screwed part II
Gentlemen, a quick update on my situation.
Having had the detailed parts and labour independently scrutinised by two well respected individuals in the world of rotary engineering (who are based too far from me to offer their services and thus have no axe to grind) it appears that I have indeed been overcharged.
The markup on parts varied from 30-40% over Robinson base price - maintenance organisations purchase the parts for less than this and already generate profit by selling them AT base price. This extra margin presumably reflects some form of golden touch that the parts are given on their way into my machine?
Total labour time was probably exaggerated by 20% (i:e job could have been done in 40 rather than 50 hrs).
Some of the charges were dubious but difficult to contest.
Even use of outside contractors was marked up, the avionics check had an additional £110 added to what the contractor usually charges. i:e contractor charges HMO £140, they charge me £255 for NO added value except picking the phone up and calling him and giving him a brief period of hangar access.
My "£2800 complete new muffler assembly" consists of 11 or so sub-parts.
It is highly unlikely that all 11 parts were holed and required replacing. I could have paid a fraction of this total cost but was not offered this option. The fact that I was led down the garden path with this one really horrifies me.
The 3 week downtime for mag overhaul could have been avioded by pre-booking an overhaul slot rather than waiting for the aircraft to arrive and then having to join a long queue. The HMO knew the date I was booked for more than 1 month in advance. This is basic incompetence and shows little regard for my time and aircraft downtime.
I am saddened that the trust I had in these individuals was misplaced. It disappoints me to think that people whose business I sponsor have little regard for wasting my hard earned cash and basically ripping me off.
I will be taking issue with the maintenance organisation concerned and will contest elements of the bill all the way to court if necessary.
I shall also freely spead the word that this organisation have little compunction in overcharging their customers. Somebody else advised me that I was paying them through the nose 2 years ago but I stayed with them because I am very busy and didn't need the hassle of going elsewhere. Well they have made my mind up permanently.
I would give this "new management team" 18 months max before they lose their existing customer base and the business collapses. In the meantime I'll happily fly a little further for a better deal - they have milked this cash cow once too often.
SB