Finding more work.

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
An A&P is doing simple maintenance, then finds a very serious issue?

Can they force the owner to get it fixed?

What are the mechanic's resources ?
 
Can an A&P "force" an owner to do anything?

A&P - I've found a serious problem with your dual overhead gonkulator.
Owner - Is it serious?
A&P - I don't think you should fly it again until its fixed. You'll most certainly crash into a busload of nuns en-route to a penguin petting.
Owner - I think I'll fly it anyway.
A&P - If anyone asks me when they find your smoking hole, I'll tell them I warned you.
 
Can the A&P sign the logbook noting the aircraft is unworthy, or can only an IA declare an aircraft unworthy?
 
I don’t see how the A&P could force the client to have the problem fixed, unless it was an airworthiness discrepancy and you wouldn’t sign it off unless it was fixed.

Would be similar to that of a dentist. Go in for a simple checkup & cleaning and they discover that a root canal needs to be performed and refused to let you get up from the chair until it was done.
 
Ryanb said:
Would be similar to that of a dentist. Go in for a simple checkup & cleaning and they discover that a root canal needs to be performed and refused to let you get up from the chair until it was done.
Click to expand...
Well, if the FAA oversaw dentistry, you wouldn't be able to use your teeth if you hadn't been to the dentist in the last year. Well, 13 months if your last trip had been overnight at the end of the month.
 
And I thought it was just my A&P wanting to buy a new fishing boat ...
 
Tom-D said:
An A&P is doing simple maintenance, then finds a very serious issue?

Can they force the owner to get it fixed?

What are the mechanic's resources ?
Click to expand...

Tom:
No.
The owner is responsible for getting it fixed. 91.403 and 91.407

If the simple maintenance was an inspection the mechanic is only required to provide a list of disc to owner. 43.11(7)(b). However there is a FAA doc somewhere that allows this same method for maintenance in general.
 
murphey said:
Can the A&P sign the logbook noting the aircraft is unworthy, or can only an IA declare an aircraft unworthy?
Click to expand...
murph:
Yes an A&P can determine an aircraft unairworthy in a logbook. An IA is required if determination was during an annual. But just a written disc list given to an owner is enough to indicate the aircraft is unairworthy and requires the owner to address them.
 
Documenting "not airworthy" in the aircraft logs is probably out of bounds. It's one thing to say "replaced dual overhead gonkulator", it's an entirely different thing to write "dual overhead gonkulator is fuburlating, aircraft is not airworthy".

It is for the owner and operator to determine air worthiness and by taking on that authority you could be opening yourself to legal issues. Your information is your opinion only. If you permanently record your opinion in the aircraft logs then it can be argued that you have permanently damaged the aircraft's value. I certainly would be skeptical about buying an aircraft that was once declared unairworthy by a mechanic, even if the gonkulator had been entirely replaced.

You have remedies other than the logbook. Give the owner a list of discrepancies. They are required to address them. You have maintained the trust of your client. Win-win.
 
Banjo33 said:
Here’s hoping someone can cut through the sarcasm and post a legitimate answer...I, for one, am interested to know.
Click to expand...
OK, so you take your ride in to get a crack in a baffle stop drilled.

Once there, the A&P points out that the tires are getting "thin" and must be replaced for $xxx.
And that hydraulic fluid in the carpet is a sign that you need a total overhaul of the retract system for $xxxx.
And, the paint on the prop tips is worn so you need to send it out for an overhaul for $xxxx. (including his 10% markup, of course).
And, the engine is past the calendar limit for "TBO" - guess how much that is going to cost?

Can he/she/it hold your airplane hostage until all this "required" work is done? How do you get it to someone who is not overdue on his boat payment? Do you need a ferry permit? A flatbed?
 
bflynn said:
Documenting "not airworthy" in the aircraft logs is probably out of bounds. It's one thing to say "replaced dual overhead gonkulator", it's an entirely different thing to write "dual overhead gonkulator is fuburlating, aircraft is not airworthy".

It is for the owner and operator to determine air worthiness and by taking on that authority you could be opening yourself to legal issues. Your information is your opinion only. If you permanently record your opinion in the aircraft logs then it can be argued that you have permanently damaged the aircraft's value. I certainly would be skeptical about buying an aircraft that was once declared unairworthy by a mechanic, even if the gonkulator had been entirely replaced.

