Flying school aircraft develops fault - who pays?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying school aircraft develops fault - who pays?
All
I'm a "returning" PPL and have an interesting connundrum.
I went flying recently in a school aircraft, with an instructor on-board on a navex.
All was going well, 20 minutes into the flight, knew exactly where I was etc
Then the plane develops a technical fault, so instructor makes executive decision to abandon the navex and return to base.
The plane we were flying was 3 hours off its next scheduled overhaul ... I had to foot the bill for the 40 minutes or so airborne even though their plane goes faulty ...
I paid for the time without argument as I still have training to do with the school but being a novice, not sure what the "done thing" is ... Are they right to make me pay or should I have been a little more vocal and expected some kind of compromise on the price?
I'm a "returning" PPL and have an interesting connundrum.
I went flying recently in a school aircraft, with an instructor on-board on a navex.
All was going well, 20 minutes into the flight, knew exactly where I was etc
Then the plane develops a technical fault, so instructor makes executive decision to abandon the navex and return to base.
The plane we were flying was 3 hours off its next scheduled overhaul ... I had to foot the bill for the 40 minutes or so airborne even though their plane goes faulty ...
I paid for the time without argument as I still have training to do with the school but being a novice, not sure what the "done thing" is ... Are they right to make me pay or should I have been a little more vocal and expected some kind of compromise on the price?
You flew the aircraft, you can log the hours, you pay the bill; as a returning PPL you should be aware these things happen. Should the instructor go unpaid because the aircraft developed a problem? I see no conundrum.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as a returning PPL you should be aware these things happen
i'm aware these things happen, but didn't have a great deal of experience before finances dictated I gave up flying for some years. This is a situation I've never encountered before, due to lack of experience, thus the question.
I'm sure if the bill had been split the instructor would have been paid and fuel costs covered (for example).
The only reason I embarked on the trip was to complete the navex, I had no need to put 40 minutes in my log book. Whilst I understand these things happen, my viewpoint is this is why flying school charge so much and these things should be taken into account by them.
I didn't argue with the school and won't argue -- I just think that you hire an aircraft with a specific purpose in mind and if you can't achieve that purpose, then like anything you've paid for a service which wasn't delivered in full.
i'm aware these things happen, but didn't have a great deal of experience before finances dictated I gave up flying for some years. This is a situation I've never encountered before, due to lack of experience, thus the question.
I'm sure if the bill had been split the instructor would have been paid and fuel costs covered (for example).
The only reason I embarked on the trip was to complete the navex, I had no need to put 40 minutes in my log book. Whilst I understand these things happen, my viewpoint is this is why flying school charge so much and these things should be taken into account by them.
I didn't argue with the school and won't argue -- I just think that you hire an aircraft with a specific purpose in mind and if you can't achieve that purpose, then like anything you've paid for a service which wasn't delivered in full.
It's all valuable experience. If your instructor was good (s)he presumably used it to teach diversions or some aspects of decision-making. Was it a practice for the long navex? If so I can understand why you're miffed as it's an expensive thing to have to repeat.
What actually went wrong?
What actually went wrong?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Appreciate the replies - I don't want to be arguing with anyone and figured it would be one of those things put down to experience. Safety first and all that.
In terms of the fault, carb heat control kept dropping (a bit like if you didn't tighten the throttle friction the level could move!)
Could see a drop when applying the carb heat but clearly it wasn't as it was supposed to be. No rough running or anything untoward and a good safe judgement call by the instructor in my opinion.
Had I been flying solo, I would have turned back.
Just "one of those things" I suppose, but an expensive one at £90!
Yet one I won't forget!
In terms of:
Yes he did - I had overlooked that actually and that makes me feel immediately less peaved! I'll shut up now! 
In terms of the fault, carb heat control kept dropping (a bit like if you didn't tighten the throttle friction the level could move!)
Could see a drop when applying the carb heat but clearly it wasn't as it was supposed to be. No rough running or anything untoward and a good safe judgement call by the instructor in my opinion.
Had I been flying solo, I would have turned back.
Just "one of those things" I suppose, but an expensive one at £90!
Yet one I won't forget!In terms of:
If your instructor was good (s)he presumably used it to teach diversions or some aspects of decision-making
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft flies from A to B across a stretch of water.
Aircraft develops an engine fault on the ground at B which precludes a safe return to A (fault separately assessed and confirmed by Licensed Engineer).
Flying school state that unless the pilot returns the aircraft to A (across the water) they will charge for any costs in connection with the maintenance issue (including the cost of flying AOG spares to B).
Who pays?
Aircraft develops an engine fault on the ground at B which precludes a safe return to A (fault separately assessed and confirmed by Licensed Engineer).
Flying school state that unless the pilot returns the aircraft to A (across the water) they will charge for any costs in connection with the maintenance issue (including the cost of flying AOG spares to B).
Who pays?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dera - morally I agre with you.
