Wings of Hope Fall 2018 Raffle airplane announced

did WoH agree to cover the cost to repair or agree to help fix the issue? reason I ask is, they (or anyone else) might have been able to fix the issue for $1000 but you went and racked up over $20k is repairs. so, there should have been very specific details worked out between the two of you on who/what/when/where is going to be repaired and exactly what WoH is willing to cover. it wasn't a blank check for you to spend however you wanted. and I'm not saying that's how it happened, just saying we are hearing your side of the story and quite frankly some of it sounds hard to believe.

with all that being said, while I did participate in one (and only one) WoH raffle, I have my own opinion about donated planes in general. and it isn't favorable. I know, I know, "but I have a plane that was donated and it's fine blah blah...". I"m not saying it can't work, I'm sure it can, but shame on the person who doesn't do their do diligence with one of them.
 
@scorpio Again - they may not have had any duty to pay for it. But they offered to do so. An offer on which I acted and thus incurred liability that I would not have otherwise had. By offering to pay, they accepted a duty to pay - do you disagree?
 
@Wade I may contact you about this in the next couple of days if you don't mind. That said, I wouldn't walk away with $10k. I *might* recover a portion of the other money spent housing and insuring the airplane and pursuing a resolution.
 
did WoH agree to cover the cost to repair or agree to help fix the issue? reason I ask is, they (or anyone else) might have been able to fix the issue for $1000 but you went and racked up over $20k is repairs. so, there should have been very specific details worked out between the two of you on who/what/when/where is going to be repaired and exactly what WoH is willing to cover. it wasn't a blank check for you to spend however you wanted. and I'm not saying that's how it happened, just saying we are hearing your side of the story and quite frankly some of it sounds hard to believe.

with all that being said, while I did participate in one (and only one) WoH raffle, I have my own opinion about donated planes in general. and it isn't favorable. I know, I know, "but I have a plane that was donated and it's fine blah blah...". I"m not saying it can't work, I'm sure it can, but shame on the person who doesn't do their do diligence with one of them.


@eman1200 "We will be glad to cover the cost of repairs" is a direct quote. It was made in response to seeing an itemized squawk list of the proposed repairs to be addressed.
 
@eman1200 Offhand I don't believe that list did carry pricing, but I'm not certain and don't have it in front of my at this very moment. But the Director of Maintenance for WoH surely knows approximately what repairs on a C172 run, wouldn't you think? They didn't ask for more info, they offered, quite clearly, to cover the cost, in response to that document. The repairs performed were what was on that document and the pricing was (per everyone I have since asked) right in line with what they should be.

Ultimately, I realize now that if I wanted to be protected I should have had an inspection performed before accepting the plane, I should have had legal contracts for every single discussion, I should have done many things....but do any of us operate like that? Would you think that a large public-facing organization like WoH would make a clear and concise offer, in writing, and then outright refuse to honor it? I certainly wouldn't.

Let's not forget, this is not some guy from craigslist/trade-a-plane/barnstormers or anywhere else who's selling a plane that turns out to have some fudged info. This is a written offer from the Director of Maintenance for a large, registered charity with a fleet of aircraft, offering to cover the costs of a detailed list of repairs on an airframe he is familiar with, and of the charity then refusing to do so.
 
The offer/acceptance issue would come down to the minutia of the communications to determine if you and WoH had a binding contract with sufficiently clear terms and a meeting of the minds. Whether that happened is anyone's guess.
 
@scorpio Obviously that's true. It's also a question for my attorney and myself. My point in posting here wasn't to look for legal advice. It was as stated - to inform others that I have found WOH to be unreliable. Whether they can be legally held accountable is not a question for a forum. Whether doing so is possible without spending even more than they are avoiding paying is another question, also not for a forum. But frankly I am certain that anyone here would have taken the message I received as I took it and expected the organization to honor their offer. I am simply warning others that this apparently is not how WoH operates. Moreover, I know that I'm not the only one who has suffered less than stellar treatment from them because others have contacted me privately.

What does surprise me (but probably shouldn't in a forum at this point) is how everyone's response is to tell me why I shouldn't be surprised that they're ignoring a promise made to me. Or what I should/could have done better. Yes, as I said, I could have asked for contracts and inspections and all sorts of things. But really, does everyone believe that it's perfectly reasonable for WoH (or anyone for that matter) to make such a promise and then refuse to follow through?

