FBO will not give me my plane back

[Clip4]

Not if you intend to stop payment. We had this happen where I used to work. They arrested the guy. It was sweet.

Prove he intended to cancel the check and just didn’t re-evaluate the situation as being defrauded.

 

[Unit74]

In my state, if you pay with a check that is known to be bad, you've committed a felony.

Yuuup..... It's called "Hot Checks" in Arkansas.......

 

[Bonchie]

This is ridiculous and why pilots have a notorious reputation for being cheap. I pulled up asked about parking fees and left it.....for two weeks.

Recently...I went to a hotel paid for a night and tried to stay two weeks and they had the audacity to kick me out!

They should've bulldozed your plane into a ditch as it was abandoned property.

I don't know why some people don't expect FBOs to operate like any other business. If I tell a customer there's no charge for something and don't specify the details, I don't get to then demand an exorbitant amount of money from them when they return, EVEN if they take advantage of me a little. Your analogy makes no sense. If a hotel says (they wouldn't, but let's pretend) "sure stay for free, there's no charge" and doesn't warn me throughout my stay, they can't come back two weeks later and demand Waldorf Astoria nightly pricing for the entire stay.

I've owned businesses before where I assumed something from a customer. Sometimes in good faith. When I didn't end up getting what I expected from them, that was on me. I can't demand anything from them at that point and still be ethical. You write it off to a lack of diligence and move on.

If there was no written contract and he was really told there was no charge, this FBO should just move on. Demanding $1200 from the guy is unethical.

 

[Clip4]

Yuuup..... It's called "Hot Checks" in Arkansas.......

And the violation is you wrote the check without sufficient funds to begin with or with drew the fund before the check cleared.

5-37-302 - Unlawful acts.
Universal Citation: AR Code § 5-37-302 (2014)
It is unlawful for any person:

(1) To procure any article or thing of value or to secure possession of any personal property to which a lien has attached or to make payment of rent or to make payment of a child support payment or to make payment of any taxes, licenses, or fees, or any fine or court costs, or for any other purpose to make or draw or utter or deliver, with the intent to defraud, any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation, knowing at the time of such making, drawing, uttering, or delivering that the maker or drawer has not sufficient funds in, or on deposit with, such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information in full, and any other check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds then outstanding;

(2) To make, draw, utter, or deliver or to cause or direct the making, drawing, uttering, or delivering of any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money on any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation in payment of wages or salaries for personal services rendered, knowing that the maker, drawer, or payor does not have sufficient funds in or on deposit with such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment in full of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information as well as any other then-outstanding check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds, and with no good reason to believe the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information would be paid upon presentation to the person or bank upon which same was drawn; or

(3) After he or she has made, drawn, uttered, or delivered a check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, to withdraw or cause to be with intent to defraud, the funds or any part of the funds that have been deposited in the bank before presentment of the check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for payment, without leaving sufficient funds in the bank for payment in full of the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information and any other check, draft, or order upon the funds then outstanding.

 

[lancie00]

This is ridiculous and why pilots have a notorious reputation for being cheap. I pulled up asked about parking fees and left it.....for two weeks.

Recently...I went to a hotel paid for a night and tried to stay two weeks and they had the audacity to kick me out!

They should've bulldozed your plane into a ditch as it was abandoned property.

You must run an FBO. To me it sounds like the OP never asked to park for free. He landed, purchased fuel, ASKED IF THERE WAS A PARKING FEE IF HE LEFT THE PLANE FOR 2 WEEKS. Management said there was no fee and would try to park it inside if they had room. When he came back 2 weeks later, at the time he said, the new FBO held his plane for hostage.

You're hotel analogy doesn't compare to this situation unless the hotel said you could stay for free. Then tried to charge you when you checked out.

Would you have really bulldozed an airplane when the owner said he would be back in 2 weeks? If so, you would have owed him a new airplane.

