Wisconsin Aviation, Inc.

Wisconsin Aviation has been in business servicing aircraft
owners / customers for over years with safety for the pilots and aircraft being
a top priority. We acknowledge the
safety concerns expressed by this customer and feel that there has been an
unfortunate misunderstanding
Wisconsin Aviation has worked with this maintenance shop in
Fond du Lac and also the technician with whom you had a conversation. We did contact this technician to perform
additional troubleshooting, as he is an FAA-licensed technician and has years
of experience working on Teledyne Continental aircraft engines. This technician also has experience working
on Cirrus aircraft, as we have had this technician perform work on several
other Cirrus aircraft that are based at that airport. We did, in fact, send both a mechanic and a
pilot to Fond du Lac to relocate the Cirrus aircraft to Watertown,
Wisconsin. This relocation never
happened, however, because these employees, after waiting for more than two
hours, never received a response or an approval from the Cirrus owner
Again, we apologize that our service procedures did not meet
your expectation, but at no time in the past or future would we jeopardize the
safety of our customers or aircraft
*** ***
Vice President of Technical Services
River Drive
Watertown, Wisconsin

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  
Although I do accept the fact that the company has decided to drop their charge of the aircraft part, I continue to be extremely disappointed by Wisconsin Aviation's attitude towards safety as well as their overall customer service.  The information that [redacted] supplied in his reply is outright false and dishonest.  [redacted], the mechanic at Fond Du Lac, admitted readily to myself that he had absolutely no experience working on Cirrus aircraft.  It is also frustrating that [redacted] took a quote out of context that I sent in an email, when the last sentence in that very same email indicated my desire to have a Wisconsin Aviation Cirrus-certified mechanic travel to the aircraft to trouble shoot the problem.  I feel that if I had continued to let this company work on my aircraft it would have resulted in harm to the aircraft and possibly bodily harm to myself or any of my passengers.  Also, having a mechanic who was not qualified to work on my type of aircraft also potentially could cause an issue of my Cirrus no longer being considered air-worthy.  This could represent serious legal ramifications.   Please see the website link from an AOPA article on this very issue: http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/January/Pilot/1501p_cou...⇄ have no qualms in admitting that I will never allow this company to work on any of my airplanes, and I hope that by bringing my complaints to the attention of the Revdex.com that other customers will be spared the dangerous and disrespectful business ethics of Wisconsin Aviation.  
Regards,
[redacted]

This letter is in response to the complaint against Wisconsin Aviation to the Revdex.com, Case # [redacted]You contacted us with a request to find the fault with the problem you were having with your aircraft. As mentioned, you placed a called to us after hours but did not speak to the manager. You also...

sent an email requesting our assistance and advice on how to proceed. As stated in your email you were out of phone service and limited e-mail service. This email did not state that you did not want the technician at Fond du Lac to work on your aircraft; it stated that you had this technician looking into this issue and asked us to assist you in resolving the problem because of your absence and our experience with Cirrus aircraft. Your e-mail asked: “what would you suggest to do here?” We contacted this technician to perform additional troubleshooting as he is an FAA licensed technician and has years of experience working on Teledyne Continental aircraft engines. He has experience working on Cirrus aircraft as we have had this technician perform work on several other Cirrus aircraft that are based at that airport. He had already been working with you on this issue and with our advice, this was the most cost and time effective solution to the issue. When you returned to the area and I was able to speak with you and we discussed the concerns you had. At that time I apologized to the fact that you were upset and explained the reasoning behind our decisions. I also offered to continue working with you on this problem and had also made an offer to discount the expenses in an effort to further show our willingness to gain your satisfaction. Later that day I made arrangements to have a ferry pilot relocate the aircraft to RYV. I made several attempts to contact you for your approval, but a return call was never made. We later found out that you had the work performed elsewhere and the part that we ordered for your aircraft was installed by them. Since you did not return the part, we billed you for it. Because you had initially approved the work in Fond du Lac to be performed by their technician and we did not have any objection from you to that, we saw no reason that he shouldn’t perform the work. Resolution:An apology has already been made. As a further act of good business practice I will drop the charge for the part, but will not be responsible for any charges from Fond du Lac. Responded by:            [redacted]                                    Vice President of Technical Services                                    1741 River Drive                                    Watertown, WI 53094

