Precision Design, Inc.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/06/10) */
Answer to [redacted] complaint:
Facts:
This is first complaint Precision Design has had to answer to Revdex.com period.
Precision Design has rebuilt more than 160 of its own aircraft to date including two aircraft that were Oshkosh grand champions...

and one best in class.
Aircraft N625SP Repairs were completed in January 1 2014 from that date until delivery to Mr. [redacted] (6 months) the aircraft was flown by 3 separate pilots.
Mr [redacted] purchased N625SP after a 3 day pre purchase inspection by a reputable Oklahoma aircraft shop which he selected.
Mr [redacted] signed a purchase agreement prepared by his attorney stating he was buying the aircraft as is where is.
Precision Design offered to make any needed repairs by simply returning aircraft to our facility, Mr [redacted] stated it would be too expensive to return.
Precision Design then offered suppliers for economical repair that were not used by Mr [redacted] .
From June 4th until July 4 (1 month) 5 flights were recorded by flightAware totaling 9.95hr flightAware only records flights which are IFR or Flight following. The total # of VFR flights and total time are unknown.
On June 6th Mr. [redacted] sent me the following note by email
" The plane ran great on the way back to PA. 8.9 hrs of flight time. Once trimmed and stable, the plane flew hands and feet off. I told [redacted] that I could crawl in the back seat and take a nap!
[redacted] was great to work with. He's on his way home from OKC now.
Thanks, again, for everything. It was a pleasure to work with you. If you ever need a client reference, I'd be happy to oblige.
[redacted]"
Mr. [redacted] is requesting t he full amount of the bill for the Pre purchase Inspection done by Associated Aero in spite of the fact that Precision Design paid a portion of that bill as a condition of sale.
The FAA preformed an investigation an investigation based on Mr. [redacted] s complaint and no action was taken.
Mr. [redacted] required an instructor to return the aircraft to his destination, on one landing it required input from the instructor to landing during cross wind conditions.
Mr. [redacted] mechanic has very little experience with aircraft sheetmetal repairs.
Precision Design does not agree to pay bills in which it was not involved in the decision process to generate those bills.

Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/06/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
1. CFC bought N625SP from Precision Design (PD) based on a favorable inspection report by Associated Aero Service (AAS).
2. In flying the aircraft to Pennsylvania, a landing issue was discovered that was initially attributed to poor pilot technique.
3. In subsequent flights, Club members also noticed problems with directional control upon landing. The problem was worse with a loaded plane and full fuel.
4. Inspection by our A&P mechanic revealed that the right side landing gear was bent such that the wheel was significantly "toed out", because of a prior accident that nearly totaled the plane. The bent gear was responsible for the directional control problems on landing and for high tire wear.
5. Our A&P also discovered that sheet metal repairs made by PD in rebuilding the plane were not approved by Cessna and the FAA. He notified the local FSDO (FAA) and grounded the aircraft until repairs could be made. The FSDO reviewed his report and concurred in the findings.
6. Since the repairs made by PD were more than 6 months old at this point, the statute of limitations prevented the FAA from taking any action against PD.
7. We did not return the plane to PD for correction of deficiencies because the plane could not be flown, we had no confidence in the PD work and it would cost a significant amount of time and money to get the aircraft back to Oklahoma City.
8. CFC is seeking reimbursement from PD for the cost to repair deficiencies to make the airplane airworthy.