Should I Refuse to Pay My FBO?

docmirror said:
Despite my emoticon, should someone want to buy a unique plane, this could be the one. I'm not in the market but for anyone who's ever sat in the Navion, it's rather impressive.

At $30k for two airplanes, four engines, four props, and a boat trailer, the deal is looking better all the time(but don't tell Tom I said it). :lol:
Click to expand...

Might be had for 1/3rd of that which will be more than he gets at the scrapper.
 
Geico266 said:
Talk them first. I would not pay it. If a transponder is required where you are the plane was not airworthy.
Click to expand...

A/C are airworthy with out transponders.

How did the FBO know the Transponder did not work prior to the release of the aircraft?

I do not believe the FBO should charge for the flight.

Did you log the flight time, landings?
That is worth some thing.
 
docmirror said:
(but don't tell Tom I said it). :lol:
Click to expand...

You can run but you can't hide :)

Tell me we have a deal working and ?? see what happens.

we have one other company expressing an interest. but money talks and BS walks.
 
You're probably not the only frustrated renter in that area. Partnership maybe? :dunno: That way you're no longer renting, but you're also not all in either.
 
You paid to fly a plane. You got to fly a plane and log the flight time. You should still have to pay.

However, they may end up showing good faith.
 
wickedsprint said:
You paid to fly a plane. You got to fly a plane and log the flight time. You should still have to pay.
Click to expand...

If I rent a car to go to lunch and as I drive off the lot the check engine light comes on. So I circle around and come back in should I pay in that scenario? I wanted to drive a car, I did, so I owe?

I believe the test is that he did not get to use the plane as intended to go to a destination, the problem was not a pre-flight item, and he returned immediately upon discovery of the issue.
 
Alexb2000 said:
If I rent a car to go to lunch and as I drive off the lot the check engine light comes on. So I circle around and come back in should I pay in that scenario? I wanted to drive a car, I did, so I owe?

I believe the test is that he did not get to use the plane as intended to go to a destination, the problem was not a pre-flight item, and he returned immediately upon discovery of the issue.
Click to expand...

In both situations a rental agreement likely applies; therein lies the answer.
 
Last edited:
What does the FBO rental agreement say,hopefully you reviewed it before signing. A conversation with the FBO owner,or manager would help me decide if being charged was appropriate . If I didn't feel good after talking I would probably pay the bill,and post my displeasure on every site on the net. Loss of customers and their good will are worth something.
 
So far, I have not heard back from the FBO. I wrote them again this morning to request that the bill be cancelled. I'm considering reporting this on the FAA ASRS site, since I was technically (if only briefly) flying an aircraft that was not airworthy. Any thoughts on this?
 
VWGhiaBob said:
So far, I have not heard back from the FBO. I wrote them again this morning to request that the bill be cancelled. I'm considering reporting this on the FAA ASRS site, since I was technically (if only briefly) flying an aircraft that was not airworthy. Any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

Did you write them or call them ?
Call them before you do anything.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
So far, I have not heard back from the FBO. I wrote them again this morning to request that the bill be cancelled. I'm considering reporting this on the FAA ASRS site, since I was technically (if only briefly) flying an aircraft that was not airworthy. Any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

GET IT RIGHT. It's not airworthiness. The transponder is not required by 91.205, it's not an ELT, and it's not required for airframe certification. It's an airSPACE violation because you're less than 30 nm from KLAX. An erroneous NASA form serves no one any purpose whatsoever.
 
MAKG1 said:
GET IT RIGHT. It's not airworthiness. The transponder is not required by 91.205, it's not an ELT, and it's not required for airframe certification. It's an airSPACE violation because you're less than 30 nm from KLAX. An erroneous NASA form serves no one any purpose whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I don't see how a flawless one one would serve any purpose here.

What could the pilot have done differently?

40 year old transponders fail. You usually find out about it from ATC.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
So far, I have not heard back from the FBO. I wrote them again this morning to request that the bill be cancelled. I'm considering reporting this on the FAA ASRS site, since I was technically (if only briefly) flying an aircraft that was not airworthy. Any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...
Go to the FBO in person, and talk to them. Alternatively, call them. In this day of email and texting, sometimes it easy to forget that person to person often works better. Reporting via the ASRS system is an interesting thought, but I am not sure it will provide any additional clarification. You had a transponder failure, it was identified appropriately, and dealt with appropriately. Your beef is not the plane was airworthy, but that it was not "proper" for your flight. You planned a cross country through airspace that required a functional transponder, the transponder was not functional, and therefore you could not fly. My guess is that they will see your point and make it up to you.
 