I'll note that despite at least one request we have not heard from WoH - I suspect because @Ken Pedersen may be trying to be informed before responding - I suspect he was unaware of this situation. Or perhaps they would prefer not to comment since what I've said is accurate.
 
You are making a whole bunch of legal conclusions that may or may not correct. You may be 100% correct or 100% wrong. Frankly, I'm surprised they responded for your request for payment 2 years after having the plane with anything but, "sorry there are issues, but once we turn over the keys we can't be responsible for any discovered issues."
 
@scorpio I didn't make a request for payment. I made a request for information. They offered payment, then backed away after the fact. That's the whole point.
 
... I have my own opinion about donated planes in general. and it isn't favorable. ...

And as they sell some of the donated planes and raffle others, one might wonder as to the criteria involved in deciding which to sell and which to raffle off. Cynical, I know.

@HamishTHaggis Aviation ain't cheap, even when it starts off to be. You got a used plane of unknown condition for the price of a $50 raffle ticket. It took $20,000 to make it airworthy according to your mechanic. So now you have a used plane that cost you $20,000 plus a bit more for other items. Still a good deal though maybe not what you bargained for as you wanted a basically free plane. We get that. If I were to win a used plane raffle, I would not be a bit surprised to find a fair amount of work to be done to make the airplane satisfactory to me. I would definitely not expect a cherry. See my minor cynicism in my reply to eman above. Though I would expect it to be in airworthy condition at the time of transfer as they are usually advertised with a fresh annual. If there were airworthiness issues when you took possession of the aircraft and if it was advertised as having a fresh annual, then you might have a case against the IA if not wings of hope. If nothing else, you could document everything and let the IA's FSDO know about everything via a hotline complaint.

There is the old saying "buyer beware", well I'd say when it comes to these raffles "winner beware" is great advice as well. I'm sure it's a bit disappointing that your $50 plane turned into a $20,000 plane but I'm sure you could easily sell it and easily recoup all your investment and put some money in your pocket. In the end, your $50 ticket will probably yield you several thousand dollars. Not so much of a raw deal.

If its now airworthy I'll buy it for 30k and you can put 10k in your pocket. Problem solved.

Seems like a fair offer.
 
No disrespect intended here @SkyDog58 - yes aviation is expensive, etc. All of this is true. I've already said as much. But the bottom line is that isn't really relevant anymore. When I had a plane with problems, I had a challenge I needed to resolve. I could have done many things - financing repairs, selling the aircraft, selling a share, hammering out some deal with a repair station etc. But WoH stepped up and said they'd take care of it. Frankly, that was a stand-up move and I happen to believe it was the right one under the circumstances. Nobody seems to want to recognize that WoH chose to do this of their own accord - but the whole issue stems from that clear commitment on their part. That changed the situation substantially. You are advocating "Buyer (or winner) beware" - that's precisely what I said in my initial statement.

You and everyone else seem happy to offer advice on how I should be thrilled that someone put me in a situation where I'm on the hook for all this money and then walked away. The fact remains, my situation, while not ideal, was better without that offer if they weren't going to follow through. I, and the repair station, are both on the hook because WoH promised to cover the repair costs then chose not to. I have a lot of trouble understanding why everyone seems to think that's ok.

Could they have said "sorry, not our problem?" They could have, and it might well have stuck, though there's certainly an argument to be made that they were already responsible. But that isn't really relevant now. They didn't say that. They didn't say "sold as-is," in fact they didn't have that in the listing, paperwork or acceptance documents for the raffle, nor was it stated anywhere for the raffle I won. All they really said was something along the lines of "1972 C172L in great condition....". But again, even if they had "sold" it as-is (they didn't), that's all secondary now. They offered to cover the cost of repairing a known list of issues. The repair work was authorized on the basis of that offer. They then decided to leave me and the repair station in the lurch. That's not responsible or respectable behavior in my book. Is it in yours?
 
I think the best course of action with airplane raffles is to sell the plane and then use the proceeds to purchase the plane that is right for you. You can keep the random plane that landed in your lap, or carefully select from the vast market of available planes.
 
