The ombudsman recommends CAA make an ex-gratia payment to Michelle Molloy due to the harm caused by the way her complaint was handled.
A student pilot faced “unacceptable delays” after reporting her instructor’s mid-air sexual advances to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
Former chief ombudsman Peter Boshier criticised the CAA’s response, recommending an ex-gratia payment to Michelle Molloy.
Boshier highlighted “serious administrative deficiencies” and a 16-month delay in the CAA’s handling of Molloy’s complaint.
A student pilot who complained about her flying instructor’s mid-air sexual advances was “left in the dark” and faced “unacceptable delays” after laying a complaint with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
Former chief ombudsman Peter Boshier, who retired last month after a decade in the role, recommended theCAA consider making an ex-gratia payment to Wānaka woman Michelle Molloy because of its botched response to her disclosures, which Boshier said “exacerbated the trauma” she experienced.
The CAA has accepted Boshier’s recommendations with a spokesperson acknowledging the agency could have done better.
As part of his investigation, Boshier issued a detailed 24-page opinion, saying the CAA failed to explore the issue of consent, didn’t keep pertinent records, and waited 16 months to make any decisions on Molloy’s complaint.
Michelle Molloy asked the ombudsman to investigate the CAA's handling of her complaint.
Molloy, who now lives overseas, told the Herald she was grateful for the ombudsman’s work.
“I’ve never had a straight answer from the CAA. I’ve felt misled, I’ve felt they’ve been economical with the truth. I felt I could trust the ombudsman’s process in a way I could never trust the CAA,” she said.
Molloy alleged she was subjected to a “campaign” of sexual grooming by her instructor which culminated in her being touched mid-air during flying lessons.
I’ve represented myself for 14 years against this crown agency who has unleashed the full firepower of their legal department on me
“I’m trying to focus on my lesson. I wanted to be a pilot, and he sees me as a sexual object and nothing else.”
The ombudsman’s job was not to rule if the sexual contact between Molloy and her instructor was consensual. Rather, Boshier was tasked with investigating the way CAA responded when Molloy lodged a complaint about what happened to her at a flight school in 2011.
Former chief ombudsman Peter Boshier. Photo / File
Boshier found Molloy’s position on the question of consent was unclear when first interviewed by CAA and investigators should have delved into the issue in more detail.
“In my view, any allegation that someone performed a sexual act without asking the recipient obviously warrants crystal-clear clarification.”
He said context was also important — Molloy’s evidence was she was sexually inexperienced, eager to get a pilot’s licence, and her instructor was much older than she was.
I didn’t know it wasn’t normal for the instructor to say, you know, ‘flying the aircraft is like sex ... it needs a gentle touch’
Boshier found while CAA’s investigators who conducted the initial interview acted professionally overall, their failure to follow up and clarify Molloy’s evidence on the issue of consent was “unreasonable”.
The instructor has previously denied any non-consensual sexual activity occurred, while Molloy alleged a lengthy, and unwanted, sexual pursuit.
She told the Herald she was the only female student at the flight school, and she was followed around by her instructor “like a puppy”.
“I didn’t know it wasn’t normal for the instructor to say, you know, ‘flying the aircraft is like sex. You’ve got to treat the aircraft like you treat a woman. It needs a gentle touch’,” Molloy told the Herald.
As well as investigating CAA’s initial response to Molloy’s disclosures, Boshier also examined what happened when the CAA initiated an independent review of how her complaint was handled in 2021.
Missing records ‘deeply concerning’
Former chief ombudsman Peter Boshier issued a scathing report into CAA's handling of Molloy's complaint. Photo / NZME
Molloy first made a complaint to the CAA in 2011, and the CAA commenced an investigation focused on two incidents of sexual activity while flying.
The agency’s enforcement unit recommended the trainer be prosecuted over careless operation of an aircraft.
The agency’s director at the time agreed and instructed the relevant information be filed in the district court.
However, the director eventually backed away from going through with the prosecution even though the ombudsman noted this didn’t mean there were deficiencies in the case.
The exact reason no prosecution was taken remains a mystery with the ombudsman noting the absence of key records relating to this decision was “deeply concerning”.
Molloy only found out about the decision not to prosecute when she called CAA for an update in late 2011 and was told at that time the director felt it “would be too hard on her for the matter to go through the courts”.
Molloy told the Herald she should have been consulted but that never happened.
