the pilot assets could be “well secured” or “automatically transferred” on his death (e.g. trust, will…), then good luck for insurance & pax in getting a nickel !
That’s not how liability and insurance works, especially not in the UK, and probably not in any civilised country.
Graham wrote:
In any case, my experience is that someone’s willingness and enthusiasm to report information and/or opinions about someone else, or otherwise interfere, usually says more about that person than it does about anyone else.
For peace and quiet it is almost always best (for a whole lot of people) to sit still, don’t rock the boat, don’t say anything, don’t stick your head out etc. There is no moral in this, it’s simply a trade off with what I have to gain vs what possible grief and bad attention it may cause, and especially to me personally. If you are afraid of making a fuzz, then don’t, look the other way instead, wipe it under the rug and so on 
I think perhaps the only important thing here is:
I did report the individual at the time to the CFI but was not taken seriously at the time
Why did he report it? Because he was almost killed, and had to intervene, he had to take the controls. Now, is that the whole story? I have no clue, it certainly is one side of the story. It could however also be that the OP is a bit nervous when others are flying and not himself. This causes an overreaction over minor mistakes the PIC does. Again, I have no clue if that’s the case either, but it very well could be, since the CFI (seemingly) did nothing about it.
I don’t know if there is any moral here at all. But the report to the CFI is a tangible piece of information that may (or may not) shed some light on the accident. That’s for the investigators to sort out. Right now the knowledge of the existence of that information is out there on the internet in any case, perhaps some of the investigators read EuroGA ? 
They are nosy people after all.
LeSving wrote:
For peace and quiet it is almost always best (for a whole lot of people) to sit still, don’t rock the boat, don’t say anything, don’t stick your head out etc. There is no moral in this, it’s simply a trade off with what I have to gain vs what possible grief and bad attention it may cause, and especially to me personally. If you are afraid of making a fuzz, then don’t, look the other way instead, wipe it under the rug and so on
Well, it depends what your motivation is. You seem to have assumed that my motivation for minding my own business is because I want a quiet life and am afraid to make a fuss in situations where a fuss ought to be made. I’m afraid you’re wrong on that count – my motivation stems from a belief that when it comes to things like that (a) it’s nothing to do with me and my opinions are irrelevant, and (b) no good can come of it. Believe me, if I feel a fuss should be made then I have no qualms about making it.
Similarly, what are the motivations of someone who wants to get involved and give their opinions? It might be that they want to do good, but just as commonly it’s probably because they want to stick their nose in and give opinions. People like meddling, unfortunately.
Depends. Did he just kill himself or did he kill others?
Also, will this fall back on the person who ignored your earlier complaints? Should it? And can you live with the consequences if it does?
In my opinion it’s rather live and let live. If they don’t find anything wrong with the plane, they’ll attribute it to ‘pilot error’ anyway, so I personally feel that there is no need to nudge their examination that way.
If someone else got killed, maybe their wife and kids would want to know the truth and possibly a compensation from the estate, that’s where I’d probably say something.
Well put, @Graham.
The pilot is responsible for any accident that occurs because of his lack of skill or judgement, period.
An accident caused by pilot error is not the responsibility of the aircraft owner/club in any sense, they are in fact a victim of the pilots error, and I have never heard a reasonable case that somebody who previously gave training to a pilot, for instance a flight review that is explicitly not a test, is in any way responsible for subsequent pilot error.
This is IMHO a nonsense question, and the better approach for an observer would be to learn from others’ errors, understand that flying is intrinsically intolerant of personal errors in judgment, and use your energy towards ensuring it doesn’t happen to you… something for which you’re actually responsible, and which you can control.
Silvaire wrote:
The pilot is responsible for any accident that occurs because of his lack of skill or judgement, period.
I don’t think anyone has said differently. The point is that it’s the investigators responsibility to find the cause of the accident, it’s not their responsibility to blame someone. In this case the cause may very well be an incapable pilot on the loose, exaggerated by the inability of the “system” to pick it up, even after a warning. Just because you don’t like that cause, or feel “morally superior” to even recognize this as a cause, doesn’t mean it isn’t a cause. He was a loose gun, an accident waiting to happen. A known factor.
I’m not saying that this was the cause here, but if it was, and the investigation don’t mention it (due to “moral dilemmas”), then the report is worth zero.
Other pilots are not part of the training system, nor is a club part of the training system. Individuals holding government delegated authority to instruct and/or examine individual pilots are part of the system, but after a pilot demonstrates competence and has a PPL their relevance becomes less and less every day. For a private pilot who has been flying for years, the details of his training and examination years prior are unlikely to be relevant, periodic flight reviews with a flight instructor are only educational and not legally judgmental, and the input of non-authorized critics who once upon a time “a few years ago” flew with the guy is valueless. Maintaining competence and even more so flying within his level of competence is the private pilot’s sole responsibility.
If the cause of the accident was the PIC failure to maintain control that will be evident without gossipy input from the uninvolved and unauthorized, and will be documented in the report.
How about the reverse he was described as “very good pilot”, “very cautious pilot”, “very through”, “very careful”…then found on a hill doing IMC bellow MSA?
I doubt those comments are as valuable as one thinks…
Agreed, pointless.
Ibra wrote:
I doubt those comments are as valuable as one thinks…
True. It’s just that if you are looking for the truth, then every stone must be turned. It may very well be that the initial story here is a red herring, and utterly irrelevant, but so what? The investigators aren’t looking to blame someone or to inject some “moral superiority” onto the public. They are simply trying to find out what has happened. Then, maybe with some luck, there is something to learn from the facts. If there weren’t a chance that there was something to learn, something to improve, then all that is needed is a police investigation/screening to look for eventual criminal activity.
Silvaire wrote:
and the input of non-authorized critics who once upon a time “a few years ago” flew with the guy is valueless
Perhaps, but who are you to decide this? What makes you the judge of what is valuable information for investigators?
Silvaire wrote:
Maintaining competence and even more so flying within his level of competence is the private pilot’s sole responsibility.
Sure, that’s the very foundation of who is responsible during a flight. It is the PIC. But this is trivial. The investigators are looking for the cause of the accident.
