutory
request
• Details of how you want to work
(type of flexible working) and
proposed start date
• Explanation of how your request
might affect business and how
that might be dealt with
• Statement if/when any previous
application was made
...some
forms of
flexible
working
will not
meet the
needs of
pilots...

5. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 5
Your employer should conclude
the process within three months of
the request being made. As a general
rule, such requests should not be
used for a sudden change that may
occur resulting in you needing to
change your work pattern. In that
situation, other options may be more
appropriate (such as dependants
leave, unpaid parental leave or
compassionate leave).
When making an application,
your employer may be able to agree
the request without the need for a
formal meeting, and confirm any
agreed changes in writing. Most likely,
however, within the aviation industry,
a meeting will be required to discuss
your request.
It is often a point missed by
employees that any agreed changes
to your way of working will be
permanent (and thus become your
new contractual terms), unless there
is agreement to the contrary. There
is no automatic right to return to

6. 6 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
your previous contractual terms and
conditions. Any such changes should
be issued within 28 days of the
request being approved.
If you attend a meeting, and your
request is rejected, the employer can
only do so for one or some of the
following reasons:
• Extra cost that will damage the
business
• Unable to reorganise
the work
• People can’t be
recruited
• Flexible working
will affect quality/
performance
• Business won’t meet
customer demand
• Lack of work during
proposed times of
work
• Business is planning
changes to the
workforce
If you do not like the
decision/outcome, there
is no statutory right of
appeal, however it is likely to be
considered unreasonable if your
employer does not allow an appeal. It
is crucial that employees understand
that you cannot make a claim to an
Employment Tribunal just because
the request was refused/rejected.
You would be required to assert that
some other employment right was
behind the refusal/rejection, unless it
is claimed that the request was dealt
with unreasonably. This is likely to
be hard to prove if your employer
has made a counter-proposal to your
request that could be considered
reasonable.
Additionally, your employer is
not under a duty to consider the
personal circumstances for making
the request, and indeed, there is no
requirement on an employee to share
or disclose the reasons
for making the request to
an employer.
With the consolidated
legislation contained
within the Equality Act
2010, employers may
face claims from different
groups of the workforce
for potential age,
sex, marital status (for
example) claims if they
delve too deeply into the
personal circumstances
for making the request.
It will be a matter
of judgment for an
employee to determine
whether disclosing the
reasons for the request will benefit
their application. Employment law
is clear that an employer must not
unlawfully discriminate against its
employees. So the safest option? Be
objective.
There are also practical
considerations. Employers will be
wary of granting a working pattern
that employees might consider sets
a precedent. It may be the case
Employment
law is clear
that an
employer
must not
unlawfully
discriminate
against its
employees.
So the safest
option? Be
objective.

7. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 7
than an employer could meet the
request of one person, but if that
same request was made by others, it
would be commercially very difficult
to accommodate. Although the
employer is likely to be able to rely
on business reasons for rejecting the
request, avoiding an assumption that
everyone can have the same thing
and managing employee expectations
is fundamental to dealing with
requests for flexible working. The
advice to employees is to be practical
and pragmatic in your approach – you
have a right to request what you want,
not a right to get what you want.
If your employer already offers
variations of flexible working, consider
these. An employer is more likely to
agree to something that they have
already considered suitable for their
business needs by making that option
available to employees. Managers
will already be aware of the impact on
the business of the types of flexible
working they offer. If none of these
options work for you, explain why
as part of your application, so that
your employer can see that you have
reasonably explored existing options.
Be prepared to compromise. If you
are offered something that isn’t
ideal, but is better than your current
working arrangement, it may be
better to accept this, and consider
your position in 12 months.
The outcome of flexible working
requests varies significantly for our
members. Much will depend on the
airline we are dealing with, and in
our experience the barriers go up
when an employee requests bespoke
rostering. This is particularly the case
where the employer already offers
forms of flexible working. There can
be no guarantees at any time that
an application will be successful,
however the penultimate piece of
advice is to time your application for
the point when your employer is most
likely to have the opportunity to give
your request proper and measured
consideration.
And the final piece of advice? If
you are in any doubt, contact us, so
that we can give advice tailored to
your individual circumstances.

8. 8 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
A
fter the GermanWings
accident the ‘2 persons in
the cockpit’ rule was applied
to all EASA CAT. From the 6th Jan
– 11th Mar EASA instituted a survey
to question the effectiveness of
the ruling. All interested parties in
aviation were invited to participate.
On the 23rd May the results were
published.
Over 3000 pilots from
56 countries completed
the survey (of which I was
one), 270 cabin crew, 87
operators (airlines) and
65 trade associations.
Unsurprisingly the majority
of the pilot replies were
from Germany, next was
the UK with reasonably
large percentages from
the Netherlands, France,
Spain and Belgium.
Nevertheless, the
respondents were a very
small percentage of the
European workforce.
Most respondents identified
additional risks, 90% of pilots felt that
way believing that it did not improve
safety and security, introduced other
risks and created other stresses on
cabin crew. Suggested mitigation
measures largely involved better
medical examinations and aircrew
support programmes. Some believed
that keeping the door open or
unlocked would be better though I
doubt that the terrorist threat would
ever allow that to return. A few
suggested that redesigning the cockpit
to incorporate a toilet would solve the
problem but I do not see Boeing or
Airbus doing that anytime soon.
In answer to the question ‘Does
it Work?’ (The EASA
wording was more
eloquent) 82% of all
respondents said no,
either strongly (54%)
or otherwise. Further
answers on the mitigation
of the threat felt that the
actual threat may have
been suppressed but that
it introduced more risks
than it mitigated.
Prevention would be
better than the current
cure, but that also
creates other issues on
the Hippocratic oath
and national and personal issues of
health being discussed in the open.
Some felt that it was a PR exercise
to make the public feel safer. Others
suggested distraction.
Should the current procedure
become mandatory? I am on
the fence. To introduce medical
procedures to stop pilots flying whilst
under stress or depression would be
Should the
current
procedure
become
mandatory?
I am on the
fence.
2 PERSONS IN THE COCKPIT
By Richard Lotinga

9. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 9
very difficult if the pilot didn’t come
forward with their personal issue.
Would one’s local GP be forced to
contact the AME in the event of a
patient declaring a problem? Or
would a pilot self-medicate, avoid
the problem and create an even
bigger problem. If any of the above
were to occur pilots would have to
be supported by his/her employer
but I would suggest some airlines
would not be interested, those are
probably obvious.
Leaving the medical prevention
aside are we better continuing with
the 2-person rule? It maybe a public
relations exercise but it works, or
does it? How many cabin crew have
been asked if the pilot is on his/her
own if they see another pilot having
a comfort break? Or do the public,
despite the GermanWings accident,
still believe that on the whole pilots
are trustworthy and do like to live?
I would like to think the latter but
perhaps a survey needs to be done
on their attitudes. Another question
would need to be introduced on the
role of the cabin crew in the cockpit.
Do they provide comfort (to the
passengers) or create a bigger threat
to their safety. Do the passengers
know, or even care, that there is a
cabin crew person in the cockpit?
There will continue to be discussion
on this subject but in July EASA intend
to make ruling. It will be interesting to
see how the ruling applies.

10. IPA and
Social Media
We are now increasingly using
social media to communicate
with members on matters
of interest to them.
Join us on TWITTER
@IPAPilotUnion or find us on
LINKEDIN (Independent
Pilots Association).
 
10 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
I
joined IPA approximately 3 years ago
after some disillusionment with my
previous association led to a change.
IPA are not formally recognised within
my company, but management are
happy to deal with Phil and his team
on an individual basis.
I have worked for my company
for nigh-on 20 years, am rated on 3
separate company types and have
held a command for approximately
15 years. Being a rather open, honest
and straightforward person hasn’t
always been fully appreciated by all
and this is why I initially asked for
assistance from IPA.
Straight away, I felt that I had
personal one-to-one contact with
an individual who specialised in
employment law, and who had
gained experience in both legal
and aviation fields. I was regularly
updated by telephone and e-mail
during a subsequent investigation
into my conduct, and was advised
appropriately when the findings
were released to all parties. I very
much felt supported by experts who
deal with employment matters on a
professional daily basis.
The General Secretary of
IPA personally flew up on the
appointed day to represent me
during a hearing, again advised me
appropriately and subsequently
spoke on my behalf. The outcome of
the meeting was the very best that
could have been expected and I felt
that I had been treated on a fair and
reasonable basis.
I have subsequently had a number
of other dealings directly with the
General Secretary or COO of IPA on
a range of issues within my company,
again have found that I am met with
both a timely and balanced response
from either by email or telephone
(and out of hours on one occasion…).
I would not have any hesitation in
recommending membership of IPA to
any of my colleagues (and indeed I
have…) as I feel that you matter as an
individual there and are not treated as
a member of the ‘rank and file’…
TESTIMONIAL

11. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 11
Does your Tax Adviser
specialise in pilots?
Our expert team can guide you through the ever-changing
rules for both UK resident and non-resident tax payers.
We offer fantastic value for money and can give you
peace of mind as well as tax saving strategies.
NEW OFFICE: We are pleased to advise that we have moved to superb new
offices with ample client parking and new technology
Contact a pilot tax specialist: Chris Chapman or Angela Tucknott
mcphersons walpole harding
Chartered Accountants & Tax Advisers
Telecom House, 125-135 Preston Road
Brighton BN1 6AF www.mcpwh.com
Call us on: 01273 206 445
Or email: chris@mcpwh.com
or angela@mcpwh.com
Prices (correct at Oct 13)
are just:
1 year: £123
2 years: £219
3 years: £287
Then contact the
Flight International
on 08450 777733
SPECIAL
IPA MEMBER
DISCOUNT RATES
To obtain the code you need for
your IPA bulk-discount rate call
us first - 01444 441149

12. 12 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
U
nfortunately Project Propeller,
the event where WWII Veteran
aircrew are flown to a reunion,
didn’t quite go to plan 4th June.
Firstly, some 12 days before the
event the venue had to be switched
away from RAF Scampton. The
organisers pulled out all the stops
and with the assistance of the owners/
operators of Leeds East (the former
RAF Church Fenton) a new venue was
found and all was back on track.
But then the one thing
that is beyond the
control of any event
organiser, the great
British weather,
scuppered the plans
of the majority of
participants on
the day. Yours truly
included.
In the last newsletter,
I mentioned the WWII
Veteran that I was paired with but
unfortunately he had to pull out
due to ill health. I was re-assigned
a Wireless Operator who flew on
Stirling bombers and although we
didn’t get to fly to Project Propeller
we did meet the week before as a dry
run to make sure he could get in &
out of the aeroplane.
It’s not easy for everyone to get
in and out of a Jodel, even the big
Mousquetaire (D-140 four seater), but
I’m pleased to say despite his 95 years
he managed it with a little assistance
from me and his son. Once aboard
there was no excuse not to go flying
so we had a pleasant half an hour or
so bimbling around Goodwood. The
sight and sound of a Boultbee Spitfire
starting up and taking off brought a
smile to his face as well.
Once back on the ground we sat
chatting for a little while and it turns
out my Veteran was shot down over
Holland but managed to evade
capture and returned back
to Blighty. He truly is a
fine gentleman and
I would have liked
more time listening
to his stories but
regrettably we didn’t
have time on that
occasion.
It is a shame that
after the considerable
efforts of the organisers
the weather couldn’t have been a
bit more sympathetic on the day,
but those who did manage to get
to Leeds East would have had a
wonderful time and a great many
of those who didn’t will have made
alternative arrangements, either on
the 4th June or another day, to get
their Veteran airborne.
And at the time of writing, though
nothing is arranged yet, I am putting
plans together to give my Veteran
another outing, maybe to Duxford.
PROJECT PROPELLER - UPDATE
By Phill Petitt

13. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 13
HEALTH AND SAFETY CLIPS
READ ARROWS WINGS
By Philip Flower
P
ilots are trained
and trained again
that their flying
must be safe. It is the
commander of an aircraft’s
responsibility to ensure
that all flight is safely
conducted. For 52 years
the Red Arrows have
thrilled crowds with their
highly professional expert
displays of aviation skill.
They are known around
the world as the best of the best,
trained to the pinnacle of their trade
and employed to represent the UK
at its best. We have now been told
however that their famous flying
display is to be significantly curtailed
for ‘Health & Safety’ reasons
following the tragedy of the 2015
Shoreham air display crash. So have
the Red’s been behaving dangerously
and irresponsibly for the past fifty
two years? Of course not. Not only
that to restrict their display because
of something that happened to an
airplane that was as old as the reds
being flown by an individual pilot
who was not at the time a member
of the team and therefore subject to
its standards and disciplines is, in my
view, wrong.
The public do not go to air shows
to watch planes merely take off, fly by
and land. They go to be thrilled by
the speed and accuracy of the flying.
The excitement of our air displays
will be lost if we allow the mind-set
that no risk is acceptable to prevail.
Great advances in all walks of life are
made because we take calculated
risks. Of course safety must always be
a primary consideration but someone
seems to have forgot that safety can
never be guaranteed. Perhaps in
future we should all stay at home and
watch the display on TV broadcast
from a remote island where no one
lives! What next shouldn’t the RAF
also ban all low level flight as that
is notoriously dangerous? Come on
CAA / RAF the public know the risk,
respect your skill and training. We
want to be thrilled by the Red’s and
for them to continue to represent the
UK at its best.

