If th
projects that took vastly longer than the shop promised and left one owner out a couple of thousand dollars in missing materials and another fuming over both the delay and poor quality.
What went wrong here? In our view, poor communication and over-promising by the shop and business practices and policies we consider not particularly customer centric. For their part, the owners may not have been savvy enough-make that skeptical-in dealing with a shop whose reputation was unknown and who promised what we view as unrealistic delivery dates. Further, we have found that scheduling both a paint job and interior work at the same shop and at the same time is rarely a good idea. We always advise against it.
Cessna 210
The shop in question is Tri-D Aircraft Interiors and Paint in Watumpka, Alabama, near Montgomery. For Karen Edwards and Jim Pearce, the dispute with Tri-D developed during the summer of 2007. The two bought a 1978 Turbo Cessna 210 in the fall of 2006 which proved to be in good shape, but with a paint color and interior scheme that Karen Edwards told us was “hideous.”
With money in the budget for upgrades, the couple decided to paint the airplane and reupholster at the same time. After searching for shops to do the work, they settled on Tri-D, based on notices posted on the Cessna Pilots Association Web site. Edwards and Pearce found some negative comments about Tri-D related to slipped delivery times, but also found comments that these problems were addressed and “all was we’ll now.”
In late 2006, the couple flew to the shop to pick out colors and fabrics and were concerned to see some 20 aircraft in various stages of disassembly around the shops hangars. But Pearce said Tri-D owner Richard Chaput assured them of his ability to move jobs through his shop quickly. The couple agreed to a price of $18,000, including paint, interior and new glass and wrote Tri-D a check for the full amount ahead of work starting. The airplane was brought to Tri-D on February 10, 2007 and the job was supposed to begin immediately.
Delays
On their Web site (http://sss-mag.com/fernhill/airplane.html), the couple detail a litany of delays and what they describe as excuses from the shop. Some work began in March, but by April, the 210 still hadnt had its old paint stripped, something that didnt happen until May. When Pearce drove to the shop from his home in Tennessee on June 9, the airplane was stripped, but the interior wasnt complete and Chaput had stopped reliably returning calls, Pearce said.
By late June, the couple was assured by Tri-D that the base coat had been applied and the interior was installed. But when Pearce had a friend stop by the airport, the airplane was parked outside unpainted and with a gutted interior.
Although Chaput had assured Edwards and Pearce that the glass had been installed and the paint would be completed soon, by July 21, it still hadnt been and the Centurion languished stripped and unprotected on the ramp. By early August, the airplane finally got its first base coat. On August 20, Chaput called the couple to say the airplane would be done in three to five days and an August 31 pickup was planned.
But that date came and went, with more delays related to paint details and the lack of interior installation. At one point, Edwards and Pearce approached the local avionics shop on the field-CMA Aviation, operated by Jules Moffett-with a proposal to have them complete the job. This may have stirred Tri-D into motion, but despite repeated promises, the shop still didnt put the airplane back together suitable for delivery until mid-October, fully eight months after it arrived for the job.