what is an IA really responsable for update

[louiswp]

Ok guys here is an update, I lost my IA after over 15 years of having it. In the report the FAA has letters from the owner stating he adjusted and did things to the aircraft after I annualed it. so instead of 3 things that could of been better he had a whole list of items that went against me after I annualed the aircraft. FAA even had photos from the crash showing the cowl smashed and carb heat linkage sticking out and bent. so between the owner and the crash I was blamed for many things. the owner also misplaced the AD list that was done at the annual and I was hit for not doing the AD's. so no AD's, bent and torn items from the crash, elt removed by owner, added items by owner after the annual like panel mounted handheld GPS, also the FAA had said the airspeed indicator was a Cessna model and no records of it being installed. funny thing is I took a picture of it and it does not say Cessna or any model of Cessna on the indicator. the brand is written on the indicator face, plane as day and it does not say Cessna. so even though the stuff was reported to be done by the owner and obvious items from the crash I had my IA revoked without any facts being heard. I can do an appeal but it is expensive. attorney 10K plus and the NTSB judges are expensive. Lost IA for a year then I can retest and apply again. in the mean time I lose the customers I have before I can prove myself before a panel. the NTSB has not overturned a case in the past year according to their records. the fuel tank issue I found they were installed in 1995 and of course not the proper paperwork so I took the hit for the past 15 IA's that signed off this aircraft. So what is an IA responsible for? everything no matter how long after the annual and for what an owner does to his airplane after the annual, unless you have lots of money to prove otherwise. pretty bad when the papers presented has testimony from the owner and it still goes against me. its bulls*** Raymond Peterson is the FAA person. anyone know if legal action can be taken against the fed for the blatant lies that he has in writing and especially the photo of the airspeed indicator that he says was Cessna. I would spend the money to go after him.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Sounds like a whole list of reasons I keep saying WE have to protect our IAs. When we are thinking of making a minor change to our planes we need to at least TALK to our IAs to be sure we aren't putting them at risk. I never change ANYTHING without at least talking to my IA. NOT SO MUCH AS AN UPHOLSTERY SCREW! I know it isn't "required" and I also know in almost EVERY case he has said he doesn't need to look at the minor stuff, but if we do change something THIS is what can happen to them.
We need to be as good a friend TO our IAs and they are to us.

Wish I could help you, but you need a good lawyer who knows how to bust through the Government employee protection system. Sounds like a lot of train whistles here. Did you really piss this guy off somewhere along the line?

Hank

[M Towsley]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Very sorry, Louis, to hear this.

In many cases certain individuals, and even government agencies, cannot be sued. Sometimes a hearing is held by a department of that agency to determine if that government agency can be sued. (Sounds strange, I know, but I am aware of this as my wife recently sat in on a hearing for a State agency). I am not sure about a Federal employee of the FAA. Hopefully someone can step in with the knowledge of this. Most government employees can be held for Official Misconduct, as well as other possible charges. I would think finding out who his supervisor is and a well-written letter indicating your findings might get things rolling. There could be later repercussions, though, for stirring the pot so think carefully before doing so. Best of luck!!!

[stearman3]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Just sounds like more of the typical stories I hear about FAA Inspectors nowadays.

When I was an Inspector, my caution about philosophy about annual inspections was,; The IA is not responsible for anything done to the aircraft AFTER the annual, but you need to make sure that everything that has ever been done in the PAST up to this point is correct. They shouldn't be held responsible for something someone does After the annual. They have no control over that.