@Stingray Don At this point, with the benefit of hindsight, I would have to agree with you.
I think the best course of action with airplane raffles is to sell the plane and then use the proceeds to purchase the plane that is right for you. You can keep the random plane that landed in your lap, or carefully select from the vast market of available planes.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Quite. At the time when I won, it was precisely the kind of aircraft i needed - I was after all a student with a whopping 10 hours or so in my logbook.
 
Hey all - I know a lot of people get excited by these raffles, and I used to be among them. In fact I won the raffle in 2015. But I must urge a certain degree of caution based on my experience unfortunately. Given this is a forum, I’ll try to keep this reasonably short, but I can elaborate and document if anyone has a particular interest. My primary reason for writing is to shed some light to some disingenuous, dishonest and/or bad-faith behaviors I’ve experienced from Wings of Hope over the last year and hopefully prevent someone else from ending up in a similar situation. Admittedly, there is an element of self serving here in that I still hope WoH will ultimately make good on their promises but even if not, I hope not to see someone else get burned. I’ve summarized immediately below, with a longer (but still abbreviated) explanation below that.


SUPER-SHORT OVERVIEW:

Wings of Hope made a promise, in writing, to cover the cost repairs to my aircraft related to structural problems that predated my owning it. The amount due is over $20k. Seemingly at the whim of a relatively new CEO, WoH have delayed, refused and avoided payment for nearly a year and I am now forced to sell the aircraft to cover the repair costs. This leaves me with no aircraft, a year behind in my training and with thousands spent on insurance and hangar for a year without use of the plane, not to mention hours spent pursuing a resolution, obnoxious if not abusive treatment by WoH’s CEO and being portrayed as a liar and worse by him to the repair station who worked on the plane. I respect what Wings of Hope purports to do, and support aviation charity, but I must advise against trusting their word (or in fact written claims) and I certainly do not respect or approve of the current CEO or his approach to dealing with supporters.


MORE INFORMATION:

As mentioned above I won the 2015 raffle. The prize was a 1972 C172L with a STOL kit that was claimed to be “in great condition” and was offered with a fresh annual. Initially all dealings were great - the airplane looked and felt good, and I proceeded to finish my PPL in it. WoH had to issue a second Bill of Sale because I was registering to an LLC and the first one wasn’t a perfect match so the FAA rejected it - WoH was responsive and helpful in that process. The only real trouble with the plane was that we never had complete logs - logs were from 1990 onward, coinciding with a new engine being installed.


We encountered a few service items along the way but figured it was an older airplane (and a nearly free one at that), so we fixed them and moved on. Last year (Feb 2017) we started an annual which found a number of issues, then as we started to put the plane back together we discovered that the STOL kit had been installed over damaged wings. This precipitated careful inspection of the flight surfaces and we found a number of discrepancies of a structural nature which my A&P said were airworthiness issues.

At this point I contacted WoH in the (faint) hopes that they might have more information than we had received. I spoke with the Director of Maintenance at that time, one Steve Long, who suggested we seek a second opinion. We did so, asking a group specializing in structural repair to look the plane over. They generated a nearly identical set of squawks, and reiterated that they were airworthiness issues. These structural issues predated my owning the aircraft, but being a student pilot I didn’t know enough to recognize them and we didn’t ask (nor did WoH offer or suggest) a “pre-buy” type inspection. I sent the second inspection back to Steve Long since we had been discussing the situation, and asked again for any input he might have. To reiterate - we asked for information.


At this point WoH, via Steve Long, responded (in a longer message) that “We will be glad to cover the cost of repairs.” I was surprised, but thankful and responded in kind, thanking him for that support. This was particularly helpful as the resulting bill was more than I could approve without making some other arrangements. We then approved the repairs to be made by the specialist who had done the second inspection. That work was completed in November 2017 (excepting the airbox which they withheld pending payment).


To date WoH has refused to honor this offer, made in writing, by the head of their maintenance department. The CEO has been rude to me and to the repair station, has suggested that it’s ridiculous for us to ask them to pay (we didn’t until they offered in writing and we acted upon that offer), and has suggested that they bear no responsibility (I must respectfully disagree - they may not have had any before promising to pay, but I believe they certainly do now). I am in the midst of finalizing a formal agreement with the repair station to sell the aircraft and hopefully cover the ~$21k repair cost after which I will no longer have an airplane. I’ll have spend thousands of dollars on hangering and insuring the aircraft, delayed my flight training by over a year, and spent many hours and dollars pursuing the payment that was promised clearly in writing.