You have remedies other than the logbook. Give the owner a list of discrepancies. They are required to address them. You have maintained the trust of your client. Win-win.
Click to expand...

bflynn:
I took murphey's question to ask IF a mechanic COULD make such a write up or did it have to be an IA. Not to make the write up. A list of disc is definitely the preferred way.

However, at the same time an owner cannot dictate how a mechanic drafts his write up which is required under 43. For instance, if a mechanic gives the owner a label to post in the aircraft record and his write up includes something similar to your gonkulator example, then it falls back on the owner how that entry gets into the record.

Granted you may never use that mechanic again if you don't like his write ups but he doesn't have to follow your request. But in this case you still have an out as 91.417(b)(3) only requires keeping a "disc list" until it is fixed. The final entry the owner includes in the aircraft record would state "gonkulator repaired...."
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
OK, so you take your ride in to get a crack in a baffle stop drilled.

Once there, the A&P points out that the tires are getting "thin" and must be replaced for $xxx.
And that hydraulic fluid in the carpet is a sign that you need a total overhaul of the retract system for $xxxx.
And, the paint on the prop tips is worn so you need to send it out for an overhaul for $xxxx. (including his 10% markup, of course).
And, the engine is past the calendar limit for "TBO" - guess how much that is going to cost?

Can he/she/it hold your airplane hostage until all this "required" work is done? How do you get it to someone who is not overdue on his boat payment? Do you need a ferry permit? A flatbed?
Click to expand...
Capt:
No. However, some shops have done this... but whether they won or lost depends on how diligent the owner is.

On the airworthy side, if the shop presents to the owner an official disc list per the FARs then he is bound to it.

On the business side, if the owner was smart to have a work request drawn up on only the crack stop drill then it becomes a civil matter.

There's no easy way out of this situation, but one way short of a ferry flight is to demand a disc list from the shop and bring your mechanic to clear the disc (i.e., engine calendar O/H not required per Part 91; retract sys found within limits, tires within limits, etc)
 
Bell206 said:
Tom:
No.
The owner is responsible for getting it fixed. 91.403 and 91.407

If the simple maintenance was an inspection the mechanic is only required to provide a list of disc to owner. 43.11(7)(b). However there is a FAA doc somewhere that allows this same method for maintenance in general.
Click to expand...
Let us say it was not an inspection.
Supposed it was a simple oil / filter change, and they find metal in the filter.

does the mechanic have any leverage to require the owner to overhaul the engine, or even have it repaired?
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
bflynn:
I took murphey's question to ask IF a mechanic COULD make such a write up or did it have to be an IA. Not to make the write up. A list of disc is definitely the preferred way.

However, at the same time an owner cannot dictate how a mechanic drafts his write up which is required under 43. For instance, if a mechanic gives the owner a label to post in the aircraft record and his write up includes something similar to your gonkulator example, then it falls back on the owner how that entry gets into the record.

Granted you may never use that mechanic again if you don't like his write ups but he doesn't have to follow your request. But in this case you still have an out as 91.417(b)(3) only requires keeping a "disc list" until it is fixed. The final entry the owner includes in the aircraft record would state "gonkulator repaired...."
Click to expand...

A mechanic can write anything he wants to. My response was that he might regret doing so for multiple reasons.
 
He’s your chosen A&P,if he finds more work ,it’s usually a good thing.i trust the mechanics ,who work on my plane explicitly. You can find plenty of mechanics,that will do only what you ask for. Unless it’s a truly minor fix,do you feel safe overlooking ,the mechanics recommendations.
 
Banjo33 said:
Here’s hoping someone can cut through the sarcasm and post a legitimate answer...I, for one, am interested to know.
Click to expand...
MHO is, the A&P can only submit a well documented letter to FSDO, on the condition of the aircraft in question.
Even then the FAA can not force the owner to fix it, they can pull the AWC, and then if the aircraft is flown, proceed with an enforcement procedure.
 
@frfly172 brings in an interesting POV. Is this your usual A&P giving you the low down on what he finds, or is this away where you are fixing a flat or repairing a P-Lead and find something?

It's all situational. Just because I get 'er going with the P-lead fix doesn't mean I'm not going to address the other item(s) with my usual A&P when I get home. That oil leak in the case didn't lose ALL the oil, it'll hold till I get it back to JimmyJack at the home drome.

Not sure I'd appreciate a letter to the feds on something like that.
 
Tom-D said:
Let us say it was not an inspection.
Supposed it was a simple oil / filter change, and they find metal in the filter.

does the mechanic have any leverage to require the owner to overhaul the engine, or even have it repaired?
Click to expand...