Good News!

Finally heard back after multiple inquiries! They have agreed to withdraw the bill and will not charge me.

Now I just have to figure out what plane to buy...getting really tired of cancelling trips due to older planes that have so many issues (recent: failed vacuum, failed strobe, failed rudder connection, bad transponder, cracked cylinder head...arrrggghh!).

C172 Glass with BRS Parachute?
Cirrus SR20?
Cirrus SR22?
Steam PA 28 or C172 with iPad?
Older Cirrus with steam, plus Foreflight?

So many decisions; so much complexity.
 
Re: Good News!

VWGhiaBob said:
Finally heard back after multiple inquiries! They have agreed to withdraw the bill and will not charge me.

Now I just have to figure out what plane to buy...getting really tired of cancelling trips due to older planes that have so many issues (recent: failed vacuum, failed strobe, failed rudder connection, bad transponder, cracked cylinder head...arrrggghh!).

C172 Glass with BRS Parachute?
Cirrus SR20?
Cirrus SR22?
Steam PA 28 or C172 with iPad?
Older Cirrus with steam, plus Foreflight?

So many decisions; so much complexity.
Click to expand...


RV-10 :D
 
Re: Good News!

VWGhiaBob said:
Finally heard back after multiple inquiries! They have agreed to withdraw the bill and will not charge me.

Now I just have to figure out what plane to buy...getting really tired of cancelling trips due to older planes that have so many issues (recent: failed vacuum, failed strobe, failed rudder connection, bad transponder, cracked cylinder head...arrrggghh!).

C172 Glass with BRS Parachute?
Cirrus SR20?
Cirrus SR22?
Steam PA 28 or C172 with iPad?
Older Cirrus with steam, plus Foreflight?

So many decisions; so much complexity.
Click to expand...
I am sure you know this but the only difference between renting the plane and buying the plane is that you get to pay for the repairs.
 
Well I assume as an owner that I get to set the maintenace standards (high) and there's less wear and tear on a plane that's not 40+ years old and being beat up by student pilots every day. Therefore, hopefully, I have less downtime.

Am I wrong?
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Well I assume as an owner that I get to set the maintenace standards (high) and there's less wear and tear on a plane that's not 40+ years old and being beat up by student pilots every day. Therefore, hopefully, I have less downtime.

Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
You get to set the standards and pay for them. A plane that is not used enough often fends worse than a plane that is use "too much." All I am trying to say is that there are definite advantages to plane ownership, and there are definite advantages to renting. Which one is best for you really is a personal decision. Just remember because you are the only one flying it does not mean you will not have problems. My 2007 T182T which I have owned for just over two and a half years has gone through multiple probes, a tire, a tube(just after the tire was replaced), a PFD X 2, a transponder, a nav/com, repairs to the nose wheel pants, brakes, in addition to the oil changes every twenty five hrs, annual, fuel, hangar, insurance, cleaning, extra oil(one quart in between oil changes), etc. My friend just had an overhaul on his Grunman and it is two months later and he is having his plane finally.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Well I assume as an owner that I get to set the maintenace standards (high) and there's less wear and tear on a plane that's not 40+ years old and being beat up by student pilots every day. Therefore, hopefully, I have less downtime.

Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Yes, short of wheels tires and brakes our flight school planes aren't any worse than most of the private fleet I see, and all to often better
 
Bob,
Are you uncomfortable dealing with issues face to face? This isn't even a dispute until they have rejected your request. If I were the other party and stumbled across this thread, I'd be a little disgruntled at three pages of some what adversarial discussion before I've even been made aware of the issue and had a chance to address it. Step one is TALK to a person, preferably face to face but at least on the phone. If the result isn't what you want, that is the time to start looking at various other possibilities to achieve an out come that is acceptable to you. Running the issue up the flag pole very publicly as the first step is unlikely to be productive.
 
If you can get a couple of partners the transition from renter to owner will be easier.

Because as an owner you never pay the 'daily minimum', but you still pay for failed vacuum, failed strobe, failed rudder connection, bad transponder, cracked cylinder head, tires and oil, tie down, insurance, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Spreading the pain of these things makes them easier to take.
 
wickedsprint said:
You paid to fly a plane. You got to fly a plane and log the flight time. You should still have to pay.

However, they may end up showing good faith.
Click to expand...

Not everybody flies a plane to fly and log time. Some people fly planes because we need to get somewhere. If I cannot leave and complete my flight because the equipment is not functioning, not only do I not expect to pay for the aborted flight, if it comes down to it, I'll counter sue for my time wasted test flying their POS.
 
Henning said:
Not everybody flies a plane to fly and log time. Some people fly planes because we need to get somewhere. If I cannot leave and complete my flight because the equipment is not functioning, not only do I not expect to pay for the aborted flight, if it comes down to it, I'll counter sue for my time wasted test flying their POS.
Click to expand...
Counter sue? To counter sue don't you have to be responding to an initial lawsuit.

But why sue? Do you think they really wanted to rent you a plane without a transponder? So you could not fly, you wasted some time. Do you sue Walmart when the POS chinese built thingamajig does not work when you get it home, or do you just return it and get your money back?
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Well I assume as an owner that I get to set the maintenace standards (high) and there's less wear and tear on a plane that's not 40+ years old and being beat up by student pilots every day. Therefore, hopefully, I have less downtime.

Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

You're wrong

The age isn't as important as how it was maintaiend and flown.

I've flown crapped out 2000+ year planes, I've flown flawless planes from the 40s and vise versa.

I'd look into experimentals as well, try to rent as many different types first to get a feel for what you want to buy. Search nationwide and don't be afraid to book a airline ticket.
 
douglas393 said:
Counter sue? To counter sue don't you have to be responding to an initial lawsuit.

But why sue? Do you think they really wanted to rent you a plane without a transponder? So you could not fly, you wasted some time. Do you sue Walmart when the POS chinese built thingamajig does not work when you get it home, or do you just return it and get your money back?
Click to expand...

That's why I said 'comes down to it', they would have to sue me for the rental, at that point I would counter sue. I understand that things break and I'll trade my wasted time for finding out that your stuff broke, but I'm not paying for taking the plane around the pattern when I intended to take it across the state. Unless they sue me for the rental, I'm good to just walk away.
 
Re: Good News!

VWGhiaBob said:
Finally heard back after multiple inquiries! They have agreed to withdraw the bill and will not charge me.

Now I just have to figure out what plane to buy...getting really tired of cancelling trips due to older planes that have so many issues (recent: failed vacuum, failed strobe, failed rudder connection, bad transponder, cracked cylinder head...arrrggghh!).

C172 Glass with BRS Parachute?
Cirrus SR20?
Cirrus SR22?
Steam PA 28 or C172 with iPad?
Older Cirrus with steam, plus Foreflight?

So many decisions; so much complexity.
Click to expand...

Bonanza.
 
Re: Good News!

N801BH said:
:yes::lol:....


Till you need some OEM replacement parts for it.............. There is not enough K/Y jelly in California to help with that act..:no::eek:
Click to expand...

Beech is no worse than Cessna, Piper, Mooney, or anyone else, besides, rarely will you pay to replace an OEM Beech part with new, typically that will happen in an insured incident. Most of the time parts replaced are third party parts common to all the brands as in engine and accessory parts.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Well I assume as an owner that I get to set the maintenace standards (high) and there's less wear and tear on a plane that's not 40+ years old and being beat up by student pilots every day. Therefore, hopefully, I have less downtime.

Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
It's not just wear and tear. The fact is, airplanes just need a lot of maintenance, and the more complicated the airplane the more it will need. You WILL know your mechanic by name, and (s)he will know you. Can you say that about your car?
 
Re: Good News!

N801BH said:
:yes::lol:....


Till you need some OEM replacement parts for it.............. There is not enough K/Y jelly in California to help with that act..:no::eek:
Click to expand...

Price a Piper fuel selector or stall switch, or better yet, copy of an AFM.

In six years of ownership of brands B and P, I've never had to buy an OEM part off the shelf. Actually, I have a few, A bushing that was $14.00 and an exhaust hangar that was $12.00 oh and my gear up warning switch, it was $20.00 maybe $30.00 or so.
 
Henning said:
That's why I said 'comes down to it', they would have to sue me for the rental, at that point I would counter sue. I understand that things break and I'll trade my wasted time for finding out that your stuff broke, but I'm not paying for taking the plane around the pattern when I intended to take it across the state. Unless they sue me for the rental, I'm good to just walk away.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. However, I would suspect they would send you to collections before they sue you.
 
Ken Ibold said:
The fact is, airplanes just need a lot of maintenance, and the more complicated the airplane the more it will need. You WILL know your mechanic by name, and (s)he will know you.
Click to expand...

I feel like printing that out and hanging it over my bed.

Well said, I'm living it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top