Refund for flight training

AlanM

AlanM

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
110
Location
Illinois
Display Name
Display name:
Needles
Well, this is new to me. I was training for an ATP certificate and was being trained by a CFI, and NOT a CFII. I was just reading through some stuff in the new, 2016 edition of the FAR/AIM (ASA) and happened to notice this re FAR 61.195(c): “A flight instructor who provides instrument training for ……, OR the instrument training required for commercial pilot AND AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT certificates must hold an instrument rating on his …. flight instructor certificate.”

When I was training at my local flight school, I never thought to look up any regs pertaining to the qualifications of an instructor who could train someone in ATP ops. Therefore, to “split the mellon,” I was wondering that because I DID receive flight instruction, just not "qualified" flight instruction, that my flight school could give me a credit for future flying of 1/2 of all my time spent with the instructor. [I’m not sure of any other way to resolve this mishap.] :mad2:

So, am I nuts to think that: (1) I should have known better; and, (2) to expect any type of credit or refund?????

Thanks in advance for all your advice, be it what I want to hear or not.:D
 
If you were paying an instructor and they weren't qualified to give the training you contracted for, you'd expect a FULL refund of the instruction time, I would assume.

Partial refund? NFW.

As far as whether or not you should have known better? Absolutely. You're about to be a professional pilot. Why you didn't know the FARs for instruction toward a professional rating, is beyond me. That's amateur hour.

But pay for an unqualified boob who also didn't know the regs to ride along in the airplane? No.

A performance of less than even minimum standards of all involved... Not good. Get it together. Seriously. You should have caught it on day one.
 
To be clear, are you saying you received "instrument training" from a CFI not a CFI-I? I'd say if the instructor signed your logbook for training he isn't allowed to give, he'll be in deep kimchee.
 
this is my opinon:
long story short... if you were training at a "pilot factory type school" you should DEMAND a refund! they almost certainly wont give you a full refund, but you should at least get all the fees back from the company that you paid for instruction.... They are in the business of spitting out pilots and if they are not doing this withing accordance with FARs then they owe you at least instruction fees back. I guess if they want to charge you for a/c rental, i dont think you'd win on that....

on the other hand, if it's a small local flight school, or an individual instructor... its probably an honest mistake and you should politely bring this to their attention and just move on...


BTW: im not a lawyer or anything. if you consider this legal advice, it is worth what you paid for it...
 
If your instruction was from an ATP,giving ATP instruction,not sure you have a case.
 
frfly172 said:
If your instruction was from an ATP,giving ATP instruction,not sure you have a case.
Click to expand...

Nope, just from a CF not II. I agree w/ you re: IF it were from an ATP, but that is not the case. Thank you.
 
AlanM said:
Nope, just from a CF not II. I agree w/ you re: IF it were from an ATP, but that is not the case. Thank you.
Click to expand...

He can give you the instruction, he just can't give you the instrument instruction.
 
N801BH said:
What does his sign off /lesson say in your log book..:dunno::dunno:
Click to expand...

What instrument approaches we did, with his signature as a CFI. [I guess I/he could make a case that he was merely a "safety pilot."]
 
denverpilot said:
If you were paying an instructor and they weren't qualified to give the training you contracted for, you'd expect a FULL refund of the instruction time, I would assume.

Partial refund? NFW.

As far as whether or not you should have known better? Absolutely. You're about to be a professional pilot. Why you didn't know the FARs for instruction toward a professional rating, is beyond me. That's amateur hour.

But pay for an unqualified boob who also didn't know the regs to ride along in the airplane? No.

A performance of less than even minimum standards of all involved... Not good. Get it together. Seriously. You should have caught it on day one.
Click to expand...

Broski-

He is a student pilot........ You know the book front to rear then, Or even now? Calm down son....that thin air is making you get angry.:nono:

OP...I'd say you have a valid claim. THEY are required to know the regs, not you. Your not a CFI, they are. They have to fallow the regs as it is THEIR responsibility to follow the regs and you are in good faith, purchasing a service.

If you go to the gas station and buy premium out of the premium pump, then find out the station is charging premium price and pumping regular, you have a tort. No diff here.
 
How did you find out your instructor was not a CFII? Did you look him up online? I will confess that I have never checked up on any of my instructors online, nor did I ask to see their certificates before there was an online.
 
