Club Management Issue

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Wouldn't the original pilot who got stranded at that airport have accrued
this rental fee regardless if the alternator failed? He had to return,
right? I assume the $270 rental fee is calculated based on flying time,
not
ground time while awaiting repairs?


Are you saying that the original renter should be responsible for the rent
on the return flight? It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Mike
MU-2

Mike Rapoport ) wrote:

Are you saying that the original renter should be responsible for the rent
on the return flight?

That is what I was saying. However, upon reflection, I would like to
retract that statement.

It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Agreed.


--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Agreed.

As a Devil's advocate point, though, it's also not a VFR pilot's fault when
the weather closes in and traps them at a remote airport. But it's still
the renter's responsiblity to get that plane back home so that other people
can use it, even if it means paying for two IFR club members to come get the
plane.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.627 / Virus Database: 402 - Release Date: 3/16/2004

"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in message
k.net...
It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Agreed.

As a Devil's advocate point, though, it's also not a VFR pilot's fault
when
the weather closes in and traps them at a remote airport. But it's still
the renter's responsiblity to get that plane back home so that other
people
can use it, even if it means paying for two IFR club members to come get
the
plane.

Actually, policies vary according to FBO and club. The club I did the most
renting from had a very explicit policy that weather-related delays or
cancellations would not incur additional fees (such as overnight tie-down,
daily minimums, etc.) Just as it's in the FBO's or club's interest to not
encourage a pilot to fly an unairworthy airplane, it is in their interest to
not encourage a pilot to fly in poor weather.

Now, it's true that if the pilot just left the plane there and took
alternative transportation home, leaving the plane for someone else to pick
up, the pilot would have to pay for those costs. But that's a different
situation from an unairworthy airplane. The FBO or club don't warrant the
weather and weather-related delays are a normal part of all flying, but they
do warrant the airworthiness of the airplane.

A renter should not be expected to sit around and wait for an airplane to be
repaired just so that the FBO or club who warranted the airworthiness of the
airplane in the first place can avoid additional expenses retrieving the
airplane. If the renter is willing to do so, they should expect their
expenses to be covered (hotel, meals, cab fare, etc.) by the owner of the
airplane, up to whatever the owner of the airplane would have spent anyway
(whether by paying for overtime service, or sending someone else to get the
airplane).

Maintenance and airworthiness *ought* to be the number one priority for any
FBO or club. Above all else, they should ensure that renters are not
expected to help cover their costs when something breaks. After all, how do
they establish and maintain trust with their customers otherwise? I
certainly wouldn't rent an airplane from an operation where I ran the risk
of having to pay for their errors.

Pete

Except that the owner IS responsible for airplane maintenance.

OTOH, the owner is generally not responsible for checking the weather
before flight.


"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in
k.net:

It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Agreed.

As a Devil's advocate point, though, it's also not a VFR pilot's fault
when the weather closes in and traps them at a remote airport. But
it's still the renter's responsiblity to get that plane back home so
that other people can use it, even if it means paying for two IFR club
members to come get the plane.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.627 / Virus Database: 402 - Release Date: 3/16/2004

I'll add to that another point, which may largely depend on the
club/school...

At the school where I used to rent from before I got into the flight club
that I am in now, if someone got stuck for weather, they would not force
you to try to get the plane back - especially if you called to let them
know ahead of time that you were anticipating the possibility of weather
delays. If someone else was scheduled on the plane after you, they would
try to find a way to make alternate arrangements so that your delay would
not impact anyone else.

However, if you decided that you could not wait it out, and wanted to
have someone come "save" you, then it was your choice, and you were
responsible for the expenses associated with doing that (ie, the cost of
two instrument rated CFIs to fly out and get you home, as well as the
rental time on both planes round trip).

They were also as accomodating as could be, though. For example, I once
got almost all the way home when the weather started closing in, and my
airport became IFR. I landed at the nearest airport I could get to (about
20 miles away), and called up and told them about my situation. I waited
most of the day, and decided it wasn't getting better quick. One of the
school instructors was already planning to take an IFR student shooting
approaches at the airport where I got stuck. So a second instructors
"hitched" a ride with him, and they dropped him off so he could save me.
As a result, they didn't charge me for any of the first CFI's time, or
the other plane's time.

Their policy was overshadowed by the feeling that no one should be
pressured into flying in poor weather. If someone can't wait for better
weather, then it is HIS decision to get "saved", and he should bear the
cost. But if you start penalizing people for getting delayed by weather,
I think you are inviting people to take risks and make bad decisions.


