Rental policy

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...
Take another look at this statement: "If the PIC determines that the
plane
needs repair before being flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away
from
its home location..."

I don't see how you get that interpretation. Nothing about the statement
indicates the order of "before being flown" and "the PIC has flown the
plane
away from its home location".

You and Tony need to read the statement more carefully.

What this is actually saying is: "If an airplane needs repair, and you
know
that the airplane needs repair, and you fly away knowing that the
airplane
needs repair, and the airplane must be repaired at a location other than
it's home base, we're going to charge you out the ass!"

That's not what it says at all. It may well be how the statement is
intended (though I doubt it), but it's definitely NOT what it says.

This is why I say just ignore it. Three people, three different
interpretations.
It's unlikely to be enforceable, and a good reason why you *should*
get a lawyer involved in writing a contract.

Anyway, we all agree that it only applies "If the PIC determines that
the plane needs repair". So don't take off if it does, right??

You made the statement: "if a pilot returned from lunch at a distant airport
and found fuel running out of the wings, the wording could be used to hold
him to the rest of it" is not correct.

The wording in that section would only apply if the pilot knew there was a
fuel leak (or something similar or related) prior to flying the aircraft.

If the pilot was not aware of a fuel system or related problem prior to
taking off, he would not be liable under this section of the rental
agreement. However, I would imagine there would be other sections covering
this type of situation.



"Roger Long" om wrote in
message ...
Hmm, reading Peter's post above dissecting the time order of the wording,
I
guess I would want a clarification before renting. It looks to me as
though
it was written so that a renter rolling the dice by flying away from the
homebase with a known problem would be responsible. Peter is right
though,
if a pilot returned from lunch at a distant airport and found fuel running
out of the wings, the wording could be used to hold him to the rest of it.

If the "being flown" in the first line was replace by "departing the home
base" or "accepting the aircraft for flight" I would consider it
reasonable.

--
Roger Long

"If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before being
flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home location, the PIC
must remain with the plane for three (3) days while the plane is being
repaired. The PIC is responsible for all costs of his own lodging, food,
travel expenses, etc. during this three day period. If the PIC elects to
leave the plane during this three day repair period, you are responsible for
the smaller of $5 per mile or $1000 for an FBO staff member to retreive the
plane."


I've never seen something like that before. I wouldn't fly there.


It shouldn't really affect you in any case. If you take off in
a plane you know needs to be repaired, you are violating
the FARs as well as the rental policy. Just fly legally and
it won't apply to you.


"if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of"

Suppose you take off in a good airplane, land in Kalazazoo, and the vacuum
system dies. Not your fault. You didn't take off (to Kalamazoo) in a plane
that you knew needed repairs; in fact it didn't. But now you're there, and the
lawyers eat you.

Run, don't walk.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Bill Denton" wrote:

You made the statement: "if a pilot returned from lunch at a distant airport
and found fuel running out of the wings, the wording could be used to hold
him to the rest of it" is not correct.


"If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before
being flown, .. "

I come back from lunch at a distant airport and the aircraft
is leaking fuel. I've now determined it needs repair and I
haven't yet flown (home.)

" and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home
location,"

I've previously flown the plane to the "distant airport."

I agree with Peter - the wording seems to cover someone who
finds out at a remote location that he needs repair before
coming home. At best, it's ambiguous.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

Thanks to everyone for their interpretations. I think I'll just check out
some more FBO's .... I'm sure someone else has comparable rates without
these types of restrictions.

Now if I could only afford my own plane.......

Robert

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

"If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before being
flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home location, the
PIC
must remain with the plane for three (3) days while the plane is being
repaired. The PIC is responsible for all costs of his own lodging, food,
travel expenses, etc. during this three day period. If the PIC elects to
leave the plane during this three day repair period, you are responsible
for
the smaller of $5 per mile or $1000 for an FBO staff member to retreive
the
plane."


I've never seen something like that before. I wouldn't fly there.


It shouldn't really affect you in any case. If you take off in
a plane you know needs to be repaired, you are violating
the FARs as well as the rental policy. Just fly legally and
it won't apply to you.


"if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of"

Suppose you take off in a good airplane, land in Kalazazoo, and the vacuum
system dies. Not your fault. You didn't take off (to Kalamazoo) in a
plane
that you knew needed repairs; in fact it didn't. But now you're there,
and the
lawyers eat you.

Run, don't walk.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Actually, we have all been skipping a more relevant point and I didn't feel
like introducing it until now: How does anyone know what the pilot knew
before the flight?

If the pilot doesn't write up a problem and give the write up to the FBO
prior to departing, how could it be established that he knew about the
problem prior to take-off?

Of course, you could always put a clause in the rental agreement stating
that unless the pilot did specific write ups it would be assumed that he
knew about all of the defects. Weird language, I know, but it works!



"Tony Cox" wrote in message
link.net...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...
Take another look at this statement: "If the PIC determines that the
plane
needs repair before being flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away
from
its home location..."

I don't see how you get that interpretation. Nothing about the
statement
indicates the order of "before being flown" and "the PIC has flown the
plane
away from its home location".

You and Tony need to read the statement more carefully.

What this is actually saying is: "If an airplane needs repair, and you
know
that the airplane needs repair, and you fly away knowing that the
airplane
needs repair, and the airplane must be repaired at a location other
than
it's home base, we're going to charge you out the ass!"

That's not what it says at all. It may well be how the statement is
intended (though I doubt it), but it's definitely NOT what it says.

This is why I say just ignore it. Three people, three different
interpretations.
It's unlikely to be enforceable, and a good reason why you *should*
get a lawyer involved in writing a contract.

Anyway, we all agree that it only applies "If the PIC determines that
the plane needs repair". So don't take off if it does, right??

The lawyers would starve on this one!

This only applies if the pilot knew about the problem before taking off...

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

"If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before being
flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home location, the
PIC
must remain with the plane for three (3) days while the plane is being
repaired. The PIC is responsible for all costs of his own lodging, food,
travel expenses, etc. during this three day period. If the PIC elects to
leave the plane during this three day repair period, you are responsible
for
the smaller of $5 per mile or $1000 for an FBO staff member to retreive
the
plane."


I've never seen something like that before. I wouldn't fly there.


It shouldn't really affect you in any case. If you take off in
a plane you know needs to be repaired, you are violating
the FARs as well as the rental policy. Just fly legally and
it won't apply to you.


"if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of"

Suppose you take off in a good airplane, land in Kalazazoo, and the vacuum
system dies. Not your fault. You didn't take off (to Kalamazoo) in a
plane
that you knew needed repairs; in fact it didn't. But now you're there,
and the
lawyers eat you.

Run, don't walk.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

"If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before being
flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home location, the
PIC
must remain with the plane for three (3) days while the plane is being
repaired. The PIC is responsible for all costs of his own lodging, food,
travel expenses, etc. during this three day period. If the PIC elects to
leave the plane during this three day repair period, you are responsible
for
the smaller of $5 per mile or $1000 for an FBO staff member to retreive
the
plane."

Suppose you take off in a good airplane, land in Kalazazoo, and the vacuum
system dies. Not your fault. You didn't take off (to Kalamazoo) in a
plane
that you knew needed repairs; in fact it didn't.

Ok, I'm with you so far....

But now you're there, and the
lawyers eat you.

Why? On what basis?

"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...
Actually, we have all been skipping a more relevant point and I didn't
feel
like introducing it until now: How does anyone know what the pilot knew
before the flight?

If the pilot doesn't write up a problem and give the write up to the FBO
prior to departing, how could it be established that he knew about the
problem prior to take-off?

Something a previous renter noted (not necessarily on a squark
sheet), but which a pilot should have noticed himself during a
preflight?


Of course, you could always put a clause in the rental agreement stating
that unless the pilot did specific write ups it would be assumed that he
knew about all of the defects. Weird language, I know, but it works!

For the FBO perhaps. I'd not sign an agreement with that in it.

They simply put in writing what has always been what I consider a
respectable idea.. If you leave the airplane "away" you are responsible
for getting the airplane back. Either you get the plane back, or you pay
someone to get it back.

The max cost is $1000 (which is 200 miles) which seems like a lot.. but
the truth is.. if you bring the plane back (which they paid to fix) then
you dont owe them anything. If it takes more than 3 days to fix the
plane, you dont owe them anything. I think "staying with the plane" is a
little excessive but rather you should be prepared to retrieve the plane
at your own cost and time expense within 3 days of leaving it "away".

The club I am with makes no such time stipulation, and states that you
are responsible for the cost of recovery.. If you fly it 5 hours away,
you can pay to have it flown the 5 hours back. Of course, maintenance is
pretty progressive so our planes usually arent down unexpectedly too much.

Dave

Robert wrote:

I received my private last September, and have rented a Cessna 172 from the
same place I completed my training at ever since. Recently, I've been
looking for a new place to rent because the 172's at my current FBO are old
and always down because something broke yet again.

I went to a different FBO yesterday to ask about getting checked out in a
plane there. Initially they looked like a great place to rent from... at
least until I took a look at their rental policies and procedures. I really
didn't like one of them, but am wondering if it is "just me" or if it is a
normal policy with most FBO's.

It says "If the PIC determines that the plane needs repair before being
flown, and the PIC has flown the plane away from its home location, the PIC
must remain with the plane for three (3) days while the plane is being
repaired. The PIC is responsible for all costs of his own lodging, food,
travel expenses, etc. during this three day period. If the PIC elects to
leave the plane during this three day repair period, you are responsible for
the smaller of $5 per mile or $1000 for an FBO staff member to retreive the
plane."

So, basically, if I fly from Long Beach to Santa Barbara (class C airport),
and the plane has an electrical problem to due to fault of my own, and I
decide to squak the plane in Santa Barbara, I have to pay someone about
$1,800 to retrieve the plane if I can't stay with it for three days while it
gets repaired.

Is this an outrageous policy, or is it normal? I could see that I would be
responsible if I damaged the plane, or just decided to leave the plane
somewhere else, but its almost like they are encouraging pilots to fly
planes back home that shouldn't be flown just so they don't get stuck with a
bill.

Robert