This lack of transparency can also itself exacerbate trauma
“I’m sitting there in the dark, not knowing that they’d made these major decisions about my complaint without any input from me,” she said.
The alternative to prosecution was a recommendation to launch an investigation into the instructor’s fit and proper person status.
Despite this recommendation, which could have resulted in the instructor being stripped of his licence, the CAA didn’t act for 16 months.
“It seems as if Ms Molloy’s complaint had, for all intents and purposes, fallen off CAA’s radar,” Boshier said.
In my view, any allegation that someone performed a sexual act without asking the recipient obviously warrants crystal-clear clarification
During the months where the complaint languished, there was a leadership change at CAA.
Then, in 2013, with a new director in charge, the instructor was told his fit and proper person status was being monitored and was called in for an interview.
However, Boshier’s opinion was that this move by CAA’s new boss was an “attempt to salvage the situation the CAA found itself in through its previous lack of action.”
Less than a month after the instructor was interviewed, he was told no action would be taken against him and the case was now closed.
Again, Molloy was not informed of this development and only learned the case had been closed when she called the CAA asking for an update.
The agency then refused to say what action had been taken citing privacy reasons.
Former chief ombudsman Peter Boshier investigated Molloy’s complaint and issued a 28-page final report. New Zealand Herald photograph by Jason Dorday
The ombudsman found the CAA’s communications with Molloy were “deficient both in content and timeliness”.
In 2021, the CAA appointed Kirsty McDonald KC to review its actions regarding Molloy’s complaint.
However, once complete, Molloy was never given a copy of McDonald’s findings even though she believed she’d be informed of the outcome.
Boshier was again critical of CAA’s tactics when it came to commissioning McDonald.
“The fact a barrister was appointed to carry out this task [the review] also meant the CAA could hide behind legal professional privilege to withhold the report,” he said.
While Molloy thought the lawyer’s review would put things right, her trust in the CAA “evaporated” after being denied a copy of the review findings.
Boshier said key to Molloy’s complaint was the CAA’s lack of transparency between 2011 and 2013, and he was concerned this continued even in 2021.
“This is out of step with good practice expectations. This lack of transparency can also itself exacerbate trauma.”
‘Serious administrative deficiencies’
Michelle Molloy says it took 14 years to extract the truth about what happened with her complaint.
Boshier’s final opinion on the case was that the CAA failed Molloy on multiple levels.
He emphasised the “unacceptable” 16-month delay in making any decisions about taking action on her complaint, saying this left her in limbo.
There were “serious administrative deficiencies” after she made the complaint and attempts to rectify mistakes in 2021 “fell below the mark in terms of transparency and acknowledgement of errors.”
The CAA’s made several changes since it mishandled Molloy’s complaint, including establishing a victims adviser role and adding more women to its investigation team, one of whom has training in adult sexual assault.
The agency also has a police liaison officer and its record keeping policies have been “thoroughly updated”, according to Boshier.
Boshier made three recommendations based on his findings, including engaging its victim management policy in “all” cases where sexual misconduct is alleged and making sure complainants are provided with information and reasons for the agency’s decisions.
It’s not about the money
He also urged the CAA to consider an ex-gratia payment to Molloy to recognise the emotional harm and distress she endured when dealing with the CAA.
The CAA told the Herald it’s received Boshier’s report and accepts his recommendations with a spokesperson saying they’re in the process of implementing them.
“We acknowledge that we could’ve done better, and we have already put measures in place to avoid this happening again,” the spokesperson said.
Molloy told the Herald getting the ombudsman involved was about unearthing the truth and ensuring better systems are in place for other complainants.
“It’s not about money. It’s about using my voice to shine a light on what happened to me,” she said.
“I want other people in the aviation system to feel safe when they fly, to know that if someone sexually harasses them, that they can complain to the regulator and the regulator will take action and will uphold the law.”
She said it was an enormous and ultimately costly effort to get answers.
“I’ve represented myself for 14 years against this crown agency who has unleashed the full firepower of their legal department on me to try and to try and stonewall me in my complaint, to prevent the truth coming out. It just seems enormous waste of taxpayer money that the CAA are fighting me.”
Michael Morrah is a senior investigative reporter/team leader at the Herald. He won the best coverage of a major news event at the 2024 Voyager NZ Media Awards and has twice been named reporter of the year. He has been a broadcast journalist for 20 years and joined the Herald’s video team in July 2024.