Let alone the fact that $1200 for 2 weeks of parking seems extremely high to me but I don't know where this was either. If it was Key West he probably got a deal. If it was Podunk Nowhere, in my opinion, it's highway robbery.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

If you fight this or if you do any of the too-cute things people have recommended, they’ll file a lien against the airplane and it’ll cost you more than $1200 to fix it. Pay the money and move on.

And post the FBO name and location...

 

[JOhnH]

You must run an FBO. To me it sounds like the OP never asked to park for free. He landed, purchased fuel, ASKED IF THERE WAS A PARKING FEE IF HE LEFT THE PLANE FOR 2 WEEKS.

You could be right. But the OP merely said the FBO told him no fees. He doesn't mention anything about two weeks except that he returned after two weeks. It looks to me like you made up the part about "IF HE LEFT THE PLANE FOR 2 WEEKS".

 

[MooneyDriver78]

You could be right. But the OP merely said the FBO told him no fees. He doesn't mention anything about two weeks except that he returned after two weeks. It looks to me like you made up the part about "IF HE LEFT THE PLANE FOR 2 WEEKS".

We’re only hearing one side of the story.
FBO: “you can leave it parked on the ramp for free or we can pull into the hangar.”
Noticed they aren’t saying it would be free.

 

[Salty]

My problem would be refusing me access to my property. That’s why I would be calling the cops if they didn’t agree to a reasonable compromise of $150. If I wasn’t told about the fee, and they didn’t bother to even call me when they took ownership of the hangar, then they have no right to charge me. They certainly have no right to keep my plane unless I’ve signed something that gives them that right.

To use the analogy above, if I park in my neighbors driveway and give them the keys, they can’t move the car into their garage and then refuse me access until I pay them.

 

[lancie00]

You could be right. But the OP merely said the FBO told him no fees. He doesn't mention anything about two weeks except that he returned after two weeks. It looks to me like you made up the part about "IF HE LEFT THE PLANE FOR 2 WEEKS".

You are correct, I made an assumption that they talked about the amount of time the plane was going to be there, but if the manager said there were no ramp fees, what difference does it make if he left his plane for 2 days or 2 weeks? I can't believe that the length of time it was there was not talked about. Let alone the fact that the OP left his "name, number and email." If the FBO had a problem with the length of time, he could have easily contacted the OP.

 

[Salty]

My experience with parking in remote hangars has been that I always had full access and they billed me remotely after I got home.

 

[murphey]

If the facts are as described, I would just be inclined to tell them if they don't return your plane and you are forced to pay their bill under duress you will then sue them (both the FBO and the individuals personally) for fraud and conversion of property (ask them if they think their insurance policy covers them personally for fraud and conversion), and will be seeking punitives, attorneys' fees, costs, pre and post judgment interest. Their costs are going to be a hell of a lot higher than then 1200.00 they are trying to charge. No, I don't know what state you are in and what the law is, so I can't tell you that these theories will be successful and/or that there are not better theories of recovery. I am just talking negotiation right now. In general (maybe not in that state, granted), they take the property subject to the prior agreements. They step into the shoes of the prior owner. They don't get to unilaterally re-negotiate the contract ex post facto. This is essentially no different than if you had pre-paid the prior FBO owner.

To the OP.....Is there a law school in the area? Frequently the 3rd year students (supervised by faculty who are lawyers in that state) will "consult" for free, just for the experience. They're familiar with the law, altho unlikely aviation law. But it's a low-cost option to start with. They can also advise on the procedure and paperwork for small claims court.

#1 - step is to contact AOPA and ask for whatever legal suggestions they can offer.
#2 - find the law school clinic and ask for help & suggestions
#3 - do NOT lose your temper but send a registered/certified/whatever letter by US Mail to the FBO requesting details about the "new rules", and stating that charging for the entire 2 weeks when the new rules have only been in effect since they took over is unfair and unreasonable, that you will be happy to pay the $75day fee only since they took over.
#4 - find a really good friend to go with you as a witness any time you need to speak with the FBO. Do not ever go alone. You want a witness at all times, even if on the telephone. Some states will allow you to record phone conversations if one party is aware of the recording, other states requires both parties to agree to the recording. Check on the rules in your state.