Review: It is with extreme displeasure that I write this letter regarding your company’s treatment of both my aircraft and myself. On March 13, 2014, I found myself in a situation where I had to request priority from the controller. En route to Grand Marais, Minnesota (CKC) from Hartford, Wisconsin (KHXF), I had noted that my oil temperature in my Cirrus SR22 (N410SR) began climbing. The high point that it reached was 208 degrees F with a subsequent drop of oil pressure to 20 PSI. Given that it was the nearest airport, I requested from the controller to expeditiously land at Fond du Lac. On final approach, with the power decreased to 11 inches of manifold pressure, the temperature then dropped to 180 degrees F and the oil pressure returned to 45 PSI. The plane was taxied to the maintenance hanger where we met with [redacted] the on site maintenance personnel. I immediately called Wisconsin Aviation upon my arrival, as they had completed the annual for my Cirrus SR22 N410SR in October 2013. It was after hours unfortunately, but one of the employees was going to attempt to get in touch with [redacted].

The mechanic at Fond Du Lac Skyport, [redacted], is not a certified Cirrus mechanic. However, the decision was made to take a quick look at the engine for any obvious problems. Nothing out of the ordinary was seen; therefore I decided to do a ground run-up. The oil temperature stabilized at 193 degrees F during the run-up with an oil pressure of 45 PSI. This is pretty standard for this aircraft, so I decided to take the aircraft back into the air to fly circles above the airport in order to assess for further engine troubles. After 3 minutes in flight, I again had an elevation in oil temperature with a pressure drop. Therefore, I immediately landed and decided that I did not feel safe taking another flight until the cause of the engine changes was identified. At this point, I had a phone conversation with [redacted] who indicated that he was very familiar with the on sight mechanic at Fond du Lac. He suggested that we trouble shoot a few more simple issues before any further decisions were made. I made clear that I didn’t feel comfortable flying the airplane any longer, and I requested in writing that a certified Cirrus mechanic from Wisconsin Aviation go over the aircraft. This was to be done by having the aircraft ferried by a Wisconsin Aviation pilot to Watertown where a proper inspection could be performed.

I rented a car and continued my journey to northern Minnesota. I lost phone contact with [redacted] over the next few days due to my remote location, but did have access to email. The last conversation with [redacted] again indicated my wish to have the plane worked on by Wisconsin Aviation, however I was then told by [redacted] that [redacted] had continued to do some work on the aircraft. I do have in writing via email my wishes to have the plane looked at by a Wisconsin Aviation mechanic, and the possible need for a ferry pilot. The work done at this time by Fond du Lac Skyport was not authorized by me, but by [redacted]. [redacted] had previously admitted to me personally that he had no experience with Cirrus aircraft. This was evidenced by the fact that he kneeled on the front left seat – something I had been admonished never to do due to the honeycomb core seat design for safety purposes. For reasons having to do with the cost of the aircraft as well as my own personal safety, I had only wanted a certified mechanic working on N410SR. Much later, when a resolution was still trying to be sought for the above detailed issues, I sent a letter to [redacted] indicating that I would like reimbursement for work performed on my aircraft that was not authorized by myself.

I am very unhappy that [redacted] would request maintenance to be performed on my aircraft by an individual who had already admitted to me that he had no personal experience working with Cirrus aircraft. My discontent is magnified further by the fact that I had told him in writing that I wanted Wisconsin Aviation to do any further work as you are one of the few Cirrus certified service centers in Wisconsin. But I am even more disappointed by the attitude that I was met with by [redacted] and [redacted] when we continued to try and trouble-shoot the problem. Nothing was fixed on the aircraft nor was the source of the engine trouble identified; yet I was emailed by [redacted] asking when I could fly the aircraft again. He said that [redacted] did a run-up, and did not have any issues. I felt like he was not making my safety a priority given that he had asked me to fly an aircraft that still had an unsolved engine problem. Later it was indeed shown that had this engine continue to be run as usual, it could have cost be not only the price of a new Continental IO-550 or the entire aircraft, but also potentially my life. I had pointed out to [redacted] that there was a service bulletin out by Cirrus regarding the oil sensor. He told me flat out that this bulletin did not apply to my aircraft. Later via email, he admitted that this service bulletin was indeed relevant to N410SR. I would not feel comfortable allowing Wisconsin Aviation to work on my aircraft again given that they did not approach the engine issue with any sort of serious thought to either my personal safety or the continued well being of the engine. [redacted] at one point told me that even if they ferried the aircraft to Watertown, they probably still would not have a mechanic look at it. I am also flabbergasted by the fact that my first annual estimate for the airplane was over $15,000 and contained almost 50 discrepancies. I went over each of these with [redacted] prior to the annual completion. My annual bill states that all service bulletins were identified for the particular aircraft. Yet, this was clearly not the case.

