Plane Held Hostage

in most EU countries “naming and shaming” for consumer information purposes is legal

That cannot be the case, because it would enable anyone to maliciously destroy somebody’s business, and the target would have no recourse. At the very least the information posted would have to be detailed, and well supported with documents, and factual (no offensive stuff etc) so the company realises the have nothing to sue over. But you can bet that if somebody posts something which results in legal action, that poster will afterwards vanish and not co-operate in substantiating the stuff he posted That’s assuming he posted the full story, too….. I think anyone running a “platform” cannot take that risk and assume the full story has been posted.

Truth is always a defence to a defamation action but do you want to pay for the defence?

And we do get, very occassionally, people posting stuff which they must know could result in legal action, but they clearly don’t care. To them, this is just another website which can be trashed.

In the long run, we do run a policy here to not mention or promote a company which has threatened to sue EuroGA – even if somebody had a good experience with them. That’s life…

If somebody says they had a bad experience, just send them a PM and ask who it was…

Peter wrote:

That cannot be the case

It is the case in Sweden. And if it were not, how can web sites like Tripadvisor operate?

Truth is always a defence to a defamation action

Not always. I know it is the case under UK law and possibly the US as well, but e.g not in Sweden.

Airborne_Again wrote:

And if it were not, how can web sites like Tripadvisor operate?

Not to mention Google (Google maps). Anyone can write “reviews” of everything, be it a grocery shop or a car sale facility. It’s a free world. you cannot stop people from expressing their opinions, good or bad. Free speech etc.

But, the problem with a web site like this, is that it is NOT a place for free speech. It is moderated, got rules. I can write whatever I want, and Peter can delete whatever he wants, which basically is the only rule here all things considered.

how can web sites like Tripadvisor operate?

IMHO Tripadvisor carries on because

• the company has loads of $$$ to fight with
• many of the bad reports are illiterate / trivial / meaningless
• many of the bad reports are brief but plausible (e.g. “very hard beds”) so one cannot argue either way
• so many of the reports are fake, and the site is often ridiculed for that
• the company has loads of $$$ to fight with

I reckon if you posted a report on TA which is very specific, clearly false, and damaging to some big company, they would sue, and TA would have to take the report down. That usually is sufficient.

the problem with a web site like this, is that it is NOT a place for free speech. It is moderated, got rules. I can write whatever I want, and Peter can delete whatever he wants, which basically is the only rule here all things considered.

LeSving, has it not occurred to you that EuroGA is moderated for good reasons, not as a personal gratification for the mods? You need to get real. The Guidelines have been up for almost 6 years and if somebody doesn’t like something there they should raise the subject. When EuroGA started, some “old forum hands” estimated that it will be trashed within a year… and some people have really tried to do that. Nearly 200k posts later we are still here. A fair bit of work has gone into achieving that, and a fair bit of hassle…

AdamFrisch wrote:

I had similar problems with my mechanic the last year.

Is that THE mechanic that had a felony conviction for fraud ?

Graham wrote:

I recently took our plane over to Thurrock for a 50hr. They are outstanding

Ian at Thurrock is one of the 2 trustworthy engineeers in the UK, there may be more around but they are few and far between.

A lot mixed advice so far. Nobody mentioned going to buy a packet of biscuits and talking them over a cup of tea.

I think WilliamF has the right idea. Not because it’s necessarily the fairest but, but because it’s probably the most practical and best chance of getting a reasonable outcome.

Do you now have someone else that can do the work if they had access to the aircraft?

From what you describe it seems that the guy took on the job without a lot of enthausiam (telling you what it would sit in the corner for 6 weeks before he did anything). Probably because he could see that it was a once off job for him, and once your own engineer got his paperwork sorted, you’d be back there. He has other customers that he wants to keep happy, and he’s not going to be late and upset them, to keep a once off customer happy (especially so if he feels that he only took on the job to do you a favour).

Not the way that it should be, but probably what has happened.

By calling in, in a friendly way (ie with biscuits/cakes/chocolate whatever) you might be able to get a descent resolution. The bisuits/cakes/chocolate essentially tries to open the conversation on friendly terms (even though you probably feel anything but friendly at this stage) and it also invites a conversation over some tea/coffee. ie a longer friendly conversation, rather than one while he’s working on some aircraft and you’re a distraction while his mind and hands are elsewhere.

If he did take it on as a favour, you could perhaps acknowledge that in the conversation and perhaps he’s regretting taking it on now. It might open the conversation to other possible resolutions. eg.

1. He puts the plane back into a flyable position and you ferry it somewhere else,
2. He allows some other engineer to come in and work on your aircraft in his space to get it into a position where it can be ferried.
3. He’s a geuine guy who took on something that he shouldn’t and is overwhelmed and reaslises the position that he’s put you in and just gets on with it and finishes it asap.

1 or 2 would probably involve some payment (perhaps discounted) for the work that he’d actually done (assuming it was of some use) and the parts purchased.

1 or 2 wouldn’t be a great outcome for you, but they might be the post practical way of getting your aircraft back in the air. Talking in a friendly way is usually the best way to resolve issues, where both sides understand the other sides position, without making threats or accusations.

A more desperate option might be to ferry the aircraft by road to someone else who can work on it?

I wish you good luck in solving your problem. It’s not a nice position to be in.

Michael wrote:

Is that THE mechanic that had a felony conviction for fraud ?

I have no idea. Most of us don’t do full background checks on mechanics when they get recommended by a lot of people in the the type community.

How do you do a “background check” on somebody, legally?

A criminal records check is not legal in the UK, which means it is expensive – probably hundreds (I last looked into this many years ago).

Anyway I doubt most of the people in question will have a criminal record.