 

[Salty]

Obviously we are only hearing one side of the story. If any of the story is in factual then any opinion would not apply.

 

[kyleb]

FBO's assume overnight or, maybe, a couple of days unless you tell them otherwise. At this point, I think the OP would be wise to volunteer to pay 2 weeks of hangar rental at the FBO's standard long term rate.

 

[murphey]

This is ridiculous and why pilots have a notorious reputation for being cheap. I pulled up asked about parking fees and left it.....for two weeks.

Recently...I went to a hotel paid for a night and tried to stay two weeks and they had the audacity to kick me out!

They should've bulldozed your plane into a ditch as it was abandoned property.

Thoughtful and insightful response. Thank you for playing.

 

[Jamie Kirk]

In my state, if you pay with a check that is known to be bad, you've committed a felony.

I’m in CA and this is true and not enforced. Had plenty of people write a bad check and they would tell the judge in court they knew it was not good. Law stays you get 3x the check amount.

Every single time the judge made the judgement for the original check amount and no penalties.

 

[Fred Thomas]

I must be taking crazy pills, when I first ready this thread I swear the OP had commented that they had informed the FBO of the two week timeframe, and had asked to not have it put into a hanger due to cost. Am I just overlooking that post now or did I make it up in my head?

 

[kyleb]

Am I just overlooking that post now or did I make it up in my head?

I think you made it up. I saw his initial post right after it was made and my mental note was "Hmm, dropped it off without mentioning the duration of the stay."

 

[Gerhardt]

1. I think the OP was out of line. He doesn't mentioning telling them ahead of time he'd planned to leave it for two weeks. Any reasonable person would do that.

2. The OP also isn't naming the FBO even though several pilots have asked. So that's a red flag.

3. If it was me, I'd offer to pay maybe $300 to make it go away. If the FBO refused, then I'd visit the local PD, explain the situation and let them know I'm headed there to get my plane back, using force if necessary, and that they're more than welcome to tag along if they want. They'll more than likely ask you not to, but tag along anyway.

 

[Lachlan]

Go to the nearest high quality cheese shop and ask for two pounds of their smelliest, runniest cheese. Order it in a squeeze tube, like cake frosting. Head to the airport with your new bag of stank, and squeeze a little at a time into the fresh air vents on each of the FBO employees’ vehicles. Then, head to a decent boat shop and buy a canoe and small electric motor. Bring you pole and some bait, and take your gear to a good, smooth lake, and spend the rest of the day trolling by yourself.

 

[lancie00]

I must be taking crazy pills, when I first ready this thread I swear the OP had commented that they had informed the FBO of the two week timeframe, and had asked to not have it put into a hanger due to cost. Am I just overlooking that post now or did I make it up in my head?

I though the same thing. I could have sworn the OP told the FBO about the time frame but I just went back though the posts and can't find any place that he said that.

 

[Clip4]

Read #3. you cannot write a check and withdraw funds from an account before it clears. That is not the same as requesting a bank to do a stop payment.

And the violation is you wrote the check without sufficient funds to begin with or with drew the fund before the check cleared.

5-37-302 - Unlawful acts.
Universal Citation: AR Code § 5-37-302 (2014)
It is unlawful for any person:

(1) To procure any article or thing of value or to secure possession of any personal property to which a lien has attached or to make payment of rent or to make payment of a child support payment or to make payment of any taxes, licenses, or fees, or any fine or court costs, or for any other purpose to make or draw or utter or deliver, with the intent to defraud, any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation, knowing at the time of such making, drawing, uttering, or delivering that the maker or drawer has not sufficient funds in, or on deposit with, such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information in full, and any other check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds then outstanding;