Have you ever seen a poor (financially speaking) lawyer?
In practice one should always read the contract. If the terms are as stated and they are clear then when you sign for the hire you accept the terms. It might be difficult to convince a court otherwise if the school then take action to recoup the costs of recovery. You might win - you hired a serviceable aircraft and this one is not serviceable - you might even get your costs of hotel / returning home; all very unclear unless specified in the contract.
If you don't like those terms, find another aircraft where the terms are different. If something is not covered, ask before you hire and either get it witnessed or get it in writing.
Have you ever seen a poor (financially speaking) lawyer?
In practice one should always read the contract. If the terms are as stated and they are clear then when you sign for the hire you accept the terms. It might be difficult to convince a court otherwise if the school then take action to recoup the costs of recovery. You might win - you hired a serviceable aircraft and this one is not serviceable - you might even get your costs of hotel / returning home; all very unclear unless specified in the contract.
If you don't like those terms, find another aircraft where the terms are different. If something is not covered, ask before you hire and either get it witnessed or get it in writing.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd have no problem paying for that 40 minutes as that 40 minutes is a very valuable bit of experience for you to file away for later. You might well have learned more on that flight than many other navex's.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wickford
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me, the answer is that it depends. For the aircraft that goes faulty at location B, I would expect the school to pay. After all, you are renting the aircraft of which they are carrying out the maintenance and making sure it is in an airworthy condition.
Regarding paying when the aircraft goes wrong during an exercise it would depend what stage I was at. I was at the end of my training and to complete certain exercises to finish and having to duplicate it again then I would be a little bit hacked off. If I needed more hours anyway and would have had to flown that time then I would put it down to experience flying as it wouldn't be costing me anymore money through no fault of my own.
Regarding paying when the aircraft goes wrong during an exercise it would depend what stage I was at. I was at the end of my training and to complete certain exercises to finish and having to duplicate it again then I would be a little bit hacked off. If I needed more hours anyway and would have had to flown that time then I would put it down to experience flying as it wouldn't be costing me anymore money through no fault of my own.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me it depends what the fault was. And if I thought they were taking the piss.
ie did I think the instructor had been told to get his arse back in under an hour because they had to get another couple of lessons out of it before going to check otherwise they would have to cancel them.
What was the fault?
ie did I think the instructor had been told to get his arse back in under an hour because they had to get another couple of lessons out of it before going to check otherwise they would have to cancel them.
What was the fault?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who flew the aircraft back? Did the Instructor take control? What was the defect?
I'm probably out of tune with most here, but when it developed a fault, you were no longer able to conduct the exercise you were expecting and paying for. It might be fair to charge you for the first 20 mins and a landing, but I think the return leg wasn't training, it was a "forced" return to base over which you had no control or decision and it's their problem.
If the defect is something that could/should have reasonably been picked up on the "A" check, then you shouldn't pay at all.
I'm probably out of tune with most here, but when it developed a fault, you were no longer able to conduct the exercise you were expecting and paying for. It might be fair to charge you for the first 20 mins and a landing, but I think the return leg wasn't training, it was a "forced" return to base over which you had no control or decision and it's their problem.
If the defect is something that could/should have reasonably been picked up on the "A" check, then you shouldn't pay at all.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's another example of the shambles that is PPL flying. The flying school makes low margins and therefore can't really afford to not charge for time used as a general rule but your whole exercise needs to be repeated - so you pay twice but have the "experience."
If you hired a car that got half way to where you wanted, you wouldn't pay for it but flying breaks the rules and like you said, you don't want an argument when there's more business needed.
If you hired a car that got half way to where you wanted, you wouldn't pay for it but flying breaks the rules and like you said, you don't want an argument when there's more business needed.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard a cracking line from a school.
Its illegal for a none commercial pilot to fly and log anything without paying because it would then be a benefit in kind and be against the law under the cost sharing rules. So you have to pay for the flight even though you had to return without actually doing a lesson.
Its illegal for a none commercial pilot to fly and log anything without paying because it would then be a benefit in kind and be against the law under the cost sharing rules. So you have to pay for the flight even though you had to return without actually doing a lesson.
Just "one of those things" I suppose, but an expensive one at £90!
The profit margin on PPL training and hire is very small whilst the costs associated with it are continually rising. If ATC put you into the hold or tell you to go around, you will fly extra time but surely that's why you are trying to get your licence back, so that you can fly.
You cannot compare PPL flying with car hire; you would have to compare an AOC operation for some level of equivalence, where, if you charted a flight and it went tech you would not be charged for the replacement flight but the cost per hour is probably 4 times as much.
It's another example of the shambles that is PPL flying.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
But it seems to be normal practice to pay for the time flown in such circumstances.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely it depends on the scenario. Must we have a rule for everything? Does nobody know how to negotiate anymore?
D.O.
D.O.
Last edited by dont overfil; 28th Aug 2013 at 18:22.