Passwort vergessen

Das neue Heft erscheint am 1. September
40 Jahre Pilot und Flugzeug - Sind wir Stümper?
Flugsicherungsgeb├╝hren an Regionalflugplätzen
Reise nach Spitzbergen
Flugplanung Polen
Risikobasiertes Training f├╝r die Allgemeine Luftfahrt
Unfall: Umkehrkurve
Engagierter Journalismus aus Sicht des eigenen Cockpits
Engagierter Journalismus aus Sicht des eigenen Cockpits
Antworten sortieren nach:  Datum - neue zuerst |  Datum - alte zuerst |  Bewertung

9. Februar 2012: Von Jan Brill an Jan Brill
UPDATE 9.2.2012: LOMA droht Pilot und Flugzeug mit Anwalt und Klage

Dass das Verhältnis zwischen Überholbetrieb und Kunde manchmal im Laufe der Zeit etwas einsäuert, ist ja nichts außergewöhnliches, aber dass der Zoff schon losgeht bevor auch nur die erste Beanstandung auftritt, das ist schon etwas Besonderes.

LOMA fühlt sich durch unsere Berichterstattung offenbar nicht sehr geschmeichelt und droht mit Klage. Dabei hatten wir niemals behauptet, LOMA sei allein Schuld an der Verzögerung. Wir hatten lediglich die widersprüchlichen Aussagen von LOMA und ECI gegenübergestellt und unserer Verwunderung darüber Ausdruck gegeben, dass LOMA den Status der kritischen Teile offenbar nicht ein einziges Mal nachgefragt hatte.

Folgende E-Mail erreichte das Redaktionsbüro heute Nachmittag:

Dear Mr. Jan Bril,
In reference to your publication 'Lisa is back' on your website from Pilot und Flugzeug,
I hereby must point out to you that some of your writings are not correct!
I do understand your frustration in accordance with the waiting for delivery of your engine.
This situation did occur because ECI did not tell us immediately that your crankshaft was rejected.
In fact, it was rejected on 20 december 2011 as you can see on the red tag in attachement.
Our parts arrived at ECI on friday the 16th of december see attachements.
So the parts could not have been inspected or rejected at the 14th of december!! (As you mentioned incorrectly on your add!)
At that time, ECI was having a change of management and therefor our new contact person at ECI did forgot to mention the rejected parts to us!
And you can also see the estimated time of return of the goods 01-15-12 (more specific 15 january 2012)
After that Loma-Air was closed for Christmas holidays from the 23th of december untill the 2nd of january.
Back to service on the 3th of january 2012. We only did know that it was rejected upon arrival of the goods and we contacted you immediately and called ECI to complain about this!
What I don't understand is the fact that you write this on your website looking as it was our fault.
And even more, that you didn't ever talked about it with us!
We are very friendly to all our customers and we always try to give them the best service and organisation!
I regret that ECI has forgotten to mention this in accordance to your engine.
If we did knew this before, we would have finished your engine much sooner!
Loma-Air is well known all over Europe for the good quality and service and I regret such publications as yours since we didn't make any mistake!!!
However, I must request that you remove all pictures and our name from this add before
noontime 10 feb. 2012!
Otherwise I have no other option than to contact my lawyer and the comission of privacy.
Thank You for understanding!
Kind Regards,
An Swiggers

Herentalsesteenweg 10
2220 Heist op den Berg

Unsere Antwort:


First off, I have contacted ECI on Jan. 24 to voice my disappointment with the lack of information towards LOMA. I was informed that LOMA was notified by Dec. 14th. I have good notes for the call so it should be no problem to retrace exactly what has been said.

Second, I do not represent this as LOMAs fault. I clearly state that I'm faced with two conflicting and incoherent statements and do not claim to know who is right or which version of events is correct. I merely state that that the customer is left holding the bag, which is - undeniably - true.

Thirdly, I voiced my puzzlement, that LOMA did apparently not follow up on the status of such a part until the box came back to Belgium. Puzzlement is, I think, a very polite way to put my sentiment.

Fourth, I did try to raise the problem with you when I was at your facility, but was told to come back later, because everyone was out to lunch.

As a result, I see no reasons to retract or change any part of our coverage about this experience. As a General Aviation Magazine we have been informing our readers about our experiences for more than 30 years. A request to remove either your company name or any picture of our own engine on grounds of "privacy" is – as your lawyer will tell you tomorrow - risible.

If you would like to pick a fight and drag this through the german courts - be my guest. Sue a paying customer. I'm sure this is going to be very well received by other prospective clients.

My suggestion: Let's hope that the engine serves our customers well (as before the OH). That would be the best advertisement for LOMA. Putting on about 400 hrs a year we shall soon see the quality of your work.

P.S. Our exchange will of course be published as a follow-up on our coverage.

kindest regards,
Jan Brill
Managing Editor - Pilot und Flugzeug

1 Beiträge Seite 1 von 1


© 2004-2021 Airwork Press GmbH. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Vervielfältigung nur mit Genehmigung der Airwork Press GmbH. Die Nutzung des Pilot und Flugzeug Internet-Forums unterliegt den allgemeinen Nutzungsbedingungen (hier). Es gelten unsere Datenschutzerklärung unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen (hier). Kartendaten: © OpenStreetMap-Mitwirkende, SRTM | Kartendarstellung: © OpenTopoMap (CC-BY-SA) Hub Version 13.52.04
Zur mobilen Ansicht wechseln