![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I called and asked the FBO what they meant by this clause. They said it
meant that, regardless of fault, if something goes wrong with the plane while I am renting it and I'm away from the home field, I am supposed to stay with the plane for three days at my own cost, or come home and go back to fly it home if the repairs take 3 days or less, or have them retrieve the plane for me at the cost we have discussed. Now, I have no problem staying with the plane or retrieving it after repairs if I am the person that broke something. I broke it, I should pay to fix it and fly it home. But if the radios die because the FBO hasn't replaced them in 20 years, or a belt breaks because the FBO decided not to replace it on the 100-hour even though it was cracked, or the alternator dies suddenly (IE... situations where I clearly didn't break anything and just happen to be the unlucky renter to have a broken plane while out on a cross country), I can not fathom having to pay to retrieve the plane. That should be a cost for the FBO to eat, since it was their maintenance that didn't find the problem to begin with. And once they eat the cost a few times, you can bet the maintenance of the planes would improve. The radio would be replaced more regularly, etc. Could you imagine renting a car from Avis, and half way through your trip having the starter on the car die? You call Avis, and they tell you that according to their contract it's your responsibility to retrieve the car after the repair or they will charge you $1,000 to get it even though it was their poor maintenance (or Murphy's law) that broke the car in the first place? I'm sure you'd go crazy. And so would I regardless of whether it was a plane or a car. Robert "gatt" wrote in message ... "Bill Denton" wrote in message news:409a9de6$0$3023 I didn't get that interpretation; that language comes directly from the rental agreement! And while the language may be a bit sloppy, the intent is perfectly obvious. If the pilot knows something is wrong before he flies, he would obviously have that information after he has flown. Hey, guys, the best thing to do would be to ask the FBO owner to clarify and, if necessary, have it put in writing. No point in arguing about it for days if somebody could just pick up the phone and ask the FBO to explain it. Would like to hear the explanation, btw. -c |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bush's Attempt to Usurp the Constitution | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 20 | July 2nd 04 04:09 PM |
Showstoppers (long, but interesting questions raised) | Anonymous Spamless | Military Aviation | 0 | April 21st 04 05:09 AM |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Military Aviation | 1 | April 9th 04 11:25 PM |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 7th 04 07:31 PM |
CBS Newsflash: Rental trucks pose imminent and grave danger to national security | Ron Lee | Piloting | 4 | January 15th 04 03:07 PM |