Along the way WoH has claimed they desired to settle the issue by non-cash methods and suggested various measures including buying parts at discounted rates for the repair station, giving another aircraft to the repair station, etc. The repair station was not willing to accept such offers in lieu of payment and pointed out (correctly i think) that the time for such offers would have been before the work was done, not after payment was due. When we (my attorney and I) recently suggested that perhaps WoH could offer another comparable aircraft to me instead (since I’m now selling the first one to cover the payment they are refusing to make) they asked a number of vague questions and have avoided making any offer to resolve the matter in the method they claim to prefer. I’m left forced to believe it was not a good-faith offer, merely an attempt at misdirection or delay.


In short...I owe over $20k to a repair station for repairs WoH had promised to cover, have spent thousands more on hanger and insurance of the aircraft that has been grounded for over 18 months, nearly a year of that awaiting the promised payment from WoH who have seemingly been using all the various suggestions purely as a delay tactic. I’ve been sent obnoxious and unreasonable letters from the CEO, been made out to be a liar to the repair station by his responses to them, and generally abused by an organization I formerly respected. I’m now forced to sell the aircraft to make good on the bill, and will then effectively be out a year of training time and thousands of dollars. I’d have been better off in terms of my training if I’d never won, even including the scholarship that came with the aircraft. Obviously more aggressive legal action is a very likely next step, but the fact remains that WoH has not stood by their word, or their aircraft.


On that basis, while I wholeheartedly support the purported mission of WoH and much of the work they do, I must advise anyone considering buying into this raffle to act cautiously. Insist on inspection of the aircraft before accepting it. And certainly don’t take anything on the word of WoH - if it isn’t in writing I wouldn’t trust it, and frankly at this point I don’t think you can trust what is in writing either. I certainly couldn’t.
Wow thanks for the heads up!!!
 
I would think, WoH aside, that you’d have a case against whomever did the prior annual and/or installed the STOL package if it could be reasonably likely that it was done while covering up known damage. I don’t know how much the agreement to pay from WoH would hold up in court, but it seems as though it would be worth it for them to split the difference at a minimum. I’d definitely recommend a pre-buy before accepting the raffle A/C (hindsight 20/20 and all) so that you can decline it if it results in a money pit from the start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
How many annuals were done when you owned the plan? You indicate you had a few service items along the way. Nobody caught this issue? I have a feeling that if you had purchased this aircraft you'd likely just be stuck.
I think you're missing the point. They said they'd fix it. They are not honoring their word. Personally, I've always viewed WoH with a somewhat jaundiced eye.
 
@SoonerAviator Possible legal actions aside (because PoA isn't the right forum), I also would've expected WOH to stand by their word.

@timwinters Thank you - this is my point. Whether they had to or not, they chose to make the offer, and offer on which I have now relied.
 
I'll note that despite at least one request we have not heard from WoH - I suspect because @Ken Pedersen may be trying to be informed before responding - I suspect he was unaware of this situation. [/QUOTE]

Correct..... I've represented Wings of Hope on this message board since our raffles began and you've always heard the straight story from me. Over the years and many plane winners this is the only negative feedback I've heard. I have the utmost respect for the honesty and ethics of Wings' organization and its officers. No doubt there's another side to this issue. Suffice to say all of the above has been communicated to those involved. Let me dig into this and in the interim we'd appreciate everyone's withholding judgement.
 
I do believe there is another side to this story, but I have no preconceptions as to the truth. I will wait until Ken reports back.

I will say that when I owned my business, there were instances of employees saying things to clients that they had no business saying and did mislead the client. That can set up some serious client communication problems and negative customer experiences. Ongoing training and open and ethical business practices are about the only way to fight that when employees (or volunteers) are involved. But even when an employee misled a client, we bent over backwards to accommodate the client and make things right. It couldn't always be done, but at least the bad will was often reduced. But sometimes, nothing you do after the fact can remedy the damage.

I hope both of you come out of this feeling like you have been treated fairly and honestly.
 