(2) To make, draw, utter, or deliver or to cause or direct the making, drawing, uttering, or delivering of any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money on any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation in payment of wages or salaries for personal services rendered, knowing that the maker, drawer, or payor does not have sufficient funds in or on deposit with such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment in full of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information as well as any other then-outstanding check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds, and with no good reason to believe the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information would be paid upon presentation to the person or bank upon which same was drawn; or

(3) After he or she has made, drawn, uttered, or delivered a check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, to withdraw or cause to be with intent to defraud, the funds or any part of the funds that have been deposited in the bank before presentment of the check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for payment, without leaving sufficient funds in the bank for payment in full of the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information and any other check, draft, or order upon the funds then outstanding.

 

[Lachlan]

Prove he intended to cancel the check and just didn’t re-evaluate the situation as being defrauded.

A discussion on an internet forum might qualify as proof. Just sayin.

 

[Ken Ibold]

And the violation is you wrote the check without sufficient funds to begin with or with drew the fund before the check cleared.

5-37-302 - Unlawful acts.
Universal Citation: AR Code § 5-37-302 (2014)
It is unlawful for any person:

(1) To procure any article or thing of value or to secure possession of any personal property to which a lien has attached or to make payment of rent or to make payment of a child support payment or to make payment of any taxes, licenses, or fees, or any fine or court costs, or for any other purpose to make or draw or utter or deliver, with the intent to defraud, any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation, knowing at the time of such making, drawing, uttering, or delivering that the maker or drawer has not sufficient funds in, or on deposit with, such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information in full, and any other check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds then outstanding;

(2) To make, draw, utter, or deliver or to cause or direct the making, drawing, uttering, or delivering of any check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money on any in-state or out-of-state bank, person, firm, or corporation in payment of wages or salaries for personal services rendered, knowing that the maker, drawer, or payor does not have sufficient funds in or on deposit with such bank, person, firm, or corporation for the payment in full of such check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information as well as any other then-outstanding check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information upon such funds, and with no good reason to believe the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information would be paid upon presentation to the person or bank upon which same was drawn; or

(3) After he or she has made, drawn, uttered, or delivered a check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for the payment of money upon any in-state or out-of-state bank, to withdraw or cause to be with intent to defraud, the funds or any part of the funds that have been deposited in the bank before presentment of the check, draft, order, or any other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information for payment, without leaving sufficient funds in the bank for payment in full of the check, draft, order, or other form of presentment involving the transmission of account information and any other check, draft, or order upon the funds then outstanding.

Note the "intent to defraud" language. I do not believe a property dispute such as this constitutes an intent to defraud.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Prove he intended to cancel the check and just didn’t re-evaluate the situation as being defrauded.

I think that the prior discussion with the FBO would be all that was needed. Suggesting that someone do this is a bad idea.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Note the "intent to defraud" language. I do not believe a property dispute such as this constitutes an intent to defraud.

Of course it does. Someone says you owe $$$, you find a way to get out of paying it.

 

[Clip4]

My problem would be refusing me access to my property. That’s why I would be calling the cops if they didn’t agree to a reasonable compromise of $150. If I wasn’t told about the fee, and they didn’t bother to even call me when they took ownership of the hangar, then they have no right to charge me. They certainly have no right to keep my plane unless I’ve signed something that gives them that right.

To use the analogy above, if I park in my neighbors driveway and give them the keys, they can’t move the car into their garage and then refuse me access until I pay them.

Note the "intent to defraud" language. I do not believe a property dispute such as this constitutes an intent to defraud.

Except the funds or any part were not withdrawn or caused to be with the intent to defraud, from the bank they were deposited. Writing a check with insufficient funds or withdrawing the funds from the account before the check clears is illegal - a stop order is not.

 

[Salty]

Except the funds or any part were not withdrawn or caused to be with the intent to defraud, from the bank they were deposited. Writing a check with insufficient funds or withdrawing the funds from the account before the check clears is illegal - a stop order is not.

Writing a check to get someone to do something knowing you will cancel it sounds like fraud to me.