Everskyward said:
How did you find out your instructor was not a CFII? Did you look him up online? I will confess that I have never checked up on any of my instructors online, nor did I ask to see their certificates before there was an online.
Click to expand...

I was told he was going to get his CFII "soon," and this was told to me by the Customer Service Manager of the flight school. He's the one who recommended the instructor to me, so, not even thinking of looking at Part 61, Subpart H re: flight instructors, I merely and stupidly and naively took his word that this particular instructor WAS qualified to train me for my ATP. I had an uneasy feeling in my stomach that he wasn't a CFII, but the CSM and I "used to" have a good relationship, so I trusted him. My fault though.:dunno:
 
Everskyward said:
How did you find out your instructor was not a CFII? Did you look him up online? I will confess that I have never checked up on any of my instructors online, nor did I ask to see their certificates before there was an online.
Click to expand...

I have always made sure my instructor (e.g. for IPC or BFR) signed my logbook with "CFII xxxxx" if we were shooting any approaches. I would consider it a waste of money otherwise. (This started long before the online era.)
 
RotorDude said:
I have always made sure my instructor (e.g. for IPC or BFR) signed my logbook with "CFII xxxxx" if we were shooting any approaches. I would consider it a waste of money otherwise. (This started long before the online era.)
Click to expand...
The number on your CFI certificate does not have an extra "I" after it. It just says 123456CFI. I don't sign with two "I"s even though I am a CFII. I would sign it that way if someone asked me to do so, but no one has.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
The number on your CFI certificate does not have an extra "I" after it and I don't sign it that way even though I am a CFII. I would sign it that way if someone asked me to do so but no one has.
Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of convention. In all the years/decades I've been doing reviews and whatnot, I've never had a CFII omit that extra I from the "CFII xxxxx exp. YYMMDD" template. Now in the online era, I take no chance and look them up as part of my due diligence.
Edit: From my perspective as a customer, assuming approaches were flown, it is that extra 'I' I am paying for, so I need to see it in writing in my logbook.
 
Last edited:
RotorDude said:
I guess it's a matter of convention. In all the years/decades I've been doing reviews and whatnot, I've never had a CFII omit that extra I from the "CFII xxxxx exp. YYMMDD" template.
Click to expand...
When you receive multiengine instrument instruction do you expect them to sign 123456CFIIMEI?

I only thought people used stuff like that in their signature line on POA. :D
 
Everskyward said:
The number on your CFI certificate does not have an extra "I" after it. It just says 123456CFI. I don't sign with two "I"s even though I am a CFII. I would sign it that way if someone asked me to do so, but no one has.
Click to expand...

Well that brings another question to light, "Will anyone notice?". As long as a CFII signs off the IACRA form for the ride, it'll probably slide in under the radar.
 
Everskyward said:
When you receive multiengine instrument instruction do you expect them to sign 123456CFIIMEI?

I only thought people used stuff like that in their signature line on POA. :D
Click to expand...

I don't put any ratings (or anything else) on my PoA sig, but do care a lot about that extra 'I' in the logbook entry, since that letter represents the essence of what I am paying for as a customer and (often) makes me legal to keep flying. So it's definitely not vanity for me.
 
Henning said:
Well that brings another question to light, "Will anyone notice?". As long as a CFII signs off the IACRA form for the ride, it'll probably slide in under the radar.
Click to expand...
Every time I have taken a checkride the examiner has known the instructor. In fact I have always used the examiner recommended by the instructor so that was never an issue for me. I thought that was generally the case but maybe not.
 
RotorDude said:
I don't put any ratings (or anything else) on my PoA sig, but do care a lot about that extra 'I' in the logbook entry, since that letter represents the essence of what I am paying for as a customer and (often) makes me legal to keep flying. So it's definitely not vanity for me.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the extra written "I" doesn't have any bearing on whether you are legal or not as long as the instructor was an instrument instructor, but if that's what you want it doesn't hurt.
 
Everskyward said:
I'm sure the extra written "I" doesn't have any bearing on whether you are legal or not as long as the instructor was an instrument instructor, but if that's what you want it doesn't hurt.
Click to expand...

I agree with you technically, but since I am the customer and paying for it, I prefer to have that qualification written out explicitly.
 
About 1/2 hour ago, before the T's started (as if that matters), I received a nasty email from the flight school's CSM saying that the CFI was qualified to give INSTRUMENT INSTRUCTION (even though the instructor was not a CFII). So, I paid lots of money for a safety pilot and I'm pretty sure that I won't see a dime. But........to satisfy my curiosity, I'm going to call my FSDO on Monday on a "no-name basis" and discuss the situation with them. That might give me some leverage in the financial side of life????
 
Last edited:
OK, another addendum. Here is the complete regulation, with emphasis added by me:
Here is the entire reg, with emphasis added by me:

“A flight instructor who provides INSTRUMENT TRAINING for the issuance of an instrument rating, a type rating not limited to VFR, or the INSTRUMENT TRAINING required for commercial pilot AND AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT CERTIFICATES MUST HOLD AN INSTRUMENT RATING on his or her pilot certificate AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft used for the training provided.”
FAR 61.195(c)

So, am I the one who is mis-reading the reg? My reading of it says that if I am getting instrument training for an ATP certificate, then the flight instructor must have an instrument rating on his/her flight instructor certificate.

What am I missing in my interpretation?????
 
RotorDude said:
I don't put any ratings (or anything else) on my PoA sig, but do care a lot about that extra 'I' in the logbook entry, since that letter represents the essence of what I am paying for as a customer and (often) makes me legal to keep flying. So it's definitely not vanity for me.
Click to expand...

The FARs require the instructor to enter their certificate number and the expiration date. The extra I is not part of the certificate number. Putting in extra letters or numbers would be falsification of the logbook. "CFII" is just a colloquialism.
 
AlanM said:
OK, another addendum. Here is the complete regulation, with emphasis added by me:
Here is the entire reg, with emphasis added by me:

“A flight instructor who provides INSTRUMENT TRAINING for the issuance of an instrument rating, a type rating not limited to VFR, or the INSTRUMENT TRAINING required for commercial pilot AND AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT CERTIFICATES MUST HOLD AN INSTRUMENT RATING on his or her pilot certificate AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft used for the training provided.”
FAR 61.195(c)

So, am I the one who is mis-reading the reg? My reading of it says that if I am getting instrument training for an ATP certificate, then the flight instructor must have an instrument rating on his/her flight instructor certificate.

What am I missing in my interpretation?????
Click to expand...

Well, I'm only playing devil's advocate here, but if you have met the minimum instrument training required for the ATP, then any additional would not require a double-I.
 
AlanM said:
OK, another addendum. Here is the complete regulation, with emphasis added by me:
Here is the entire reg, with emphasis added by me:

“A flight instructor who provides INSTRUMENT TRAINING for the issuance of an instrument rating, a type rating not limited to VFR, or the INSTRUMENT TRAINING required for commercial pilot AND AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT CERTIFICATES MUST HOLD AN INSTRUMENT RATING on his or her pilot certificate AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR CERTIFICATE that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft used for the training provided.”
FAR 61.195(c)

So, am I the one who is mis-reading the reg? My reading of it says that if I am getting instrument training for an ATP certificate, then the flight instructor must have an instrument rating on his/her flight instructor certificate.

What am I missing in my interpretation?????
Click to expand...

Your interpretation is correct if you are going to use that training as required training towards your ATP.
 
dmspilot said:
The FARs require the instructor to enter their certificate number and the expiration date. The extra I is not part of the certificate number. Putting in extra letters or numbers would be falsification of the logbook. "CFII" is just a colloquialism.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but I have never had a CFII sign my logbook as plain CFI (without any prodding). So that "colloquialism" must be deeply entrenched. Of course nowadays you can check everyone online and get their latest ratings, so it's become less critical, but I think most CFII's know that it is that extra 'I' their customers are paying for.
 
How many dollars into this are you? Is it worth taking them to small claims court?
 
Lindberg said:
To be clear, are you saying you received "instrument training" from a CFI not a CFI-I? I'd say if the instructor signed your logbook for training he isn't allowed to give, he'll be in deep kimchee.
Click to expand...
Turns out the instructor I was using early this year for the instrument is CFII but not current. I discovered this when we had some benign fog and I wanted to shoot approaches. He was quite honest about not being current and I missed some great actual. I'm not taking lessons from him anymore. And I still haven't finished the instrument.
 
