I can tell a couple of stories of ZÜP abuse – whilst I was learning to fly, a pilot there was banned from flying because he was accused of ‘verschleppte Insolvenz’ – an accusation of a criminal offence which I believe was then proven to be false, however the BR had already removed his ZÜP thus this accusation alone was enough to have his licence revoked.
Secondly, a guy was learning to fly, was a true self made man, drove the ultimate sleeper car – an Audi RS6 Avant, the estate version with a Lamborghini motor under the hood. However, the 500plus BHP wasn’t enough for him, he had it tuned to churn out north of 600BHP, he claimed it was closer to 700BHP. He was intending to buy an aircraft to help expand his business and was prepared to throw a lot of money at the right machine.
Unfortunately with such a car, the temptation is to misuse the power and he ended up with 7 points in Flensburg (the German equivalent of the DVLA in Swansea) which is one point short of a ban. Because of that, they refused him his ZüP until all points were gone. For Info, if you receive 1 point for a transgression – for example more than 21km/h faster than allowed, it will be removed after 30 months. If you received 2 points for something more serious – eg more than 31km/h too fast within town limits or more than 41km/h beyond the city limits, you need to wait at least 5 years for it to be removed. If you received 3 points for an even more heinous offence, eg more than 1.6pro mille alcohol whilst riding a bicycle, the period before they are removed is 10 years.
The worst thing about that decision was that he had started his training, passed all the theory exams during a 2 week residential course, had progressed to the solo stage when he was asked about the ZüP – which until then, no-one had spoken about. As he’d done all the theory in a residential course, the local flight school assumed he was aware of the requirement and didn’t check until he was about to go solo……
He then sold the car, slowed down and 5 years later got his ZüP, resat the exams via residential course – again, – refreshed his training, went solo and got his licence / plane. So from that point of view, you could say that the ZüP did have an influence on his driving style
Peter wrote:
Norway allows you to be banned from driving, for any reason including alcohol, but you can still fly a plane.
Yes, that’s how it is. There is definitely no “bot” or person continuously monitoring your records in the background. I can’t imagine it’s like that anywhere? That would be truly like Big Brother.
The last time I had to show my “records” was when getting ID card for ENVA some 10-15 years ago I think. That was not a full record, only relevant criminal activity is looked at (like spying or terrorism I guess? 
), and it went back only a few years. As I remember it I had to go to the police office in person to sign that I allowed them to send it.
At the medical check, isn’t there some check marks about alcohol/drug consumption? Anyway, I don’t really see the connection between previous convictions and the ability to fly. Legally, to assume such a connection sounds very sketchy. You don’t suddenly become a poor walker if you are convicted for drunk driving either well, unless you are constantly drunk 
but then you have bigger problems.
As with the EU Customs thread, which got bogged down in confusion between a) legal Customs requirements and b) what is actually possible to smuggle through, here we may have the same again.
If the Norwegian medical asks about any alcohol related offences, then you must disclose it, and the consequences is what this thread is about. Otherwise we should have a new thread entitled “how much nondisclosure can you get away with on a Class 2 medical” which is an entirely different topic. I don’t know how else I can re-phrase this over and over.
If you can literally tell the CAA that you got banned from driving for drinking, and they say “okay”, that is probably unusual. Not impossible; the UK used to be like that.
Is there an EASA Part-MED position? I have no idea where to find the latest EASA regs, thousands of pages of them…
Peter wrote:
If the Norwegian medical asks about any alcohol related offences, then you must disclose it, and the consequences is what this thread is about.
They are not allowed to ask! and never will be (unless Russia invades us ) I find it rather hard to believe that this is asked in other countries. It defies the very principles of law, freedom, individual rights and so on. What does alcohol related offence has to do with your medical condition in any case? (I know it could have, but so could being convicted for shoplifting – a symptom of kleptomania).
To lessen the confusion, here is the official English version of the self declaration form for any aviation medical.
med_application_form_v4_english_pdf
@Peter wrote:- Gallois – are you sure that there is no question at the medical on whether you got banned from driving for drinking? Anyway, France must be EASA Part-MED compliant and what does that say?
Formulaire_pour_demande_de_certificat_medical_aptitude_pdf
Is this it?
Yes – both Norwegian and French forms closely resemble the FAA form 8500
The big difference is that the French form doesn’t ask you about all visits to medical professionals, whereas the FAA one does.
An actual FAA medical is a pretty perfunctory affair. If you can walk into the surgery unaided you’ll probably pass. But if you fail to disclose so much as visit to the dental hygienist, you risk losing your license. So people tend not to lie. Whereas in France you do actually get fairly thoroughly examined.
In particular, in the US system, if you visit a cardiologist just for a routine checkup, there’s a chance that just the visit will provoke a deferral, i.e. massive hassle. So the best way to get an ECG is to do a French medical, since that always includes one!
Croatian traffic police officers are always friendly if you’re not arrogant and tend to lower your fine if you’re cooperative. To relax the atmosphere sometimes they try to be funny and to make a joke about your driving. Once I was stopped for speeding when I was returning from the airport and the officer asked for car papers and a pilot licence, alluding to my speed. I gave him car papers and my pilot licence. He was confused for a moment and then started to laugh letting me go without being fined.
johnh wrote:
The big difference is that the French form doesn’t ask you about all visits to medical professionals, whereas the FAA one does.
The EASA form do, point 130. The big difference is that EASA does not ask about Arrest, convictions related to driving etc as well as history of nontraffic convictions. That the FAA does is rather odd and downright mediaeval IMO. It would never be legal in Norway, and I guess the rest of Europe, but who knows. Big brother is always looking for excuses to tighten the grip
In particular, in the US system, if you visit a cardiologist just for a routine checkup, there’s a chance that just the visit will provoke a deferral, i.e. massive hassle.
That has not been my observation. The visit is of no consequence, only the diagnosis – if there is one. Of course there is always the risk that the visit or EKG might diagnose some issue that requires further resolution – perhaps because the written guidance to the AME indicates it may or may not be an FAA medical issue, depending on the results of an additional test. Sometimes that means referral to FAA, sometimes not.