14. 14 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
I
t was mentioned in a previous issue
of SkyPointer that EU regulations
are now in place governing the
reporting and investigation of
occurrences in aviation effective from
15th November 2015.
Regulation 376/2014 is the
‘Nuts ‘n Bolts’, or framework, of the
legislation; there is no opt-in by
Governments or National
Regulatory Authorities, it is
what it is and it overrides
National Law.
Implementing
Regulation 2015/1018
is the ‘How To’ which
puts the legislation into
practice and there is
also a Guidance Material
document available.
By the time you
read this the EU In/Out
Referendum will have
taken place and if the
vote has been ‘Out’ then
nothing changes, for the
time being at least and this legislation
will certainly remain in place and
applicable to the UK. As far as we
understand it as well, it is quite likely
that this (and other aviation legislation)
will continue to be applicable to the
UK in the longer term as well.
So what does it all mean?
To find out, I recently accepted
an invitation to attend a training
session run by the CAA and hosted
by Unite the Union (our thanks go to
both organisations for extending the
invitation) and the first thing to say
is that the CAA were taking things
gently for the first six months giving
organisations time to adjust to the
new Safety Management System
way of doing things, but that time
has now passed so
organisations shouldn’t
any longer be expecting
an easy ride if they
haven’t got their internal
processes sorted out.
The regulation
establishes a requirement
for a ‘Just Safety Culture’
where reporting of
occurrences by listed
aviation professionals
(pilot, engineer, ATCO,
etc.) is in some cases
required, in others is
encouraged and is always
allowed voluntarily. The
manner in which an organisation
operates its Just Culture is through
a Safety Management System in
which reporting is similarly required/
encouraged/received, reports are
investigated and where appropriate,
follow-up action is taken.
One point to note here is that
Article 16(11) of EC376/2014 which
requires organisations to adopt
JUST CULTURE IN
AVIATION SAFETY
By Phill Petitt
By the time
you read
this the
EU In/Out
Referendum
will have
taken place
and if the
vote has
been ‘Out’
then nothing
changes...

15. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 15
just culture principles also requires
organisations to consult staff
representatives so they should be
open with staff about the system
they adopt.
Hopefully, the system within your
company complies with the principle
of a Just Culture where open
reporting is encouraged, reports
are fully investigated and upon
determination of the cause, errors
and unsafe acts will not be punished
if the error was unintentional, but,
those who act recklessly or take
deliberate and unjustifiable risks
will still be subject to disciplinary or
remedial action.
A large part of a well-run
Safety Management System is the
investigation process that should
obviously be thorough but also fair.
To this end, a number of assessment
tools are available to work through
to determine culpability and one
factor that appears largely in each
is the Substitution Test – could
what happened to Joe also have
happened to Fred in the same
circumstances?
If the answer is yes then it is likely
the problem reported is a system error
that unfortunately happened to Joe
so he is not culpable. However, if the
answer is no then the error likely rests

16. 16 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
with Joe and he potentially is culpable.
Obviously, that is a rather basic
explanation but it gives an idea of
the questions that whomever in your
organisation is running the Safety
Management System should be asking
when investigating reports submitted.
If you think the Safety Management
System in your company doesn’t
comply with regulations then in
the first place ask your workplace
representatives for advice but of
course we in the IPA Office are also
here for advice should you need it.
There is also some information on the
EU Aviation Safety Reporting website:
www.aviationreporting.eu
A final thought – Just Culture is
not entirely a new idea. The following
wording was on a sign on a Hurricane
production line in 1940:
A fault revealed voluntarily will
be treated leniently but a fault
concealed may lead to serious
consequences for the workman, not
to mention the pilot.
FOR RENTThis beautiful four-bedroom, three-bathroom home
with private pool & jacuzzi in a conservation area
near Disney World, Orlando.
! Web: www.floridianescape.com! e-mail:
This beautiful four-
bedroom, three-
bathroom home
with private pool
& jacuzzi in a
conservation area
near Disney World,
Orlando.
FOR
RENT
web: www.floridianescape.com
e-mail: julie06.baker@blueyonder.co.uk
tel: 01293 435505
...organisations
shouldn’t any longer
be expecting an
easy ride if they
haven’t got their
internal processes
sorted out.

17. SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 17
INDEPENDENT PILOTS
(Financial Services)
The only financial planners endorsed by the
Independent Pilots Association
 Experienced in advising pilots on issues unique
to their profession
 Fully Independent
 Chartered (the gold standard for financial planners)
 Part of the award winning Aspect8 group
(www.aspect8.co.uk)
 Free initial consultations
We provide a full financial
planning service encompassing:
 Pensions  Investments
 Mortgages  Estate Planning
 Protection  Tax Planning
e: info@ipafs.com
t: 01273 208 028
INDEPENDENT PILOTS
(Financial Services)
Independent Pilots Financial Services is a trading style of Aspect8 Ltd which
is an appointed representative of Best Practice IFA Group Limited which is
authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
5th Floor, Telecom House
125-­135 Preston Road
Brighton, BN1 6AF

18. 18 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
THE DANGERS OF UNREGULATED
ADVICE FOR PILOTS OVERSEAS
Introduction
We have many years of experience in providing financial
advice to pilots and, increasingly, it is becoming clear that
more and more pilots are working or retiring overseas. In
many respects, this is an opportunity to build up savings
for a return to the UK or retirement overseas but there
are dangers as well – most notably, financial advice and
product sales from individuals working in jurisdictions with
minimal regulation and consumer protection.
Why is UK Regulation Important?
The UK has some of the most stringent financial services
regulation in the world. All recommendations and product
sales from UK based advisers taking place in the UK must
be evidenced as being in the clients best interests and
there is a robust complaints and compensation framework
should anything go wrong. This includes the right to
have your case heard by the Ombudsmen and a Financial
Services Compensation Scheme to compensate in the
event of the failure of an institution.
What Can Go Wrong?
In the absence of such consumer protection, evidence
suggests organisations are actively targeting ex pats
overseas with products that are seen as highly charged,
restrictive and unsuitable. This is done safe in the
knowledge that if such advice is given overseas it will
not fall under UK regulation and the client may have no
recourse with regards to a complaint or compensation.
This may even include advice regarding UK contracts if the
advice is actually given overseas.
Examples of such practices that we have encountered
include:
• Taking 30% from an investment up front, in addition to
ongoing fees, without informing client.
• Not allowing fund to be cashed in before client reaches
75 even though they had returned to the UK at age 65.
...we ensure
that our
recom-
mendations
benefit
from the full
weight of UK
regulation
and consumer
protection.

19. SKYPOINTER
ADVERTISING RATES
REACH THE AUDIENCE THAT MATTERS
FULL COLOUR:
Half-page £80
Full-page £115
Discounts for multiple entries and
10% DISCOUNT FOR MEMBERS
Call 01444 441149 for details.
www.ipapilot.com
SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016 | 19
This article does
not constitute
advice and advice
should be sought
on an individual
basis. The FCA
do not regulate
tax advice.
• Taking funds which fall outside client’s estate and
returning them to estate causing an unnecessary
inheritance tax charge of 40%.
• Falsifying what country the investment falls under,
resulting in a large fine for the client from HMRC.
What Do We Do?
By ensuring we limit our advice to your UK assets and
provide advice to you only when you are physically in the
UK or if appropriate within anther EEA member country,
we can ensure that our recommendations benefit from the
full weight of UK regulation and consumer protection. We
will recommend that you obtain local tax advice where
appropriate and will consider the use of alternative products
such as Qualifying Recognised Overseas Pension Schemes if
your circumstances suggest this may be suitable.
By working in this way we help you to achieve the best
of both worlds: the advantages of working overseas and
protection from the very real and significant dangers of
unregulated advice.

20. 20 | SKYPOINTER ISSUE 113 | JULY 2016
For further details,
call IPFS on 01273 208028
or fax 01273 202645
Cover Premium
Worldwide (excl USA) £125,000 £97.54+IPT
Worldwide (excl USA) £250,000 £150.33+IPT
Worldwide (incl USA) £125,000 £160.67+IPT
Worldwide (incl USA) £250,000 £247.63+IPT
SUPPLEMENTARY LEGAL
EXPENSES SCHEME
Optional insurance cover which
provides protection beyond our
Legal Scheme, at concessionary
rates to full members.