Henning said:
How many dollars into this are you? Is it worth taking them to small claims court?
Click to expand...

Heck no. I'm just disappointed in getting "taken" by the CSM who set me up with the wrong instructor. I need to keep a good relationship w/ the flight school as they are the only ones at my airport who have a C172SP, G1000, KAP 140 in existence there. This is more ego/pride than the money -- it's long gone and I'm not going to waste my time doing a tally. IF, on the other hand, they agree to give me some flight time credit for the mistaken instruction, then that would be a bonus to me, and for that, I'm willing to pursue it to a polite end.
 
murphey said:
Turns out the instructor I was using early this year for the instrument is CFII but not current. I discovered this when we had some benign fog and I wanted to shoot approaches. He was quite honest about not being current and I missed some great actual. I'm not taking lessons from him anymore. And I still haven't finished the instrument.
Click to expand...

In your case the logbook entries (for simulated IMC) are valid, but the quality of instruction would suffer if the instructor is not a "real IFR" guy, so you did right in dumping him. Unfortunately very few CFIIs are real IFR guys, flying the system in low IFR day in and day out, in single pilot IFR operations. I was lucky that my own original CFII was of the latter category, and he was more than happy to have us fly most of my training IMC, including many low IFR approaches into our short home strip (served by a VOR 20 nm away, before GPS). I have little doubt IMC immersion training makes better IFR pilots.
 
Boy I must be out of the loop... I didn't think there was any training required for the ATP.
When I did mine, back in the day, an FAA logbook inspection was required just to take the written.... Along with a first class medical.
 
Kritchlow said:
Boy I must be out of the loop... I didn't think there was any training required for the ATP.
When I did mine, back in the day, an FAA logbook inspection was required just to take the written.... Along with a first class medical.
Click to expand...

The ATP check ride is a self-endorsed ride / you don't need a CFII to sign you off for the first ride, but unfortunately for me, I didn't completely pass the practical so now I need remedial training. Any training for the ATP, in my reading of Part 61, need to be given by a CFII. And, all you need now to take the check ride is a third class medical.:yes:
 
Okay... Thank you for clarifying. I now know that I don't have Alzheimer's.
 
AlanM said:
Heck no. I'm just disappointed in getting "taken" by the CSM who set me up with the wrong instructor. I need to keep a good relationship w/ the flight school as they are the only ones at my airport who have a C172SP, G1000, KAP 140 in existence there. This is more ego/pride than the money -- it's long gone and I'm not going to waste my time doing a tally. IF, on the other hand, they agree to give me some flight time credit for the mistaken instruction, then that would be a bonus to me, and for that, I'm willing to pursue it to a polite end.
Click to expand...

Go talk to the owner/big boss so at least he squares away the CSM on what is legal or not, they may make it up to you.
 
Henning said:
Go talk to the owner/big boss so at least he squares away the CSM on what is legal or not, they may make it up to you.
Click to expand...

Roger and Wilco. Telling the CSM that I'm going to talk to the FSDO on Monday on a "no-name" basis might get their collective arse going. Whatever. I now feel that I can't trust them as much as I used to....does this trust go to a/c maintenance too? It's the whole package that the trust issue involves.:rofl:
 
AlanM said:
Roger and Wilco. Telling the CSM that I'm going to talk to the FSDO on Monday on a "no-name" basis might get their collective arse going. Whatever. I now feel that I can't trust them as much as I used to....does this trust go to a/c maintenance too? It's the whole package that the trust issue involves.:rofl:
Click to expand...

Yeah, give the boss a chance to make it right first. Never bother complaining to the flunkies, they'll just try to cover their mistakes. Go straight to the boss.
 
At the flight schools I've been at, I would not expect a CSM to know that a CFII is required for remedial flight instruction due to a ATP failure. I think that's too in-depth for most CSMs. However, I think knowing how to read part 61 is well within bounds of an ATP candidate....

Talk to the Chief Pilot, go fly an hour with a Double-I, and move on with your life. Maybe you'll get a price break or maybe you won't. Before you make a fuss, recognize that the resulting negative networking may not be worth the $300 you save.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top