Nothing like changing the question mid-stream, but the answer is no. The A&P can, at that point, only advise the owner. We are not given the authority to ground the aircraft. Only the FAA has that authority.

"A list of discrepancies....." applies to this situation as well as it does to an inspection.
 
Oh, it's just a small fuel leak from the cowling, what could possibly happen...

Hey, what if the pilot is intoxicated, sure, you can call the cops, but, what if he's about ready to go?
 
Tom-D said:
Explane how that article has any thing to do with the question.
Click to expand...
Similar situation, albiet not quite the same. Please explain why it doesn't have any applicability to the situation you described.
 
Bell206 said:
Capt:
No. However, some shops have done this... but whether they won or lost depends on how diligent the owner is.

On the airworthy side, if the shop presents to the owner an official disc list per the FARs then he is bound to it.

On the business side, if the owner was smart to have a work request drawn up on only the crack stop drill then it becomes a civil matter.

There's no easy way out of this situation, but one way short of a ferry flight is to demand a disc list from the shop and bring your mechanic to clear the disc (i.e., engine calendar O/H not required per Part 91; retract sys found within limits, tires within limits, etc)
Click to expand...

Best reply above. There are two things at play.Air regs and contract law. The catch is how to satisfy them both at the same time.

Do the work you are contracted to do. Inform the owner of the defect. Give him the information so he can make an informed decision. That can be a hard thing to do sometimes.
 
I was perhaps a little sarcastic in my answer but I'm genuinely interested in these type discussions as I'm training for my A&P. Apologies to Tom if my answer was taken the wrong way, but keep it up, I don't mind. I'm learning.
 
All of this is why you never, ever give your aircraft logbooks to any mechanic you’re not 110% confident in. Get the work done, get a sticker with the required entry on it, and put it in the books yourself.
 
Speaking as an owner, if I ask for 1 specific repair or service to be completed, that is all I expect of an A&P. If in the course of doing that he notices another issue, I will be happy if he informs me of it. If however he digs until he finds another issue I will be less happy (especially if he also charges me for his time spent digging where no digging was requested). If subsequent to the discovery he tries to ground my aircraft, make notation in logs with words such as unairworthy, report me to the FAA, etc., I would be quite unhappy. I would never use the "services" of that A&P again. Give me a list of discrepancies, fine. Refuse to sign off on annual unless discrepancies addressed, fine.

The question posed by Tom in the 1st post re: "can they force the owner to get it fixed" makes me think the A&P is working against me and not with me. Please don't think can I force and owner to do something. Rather, maybe it would be a better service to say this is the problem, here are options, here is a list of the discrepancies we spoke of. Even, if you like, include an it is my personal belief that x,y & z make the plane unairworthy.
 
I was hoping that some one could show that the A&P A&P-IA had the authority

Because All I can find is that the A&P only has the authority to declare the aircraft unairworthy in during the annual or AD compliance.
Same thing or the IA but add the annual inspection or the return to service on a 337.

and that doesn't give them the authority to require it to be fixed.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Please explain why it doesn't have any applicability to the situation you described.
Click to expand...
Mike's article is all about signing annuals the why and hows of it. not "can an a&p require thing to get fixed. that was what the question was about.
 
So Tom, your guy isn't interested in finding where the metal is coming from?
 
FORANE said:
Speaking as an owner, if I ask for 1 specific repair or service to be completed, that is all I expect of an A&P. If in the course of doing that he notices another issue, I will be happy if he informs me of it. If however he digs until he finds another issue I will be less happy (especially if he also charges me for his time spent digging where no digging was requested). If subsequent to the discovery he tries to ground my aircraft, make notation in logs with words such as unairworthy, report me to the FAA, etc., I would be quite unhappy. I would never use the "services" of that A&P again. Give me a list of discrepancies, fine. Refuse to sign off on annual unless discrepancies addressed, fine.

The question posed by Tom in the 1st post re: "can they force the owner to get it fixed" makes me think the A&P is working against me and not with me. Please don't think can I force and owner to do something. Rather, maybe it would be a better service to say this is the problem, here are options, here is a list of the discrepancies we spoke of. Even, if you like, include an it is my personal belief that x,y & z make the plane unairworthy.
Click to expand...
You hire me to do an oil & Filter change, I find metal in the filter, I show it to you, you tell me that's no problem it been doing that for several hundred hours.

What's my recourse?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top