Ok guys here is an update, I lost my IA after over 15 years of having it. In the report the FAA has letters from the owner stating he adjusted and did things to the aircraft after I annualed it. so instead of 3 things that could of been better he had a whole list of items that went against me after I annualed the aircraft. FAA even had photos from the crash showing the cowl smashed and carb heat linkage sticking out and bent. so between the owner and the crash I was blamed for many things. the owner also misplaced the AD list that was done at the annual and I was hit for not doing the AD's. so no AD's, bent and torn items from the crash, elt removed by owner, added items by owner after the annual like panel mounted handheld GPS, also the FAA had said the airspeed indicator was a Cessna model and no records of it being installed. funny thing is I took a picture of it and it does not say Cessna or any model of Cessna on the indicator. the brand is written on the indicator face, plane as day and it does not say Cessna. so even though the stuff was reported to be done by the owner and obvious items from the crash I had my IA revoked without any facts being heard. I can do an appeal but it is expensive. attorney 10K plus and the NTSB judges are expensive. Lost IA for a year then I can retest and apply again. in the mean time I lose the customers I have before I can prove myself before a panel. the NTSB has not overturned a case in the past year according to their records. the fuel tank issue I found they were installed in 1995 and of course not the proper paperwork so I took the hit for the past 15 IA's that signed off this aircraft. So what is an IA responsible for? everything no matter how long after the annual and for what an owner does to his airplane after the annual, unless you have lots of money to prove otherwise. pretty bad when the papers presented has testimony from the owner and it still goes against me. its bulls*** Raymond Peterson is the FAA person. anyone know if legal action can be taken against the fed for the blatant lies that he has in writing and especially the photo of the airspeed indicator that he says was Cessna. I would spend the money to go after him.

[barnstmr]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

This really brings up some interesting questions / thinking of different scenarios. How about this for one...

An airplane with current annual comes in for some routine engine work. Your shop proceeds to do the work they were hired to do. During the process, the mechanic notices some incorrect fasteners installed somewhere else on the airplane, not related to the work your shop is doing. The A&P reports these fasteners to his supervisor, an IA. The IA researches backward in the logs and see where work was done and signed off in the vicinity of these incorrect fasteners. So what should the IA do.

a) Go ahead and wrap up the work his shop was hired to do and return the airplane to service.
b) ground the airplane, notify the owner, suggest he seek FAA Approval of the non-standard fasteners or replace them with correct ones.

Believe it or not, Answer "a" is defendable in court according to a noted aviation attorney. Ethically though, Answer "b" is the responsible thing to do, but perhaps not popular with the owner.... unless he or she understands the concept of airworthiness.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

The only part of this I wouldn't agree with is the "grounding" of the plane without discussing it with the owner first. There may be extenuating circumstances like paperwork the owner has that was not given to the shop (since it wasn't what they were working on) or they could be things the owner has scheduled to be done elsewhere (across the field at the "other" FBO). If the plane is not-airworthy the RIGHT thing to do is call the owner immediately. If the shop feels the plane would not be airworthy when after they complete their work, they could refuse to work on it, but they shouldn't be "grounding" planes just because they see something they don't like. They aren't supposed to be doing the equivalent of ramp checks by grounding.
I would certainly document all of MY work and state that in my opinion the plane was not airworthy because of other things I saw if I had already done the work on it. There are MANY times I would have engine work done at one shop, avionics at another and structural at a third. I don't want to have to deal with a "GROUNDED" plane with shop two just because shop one noticed something they weren't even hired to do. TELL me, don't just ground my plane. We can fight about it if I want to fly it when you don't think it is safe.

Hank

[Garry Crookham]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

We need to define the term "grounding an aircraft." As an A&P and or IA I do not have the authority to "ground an aircraft." I can refuse to return the aircraft to service by stating that in the aircraft maintenance records but an A&P/IA has no legal authority to "ground an aircraft." Part 43 of the FARs addresses maintenance and Part 91.401 through 91.409 gives guidance to aircraft owners and pilots. FAR 91.407(a)(1) states
(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless --

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under §43.7 of this chapter; and

(2) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9 or §43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made

We can signify that the aircraft is not returned to service and notify the owner/operator that we don't consider the airplane airworthy, but other than placing a call to the local FSDO we have no legal authority to do anything else. There have been a couple of instances of legal action taken by aircraft owners/operators when a mechanic has tried to prevent an owner from taking his aircraft after the mechanic stated the aircraft, in his opinion wasn't airworthy.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Early communications with the owner can resolve an awful lot of problems before they BECOME problems.