 

[Clip4]

My problem would be refusing me access to my property. That’s why I would be calling the cops if they didn’t agree to a reasonable compromise of $150. If I wasn’t told about the fee, and they didn’t bother to even call me when they took ownership of the hangar, then they have no right to charge me. They certainly have no right to keep my plane unless I’ve signed something that gives them that right.

To use the analogy above, if I park in my neighbors driveway and give them the keys, they can’t move the car into their garage and then refuse me access until I pay them.

Just out of interest, how did you determine $10 a day was reasonable?

 

[Clip4]

Writing a check to get someone to do something knowing you will cancel it sounds like fraud to me.

Sounding like something should violate a law does not mean the law was violated. The act must meet all the elements.

 

[Salty]

Just out of interest, how did you determine $10 a day was reasonable?

If they set the price at $75 when took over two days prior, that’s $150.

 

[Clip4]

If they set the price at $75 when took over two days prior, that’s $150.

Depending on the airport location and other circumstances, $150 would neither be a fair offer for a plane stored for two weeks or sufficient to convince the FBO to settle the disagreement.

In defense of the FBO, I know of zero non-government operated FBOs that will allow you to park your airplane for two weeks free.

 

[Salty]

Depending on the airport location and other circumstances, $150 would neither be a fair offer for a plane stored for two weeks or sufficient to convince the FBO to settle the disagreement.

They didn’t own the place for two weeks, and there was no agreement with the old owner to pay.

 

[Clip4]

They didn’t own the place for two weeks, and there was no agreement with the old owner to pay.

As I stated, I know zero commercial FBOs that allow you to park your airplane two weeks for free and I don’t believe we have gotten the whole story.

 

[Salty]

As I stated, I know zero commercial FBOs that allow you to park your airplane two weeks for free and I don’t believe we have gotten the whole story.

I’ve parked for a few days outside for free many times. I’ve never been asked to pay $75 a night for a shared hangar, and I’d move on if I had. Last time I did a shared hangar it was $125 a week, and last time I did a t hangar it was $25 a night. Heck, when I evacuated the hurricane last year they didn’t even charge me for 3 days in the shared hangar in Vidalia Georgia. Awesome folks.

But you like to ignore the fact that my comments assume the poster is telling the full truth. If he’s not, then my posts don’t apply, so you can stop defending the FBO.

 

[Matthew]

New FBO owner takes over, asks "How long has that plane been here?" "Two weeks? Hmm, two weeks of short term hangar rental, let's see, at $85 a night, yeah, that's the ticket! I dunno what the previous owner told him, but it's MY hangar now."

Now, about the "not allowed access to the airplane unless you pay" thing. I think something's wrong there.

 

[danhagan]

In defense of the FBO, I know of zero non-government operated FBOs that will allow you to park your airplane for two weeks free.

I used to vacation and park at KFUL (Fullerton) at least a week at a time, and the Grigg's (AFI) never charged, as I used it as a base to see other areas like Catalina, Yosemite etc. ... would take on gas at least 3 times during each trip. Did that trip at LEAST 6 times since 2007. Called ahead and left EXACT arrangements each time. I always checked to make sure they were OK with these trips, and the older Mr Griggs indicated he was happy with the multiple refuel events.

 

[Skyrys62]

Ask for the keys to the courtesy car, then lock it in your garage.
(you didn't specify how long you would have it)

Tell them the previous owner asked you to store it for him. You were going to do it for free, but your wife decided she wanted to charge $1200 per day.

 

[Skyrys62]

Then you can both write each other checks, cancel them, both go to jail, end up cell mates, and beat the living sh*t out of each other.

He stoled my plane!

He took my car!

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Now, about the "not allowed access to the airplane unless you pay" thing. I think something's wrong there.

Yea, I just walk in, normally they are open.

So, clearly the OP is traveling, how long is he going to wait?

Did he just leave it with them, so they can continue to add more hangar fees?