A Kent businessman whose two parents were killed in the Air India crash has said he does not believe the leading theory that pilots were to blame.
Haresh Kuberbhai Patel’s mum and dad died in the June 12, 2025, disaster, which killed 260 people – including 52 British nationals.
He is one of around 30 families of victims who have written to the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) asking them to conduct their own investigation into what caused the Ahmedabad to London flight to go down.
The families, 12 of whom are British, wrote that they have ‘serious concerns about how the events of the crash have been explained so far’.
Sign up for all of the latest stories
Start your day informed with Metro’s News Updates newsletter or get Breaking News alerts the moment it happens.
Mum Babiben Kuberbhai Patel, 69, and dad Kuberbhai Khemchanddas Patel, 72, were flying from Ahmedabad to London to visit Haresh and his siblings when the plane went down in western India.
Haresh, 49, who came to the UK in 2005, told Metro: ‘I don’t want to remember that day. I lost both my parents and it’s a difficult time for us.
‘Mentally we’re still disturbed. We try to recover from them, but we can’t.’
He added: ‘I just want to carry on and find out how this could happen.’
Haresh says he and other victims’ families are ‘still waiting for the truth to come out’ after reports Indian investigators are leaning towards pilot action being behind the crash.
The Herne Bay local disagrees with the contested theory, saying: ‘I don’t believe that. How can anyone go on a plane and put people’s lives at risk? No one can.
‘It could be a technical problem. We deserve answers.’
Haresh has joined as many as thirty other victims’ relatives in writing letters calling for the UK AAIB to launch their own independent investigation into the tragedy.
The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) in India released a controversial preliminary report in July, which first fuelled theories that pilot self-sabotage or error.
The report said the Boeing 787’s fuel switches moved to the ‘cut-off’ position ‘immediately’ after take-off, halting fuel supply to the engine.
However, the letter sent by families points to technical details of the crash, which could suggest an electrical or system failure was at fault.
These concerns, shared by the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) in letters to the AAIB India last month, focus on Boeing 787’s back-up generator used in emergencies, called the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), The Times of India reports.
The FIP says that CCTV pictures of the plane before the crash, and a timeline of events in the preliminary report, may indicate that the RAT deployed before the fuel control switches moved to the ‘cut off’ position.
That could suggest an electric failure caused the RAT to deploy and might call into question whether the pilots were responsible for cutting off fuel to the plane, according to the Times of India.
While the FIP and others do not have access to the full body evidence, these fears have been enough for the families of victims to feel they need UK investigators to step in.
The letter – seen by Metro – reads: ‘We have serious concerns about how the events of the crash have been explained so far.’
It continued: ‘A review by the UK AAIB would provide families like ours with greater confidence that all technical aspects have been properly examined.
‘We are only seeking the truth and reassurance that such a tragedy will not happen again in the future.’
The UK AAIB does have ‘Expert’ status in the crash investigation, but their function is to support the families, and they have played no role in the technical investigation into the cause of the accident.
Haresh believes that if British investigators get involved technically, then the victims’ families will get the answers they need.
He added: ‘I have lived in this country for 25 years and I want them to investigate as well. I believe in the UK AAIB.
‘If more authorities become involved independently, we might find out the truth about how this happened.’
The deadline for the AAIB India to report back in June 12, a year after the crash.
Metro understands that the AAIB UK is ready to provide additional support and expertise to their Indian counterparts if their investigation requires.
Other figures have cast doubt on the pilot action theory.
Mike Andrews, the lawyer representing 130 families of the Air India crash, told Metro last year that an electrical failure was the ‘more likely’ reason the Ahmedabad to London flight went down.
(Picture: James Manning/PA Wire)
Ayush S Rajpal, Case Manager Chionuma Law, which represents victims, told Metro: ‘We have seen the letter sent by UK families to the UK AAIB.
‘As a law firm, we support the technical concerns raised by the Federation of Indian Pilots, India, especially the four-second gap between the second fuel cut-off and RAT hydraulic power.
‘This should be properly investigated by all relevant authorities to establish the truth.’
Boeing has always maintained that the 787 is a safe aircraft and the plane does have a strong record.
The captain of the plane was Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, who had clocked over 15,600 hours in the cockpit. The second in command was the first pilot, Clive Kunder, who had 3,403 hours of flying experience.
The Air India flight was carrying 169 Indian nationals, 53 British, one Canadian and seven Portuguese passengers when it crashed outside the airport, landing on a hospital accommodation building.
Only one person survived the crash.
Viswashkumar Ramesh said he is the ‘luckiest man’ alive after climbing out of the wreckage, an escape that experts have described as impossible.
A spokesperson for the UK AAIB told Metro: ‘The AAIB has received correspondence from some of the families of British citizens who tragically lost their lives in the aircraft accident in Ahmedabad, India on 12 June 2025. We are in the process of responding to those who have contacted us.
Boeing has consistently maintained that the 787 is safe, saying the firm’s exhaustive testing procedures on aircraft ensure this is the case.
The company has told numerous outlets it would defer to India’s AAIB to provide information about the investigation.
The AAIB defended its interim report shortly after publication. It insisted that it was not meant to direct blame towards the pilots or to encourage anyone to draw conclusions, which it called ‘irresponsible’.
It said in a statement in July: ‘The purpose of AAIB’s investigation and preliminary report is to provide information about ‘WHAT’ happened. The preliminary report has to be seen in this light.
‘At this stage, it is too early to reach to any definite conclusions. The investigation by AAIB is still not complete. The final investigation report will come out with root causes and recommendations.’
The investigative body said it has a ‘flawless record’ from looking into 92 accidents and 111 serious incidents since 2012.
Air India’s boss also defended the results of the AAIB’s interim report in September, saying: ‘For the moment, the preliminary report indicates nothing wrong with the aircraft, nothing wrong with the engines, nothing wrong with the airlines operation, but we’ve taken a significant safety pause to ensure all of our practices and procedures are fully embedded, and people are fully embracing a new normal of even extra focus on safety, and the focus continues to be on the people that were affected.’
Air India, Tata Group and India’s AAIB have been approached for comment.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Migrant driver without licence killed grandmother, 70, in legal loophole
MORE: Family sues hospital after son is declared dead by virtual doctor
MORE: Body of teenage boy pulled from water in Lake District ‘after getting into difficulty’