I would think, WoH aside, that you’d have a case against whomever did the prior annual and/or installed the STOL package if it could be reasonably likely that it was done while covering up known damage. I don’t know how much the agreement to pay from WoH would hold up in court, but it seems as though it would be worth it for them to split the difference at a minimum. I’d definitely recommend a pre-buy before accepting the raffle A/C (hindsight 20/20 and all) so that you can decline it if it results in a money pit from the start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If it was covering up leading edge dings with a cuff, hey, I've seen that done, and I've seen a lot of dinged wings on flying planes. If the airplane was still airworthy (ours was, even after a hailstorm that left the wing looking like a flattened golf ball) then that is that. But some A&P determined that it was not (perhaps another would say differently.) Still, the issue is that the OP says that he acted in good faith upon the statement of WoH. Soon, "The Rest of the Story", I hope.
 
@Kenny Phillips An A&P determined it was not airworthy. WoH suggested he might be overly conservative and encouraged a second opinion. We pursued a second opinion from another A&P, who concurred. Then WoH offered to cover repair costs, hence the situation now.

@Ken Pedersen I appreciate you taking the time to try to be informed. I am sure this was not on your radar, your CEO and counsel have been dealing with this, if one wants to call it that. From my perspective they've mostly been avoiding dealing with it. As to negative feedback, I have been contacted privately by another winner who wasn't thrilled with aspects of his experience either, though he has since sold the aircraft and I don't believe he's posted publicly. Take that as you will.
 
Sounds to me like an agreement was made to cover repairs but the repairs far exceeded woh expectations. Lesson to be learned from both parties involved..
 
@Grum.Man Could be....but I would think the head of a maintenance department with a fleet of similar aircraft would have a pretty good idea of the cost of repairs. And if he didn't, why make the offer without asking?
 
@Grum.Man Could be....but I would think the head of a maintenance department with a fleet of similar aircraft would have a pretty good idea of the cost of repairs. And if he didn't, why make the offer without asking?

My guess is had they known the cost they would have just refunded your ticket and taken the plane back and parted it out. They could have put two used wings on it for 10k versus repairing what was there.
 
@Grum.Man Again, you may be right, but they had the list of issues, which was not limited to the wings. They didn't ask for any additional info or pricing or anything before offering. And I still believe someone in that position must have had a reasonable idea what the cost would be.
 
@Grum.Man Again, you may be right, but they had the list of issues, which was not limited to the wings. They didn't ask for any additional info or pricing or anything before offering. And I still believe someone in that position must have had a reasonable idea what the cost would be.

Can you provide us the detailed list that was sent to WoH? Not that it will change anything but I'm sure everyone is curious now.
 
@Grum.Man As I've said before, my point in posting here isn't to put this situation to trial in the court of public opinion. That said, I have no particular objection to sharing - I'll ask my attorney if he has any objection to my doing so.
 
All you are doing is putting the situation on trial in the court of public opinion. Your stated intent is to impact public opinion. I suspect you intent is monetary, but that’s not what you said.
 
@scorpio You're of course entitled to that opinion. I was actually advising people to exercise caution in pursuing raffle entries, and giving rationale for doing so based on my experience.

Would I like WoH to ultimately make good on their offer? Yes, of course I would, and I said so. But PoA is not the path for that. PoA is a good way for me to encourage others to treat the raffle as any purchase, consider the risks, and do more homework than I did.
 
I mean for a $75.00 ticket there isn't much risk. Even if it's junk and you sale it for scrap metal it's a pretty good deal. I would be sour in your position as well since the work was completed and now nobody wants to pay. The proper path should have been a written estimate and a check written before hand for the repairs or a signed contract with the repair facility.
 
Gentlemen, I'll have to back away from this one since the above messages mentioned the involvement of an attorney. Legal matters, pending or current, are well above my volunteer pay grade. Yes, there are 2 sides to this issue and I also hope for an equitable agreement. Thanks for your continuing support of our mission of changing and saving lives through the power of aviation.
 
I have seen STOL kits installed to conceal damage on aircraft prior to reading this thread.

Raffle ticket buyer beware!

First clue: Donated airplane
Second clue: Missing log books
Third clue: STOL kit
Fourth Clue: Annual performed “in house”.

In hindsight, before accepting an airplane into your life, be sure a trusted mechanic has looked it over extensively.

Moral: If you think it’s too good to be true, you are probably right.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top