"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in
k.net:

It is not his fault that the airplane broke.

Agreed.

As a Devil's advocate point, though, it's also not a VFR pilot's fault
when the weather closes in and traps them at a remote airport. But
it's still the renter's responsiblity to get that plane back home so
that other people can use it, even if it means paying for two IFR club
members to come get the plane.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.627 / Virus Database: 402 - Release Date: 3/16/2004

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net

Are you saying that the original renter should be responsible for the
rent on the return flight? It is not his fault that the airplane
broke.


Are you saying that the club should be responsible for the rent? It's not
their fault the plane broke.

While it's not the pilot's fault that maintenance was required, he would
have paid the return rental time if the breakdown hadn't occurred, right?
Every club agreement I've seen has covered this with something along the
lines of "pilot is responsible for the cost to return the plane." This does
not necessarily include time on the ground doing run-up tests or circuits
around the distant airport to test repairs, but the air time between the
airports would have been incurred by the pilot in any case.

Now, if the previously stranded pilot had volunteered to fly/drive out to
retrieve the plane, I'd be more willing to entertain the option of the club
covering some or all of the cost of retrieval. In this case, he was
unwilling or unable to do that so I think the club would be fair in charging
him the cost of retrieving the plane as well as the roundtrip rental for the
plane flying the replacement pilot (if that had been necessary).

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

It would be fair in my view to charge him the hours for the return trip only
if you deducted the cost of his other transportation home.

Still, as a man who rents an airplane out, I would not charge him for diddly
unless I thought he may have been responsible for the failure.

You kill the battery, foul the plugs, pop the otherwise good tires, etc. and
you are on the hook. If its something that is not usually caused by loose
nuts behind the yoke, then I will treat you like a customer ought to expect
from a vendor.





"John T" wrote in message
ws.com...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net

Are you saying that the original renter should be responsible for the
rent on the return flight? It is not his fault that the airplane
broke.


Are you saying that the club should be responsible for the rent? It's not
their fault the plane broke.

While it's not the pilot's fault that maintenance was required, he would
have paid the return rental time if the breakdown hadn't occurred, right?
Every club agreement I've seen has covered this with something along the
lines of "pilot is responsible for the cost to return the plane." This
does
not necessarily include time on the ground doing run-up tests or circuits
around the distant airport to test repairs, but the air time between the
airports would have been incurred by the pilot in any case.

Now, if the previously stranded pilot had volunteered to fly/drive out to
retrieve the plane, I'd be more willing to entertain the option of the
club
covering some or all of the cost of retrieval. In this case, he was
unwilling or unable to do that so I think the club would be fair in
charging
him the cost of retrieving the plane as well as the roundtrip rental for
the
plane flying the replacement pilot (if that had been necessary).

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

"Dude" wrote in message


Still, as a man who rents an airplane out, I would not charge him for
diddly unless I thought he may have been responsible for the failure.

You kill the battery, foul the plugs, pop the otherwise good tires,
etc. and you are on the hook. If its something that is not usually
caused by loose nuts behind the yoke, then I will treat you like a
customer ought to expect from a vendor.


If the relationship between the club and the pilot is one of vendor and
customer, then I generally agree with you. However, the equation may change
depending on the finances of the club (IOW, how expenses are handled) and
the membership agreement.

In my current club, each member owns an equal share of the planes. In my
last "club", I was nothing more than a privileged renter. The difference
between the two relationships highlights the differences in perspective than
can be applied to the OP's question.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

Dude wrote:
It would be fair in my view to charge him the hours for the return trip only
if you deducted the cost of his other transportation home.

Still, as a man who rents an airplane out, I would not charge him for diddly
unless I thought he may have been responsible for the failure.

You kill the battery, foul the plugs, pop the otherwise good tires, etc. and
you are on the hook. If its something that is not usually caused by loose
nuts behind the yoke, then I will treat you like a customer ought to expect
from a vendor.

Bingo! I was hoping someone would say that. I've owned an aircraft that was
leased to a flying club, and that would have been my reaction. I wouldn't do it
as a matter of written policy, but in a case like this where there is a dispute,
I would have stepped in and offered to cover all the costs (while hoping that
some of the other parties would say "awww, that's OK"), and considered it just
good customer relations... then I would have talked to the club about getting
the policy nailed down. This is way too little money to get upset about measured
against the scale of aircraft ownership expenses.

Dave
Remove SHIRT to reply directly.