Ultimately, we called the maintenance team at Jet Air Group in Green Bay, Wisconsin. They were happy to come pick up the airplane, and ferry it to their facility. On the flight to Green Bay, the pilot noted that he indeed had a drop in oil pressure with an accompanied elevation in temperature. He was able to get the aircraft back safely to Green Bay by using very low power settings. After intelligent trouble-shooting of the engine problem, it was determined that the vernatherm was not opening at the appropriate oil temperatures. They were sympathetic to my concerns about the aircraft, and very professional. They even ferried the aircraft to Hartford to ensure that no further issues were had with oil temperature or pressure.

After the aircraft was safely back in its hanger, I was left with numerous bills from Fond du Lac Skyport, Wisconsin Aviation, as well as Jet Air Group. Wisconsin Aviation had ordered an oil sensor and had it sent to Fond Du Lac. This part went with the aircraft when it was ferried to Green Bay. Upon receipt of this bill, a certified letter was sent to [redacted] requesting payment for $354.27, the amount of unauthorized work performed on N410SR. Since the bill for parts and freights billing by Wisconsin Aviation was $340.42, I suggested that we essentially “call it even.” I never heard anything back from [redacted], but continued to get bills from Wisconsin Aviation. I believe that requesting moneys paid for unauthorized work is quite reasonable given the unsafe situation that Wisconsin Aviation tried to put me in several times throughout this time course. Although the oil sensor did not ultimately end up being the cause for the engine trouble, I think that it is concerning that this was not listed under the discrepancies. I am sure that this is not the kind of treatment that you want your customers to experience, the reputation that you want Wisconsin Aviation to maintain, nor is this the culture of safety that you would desire your employees to have. I regret that I have left an unpaid bill due to this entire situation, this is not something that I am accustomed to doing. I am happy to pay for the parts and billing. But I am requesting to be reimbursed for the Fond du Lac maintenance. I am confident that you will give this letter, and my concerns, your due attention. I am also confident that we can come up with a satisfactory resolution to this very serious matter.Desired Settlement: A written apology from the company. Reimbursement for work unpaid OR dropping the charges requested for aircraft parts.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the complaint against Wisconsin Aviation to the Revdex.com, Case # [redacted]You contacted us with a request to find the fault with the problem you were having with your aircraft. As mentioned, you placed a called to us after hours but did not speak to the manager. You also sent an email requesting our assistance and advice on how to proceed. As stated in your email you were out of phone service and limited e-mail service. This email did not state that you did not want the technician at Fond du Lac to work on your aircraft; it stated that you had this technician looking into this issue and asked us to assist you in resolving the problem because of your absence and our experience with Cirrus aircraft. Your e-mail asked: “what would you suggest to do here?” We contacted this technician to perform additional troubleshooting as he is an FAA licensed technician and has years of experience working on Teledyne Continental aircraft engines. He has experience working on Cirrus aircraft as we have had this technician perform work on several other Cirrus aircraft that are based at that airport. He had already been working with you on this issue and with our advice, this was the most cost and time effective solution to the issue. When you returned to the area and I was able to speak with you and we discussed the concerns you had. At that time I apologized to the fact that you were upset and explained the reasoning behind our decisions. I also offered to continue working with you on this problem and had also made an offer to discount the expenses in an effort to further show our willingness to gain your satisfaction. Later that day I made arrangements to have a ferry pilot relocate the aircraft to RYV. I made several attempts to contact you for your approval, but a return call was never made. We later found out that you had the work performed elsewhere and the part that we ordered for your aircraft was installed by them. Since you did not return the part, we billed you for it. Because you had initially approved the work in Fond du Lac to be performed by their technician and we did not have any objection from you to that, we saw no reason that he shouldn’t perform the work. Resolution:An apology has already been made. As a further act of good business practice I will drop the charge for the part, but will not be responsible for any charges from Fond du Lac. Responded by: [redacted] Vice President of Technical Services 1741 River Drive Watertown, WI 53094

Consumer

Response: