So I bought my plane just about a year ago. I had a few months of happy flying, then after a HSI failure in December and a very tricky G5 install job (that’s another story) the annual was due in mid Feb. My local mx company didn’t have their paperwork in order in time so I went to another shop that I was recommended (approx 3 hour drive away).
I dropped it up in the knowledge that he would take a couple of weeks to get started on it. Eventually in late March I get a call saying he’s started and there are some corrosion problems and a few other bits. I hear nothing further until mid May when he finally sends on a parts list. It takes a while for the dealer to assemble them and they’re received at the mx shop on June 11th…on the 15th I hear there’s no 8130-3 with some of them and I suggest using owner approved parts memorandum. After numerous phone calls, texts, emails that weren’t answered or ever returned, he says ‘no can do’ on July13th.
I replied saying its the only option, otherwise parts will have to be sent back to the US (if they will even take them back as more than 30 days have expired)…Again since then, nothing. This is going on for over 5 months now, with the total work estimate at about 150 hours. Over the months, the occasional time he emails he just says something along the lines of ‘been busy, haven’t got around to it’ with no estimated date, no suggestions on how to move forward. Obviously with a car I’d have gone up and got it out of there by now, but there’s basically nothing I can do. It’s sickening that I’ll be paying full price for such a terrible service and I feel like I can’t become combative or the final bill might be even more astronomical. Is there anything that can be done in these situations? Certainly not been a fun year of aircraft ownership.
Sounds like many mechanics I’ve had the unfortunate pleasure of encountering over the years.. I feel for ya. Is she ferryable or in pieces? Because it might just be easier to pay this guy whatever he think he’s owed, get a ferry permit and fly her out of there to someone you can trust.
It really, really sucks we are not allowed to do our own maintenance. So much time and heartache could be avoided.
Now where have I heard this old chessnut before. Ahhh, happened to me, almost exactly the same scenario, except it was 163 hours, and a very dubious hidden corrosion problem that all previous other annual inspection had apparently missed.
I received the call of give me £6500.00 and I will fix it, or alternatively I will not sign it off and it will be grounded.I responded by suggesting I would pack my……
and come down and see him.
I truly feel your pain. Sorry, negotiation but it is tough, it is unpalatable, a compromise will be reached. But it is a long road to harmony.
Not currently flyable. I don’t think there’s any real malice involved, just that the existing customers get put first. Even if the parts were installed and I got a ferry permit to bring it somewhere else where they would sign off the parts that would be an OK result but also plenty more wasted time and headaches.
zuutroy wrote:
don’t think there’s any real malice involved
Yes but when people do not talk to you that is when the real issues begin. Open communication, transparency, I will do nothing until you sign off the work sheet spend, and such nonsense. If your plane lies like a hanger queen, in bits, trust me, it does not take long for everything to start becoming a problem.
pzuutroy wrote:
Over the months, the occasional time he emails he just says something along the lines of ‘been busy, haven’t got around to it’ with no estimated date, no suggestions on how to move forward.
But you are also a customer, no? It irritates enormously when you call up and they tell you dealing with other customers. Well what about me?
zuutroy wrote:
It’s sickening that I’ll be paying full price for such a terrible service and I feel like I can’t become combative or the final bill might be even more astronomical. Is there anything that can be done in these situations? Certainly not been a fun year of aircraft ownership.
By your own admission you are already stuffed.
Very sad to hear yet another story like this. There is another one I know about where the “situation” is coming up to a year…
One problem is that the general level of customer service, and especially project management, in GA, is generally poor. Many companies work on the principle that whoever screams loudest gets the work done. Another widely operated principle is to not start on the job until almost too late and then everybody is sent to “battle stations” – in the words of one UK avionics shop ex employee I used to know 
The companies’ argument is that too many customers are tight and won’t pay for a better level of customer service, which is true but is little comfort to those who are paying.
This is one good thing about being N-reg. You are, in principle at least if not in reality (for many), never at the mercy of a “company”.
Peter wrote:
This is one good thing about being N-reg.
In this case the important difference is that nobody on N-register Part 91 needs an 8130-3. I’ve never even discussed form 8130-3 with any mechanic, in relation to my planes.
That aside, my planes have never left my direct control and mostly have never left my hangar for maintenance. And they likely never will.
That’s true also, although here in Europe most companies don’t know that and will insist on one even for an N-reg.
Peter wrote:
That’s true also, although here in Europe most companies don’t know that and will insist on one even for an N-reg.
The argument I heard was it would make it easier to transfer to EASA reg if needed…maybe true?
That is not correct, if the process is followed correctly.
When you transfer the reg, there is an Export CofA done (except on a transfer to the Guernsey reg, or if using a special concession such as here) and that certifies that the whole aircraft complies with the requirements of the exporting ICAO member state.
If the inspector issuing the Export CofA has doubts about the traceability status (which is all that an 8130-3 or EASA-1 form is about) of any parts fitted, that is the time to raise those doubts (and perhaps rip out those parts and replace them with freshly-documented ones – that happens!).
Then the inspector of the accepting ICAO member state is entitled to rely on the Export CofA document which covers the whole plane and which states that the whole plane is legit.
There are some possible issues, concerning equipment not acceptable to the accepting CAA, and this has to be ripped out, or recertified by an EASA 21 company etc. I think this should be rare now, due to this.
Others here know much about this than I do, but they might not want to post it.
The main reason why mx companies want the “max paperwork” is because (a) it covers their 6 o’clock and (b) it forces the supply to come from an “aviation” supplier which is much more expensive and the company doing the work gets a much bigger dealer margin. Yesterday I heard a funny story, involving some parts for a DA42, which a diligent employee of the mx company bought from the mfg, with a CofC, all legit and all exactly identical, and his boss went ballistic when he discovered that he “lost” some 5 figures