Hank

[louiswp]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

I was a chief inspector at an FBO and it was common for them to Annual an aircraft and anything they found wrong they would fix without the owner knowing until they came to pick up their aircraft and had an outrageous bill. They were known to write in the logs a page or two of what they considered unairworthy items. dirty gear wells etc. that caused the next mechanic to address each item in their sign off to make it airworthy again. I quit and went to their competitor, after 2 years I ended up taking over that FBO and ended up with several of the customers from the FBO I had quit. Learning from them I made sure to tell the customer what I found during the inspection and left it up to them to fix the unairworthy items or just not sign off the annual.

[Michael]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Hi Louis,
One of the things that you can do, under the Freedom of Information Act, is asking for a copy of the policy and procedures manual for his job classification. That describes his job duties, etc. Getting this information gives you an idea if he followed policy and procedures. As a former government employee, I can tell you that there is people that will hold this person accountable if they find him negligent of his duties. The issue is this, government employees are civil servants and they are protected by the civil service rules. Your complaint will be looked at by his supervisor then by the supervisors supervisor and so on. There are many layers of too many chiefs. If they ever look into this issue you will never really know if he will be disciplined, due to this being a personnel issue. That said, you can do a lot of leg work yourself and save some money, but its a long process. Also talk to your local government representatives.

[astjp2]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

Wouldn't substation of hardware be considered a minor alteration...that is what I was taught....

This really brings up some interesting questions / thinking of different scenarios. How about this for one...

An airplane with current annual comes in for some routine engine work. Your shop proceeds to do the work they were hired to do. During the process, the mechanic notices some incorrect fasteners installed somewhere else on the airplane, not related to the work your shop is doing. The A&P reports these fasteners to his supervisor, an IA. The IA researches backward in the logs and see where work was done and signed off in the vicinity of these incorrect fasteners. So what should the IA do.

a) Go ahead and wrap up the work his shop was hired to do and return the airplane to service.
b) ground the airplane, notify the owner, suggest he seek FAA Approval of the non-standard fasteners or replace them with correct ones.

Believe it or not, Answer "a" is defendable in court according to a noted aviation attorney. Ethically though, Answer "b" is the responsible thing to do, but perhaps not popular with the owner.... unless he or she understands the concept of airworthiness.

[astjp2]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

What the hell does the FOIA have to do with an airplane mechanic, if that is where you are going with your posting? If someone pulled that s#it with me they would be out the door so fast their head would be spinning. Mechanics are independent of the government as far as responsibility to the owners is concerned, IA's are still responsible for representing the administrator and complying with regulations but they are not accountable to any government control (pay, benefits, etc.), just compliance....which is always subject to interpretation. I was also civil service as an aircraft mechanic as a reserve technician, different rules than someone who is working on a Taylorcraft.

If you expect to get anywhere beyond the local fsdo when it comes to the FAA, there were many lawyers involved before any enforcement action was taken. The scary thing is that this could set a precedence on responsibility. There has to be more to this story that what we know.

Hi Louis,
One of the things that you can do, under the Freedom of Information Act, is asking for a copy of the policy and procedures manual for his job classification. That describes his job duties, etc. Getting this information gives you an idea if he followed policy and procedures. As a former government employee, I can tell you that there is people that will hold this person accountable if they find him negligent of his duties. The issue is this, government employees are civil servants and they are protected by the civil service rules. Your complaint will be looked at by his supervisor then by the supervisors supervisor and so on. There are many layers of too many chiefs. If they ever look into this issue you will never really know if he will be disciplined, due to this being a personnel issue. That said, you can do a lot of leg work yourself and save some money, but its a long process. Also talk to your local government representatives.

[M Towsley]

Re: what is an IA really responsable for update

I think he meant FOIA the Fed official's job description.