Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
That was the trustee Mr. Arnot, not the judge. He did a bad job announcing the email address but I heard him talking with Mr. Conway and it was decided that the trustee should field the emails. His email is
Thank you much.
Thank you very much for your words of wisdom JJR - truely appreciate your help here. We'll get it underway.
because they are not good...mine has LCP spatter all over them and every dimple cracks. I could give a damn on what the engineers say. there are larger issues than just...your aircraft will last 130000 hrs. I don't want them in my aircraft and they wont be. Namely...they will always have the LCP stigma attached to them....you dont know what SB's will affect LCP aircraft in the future...your RV will be worth less....if something happens in the future your RV might be grounded. like I have always said....its just not all about the "engineering evaluation"...you have other considerations which ....well......are just not being considered. All I see is a massive increase in the part cost with a "bonus" 25% discount on blue and green parts to only make them 50% more expensive to replace substandard parts you already paid for. I'm sick of hearing about these parts from those not affected. If LCP is so good...why have they stopped doing it?
They say they stopped it because it costs more. How they calculated the cost is the question. Sure, buying from an outside supplier vs their in-house "costs" might look higher, but it all depends on how they depreciated their equipment and lots of other factors. Vans does not have a stellar background on how costs are calculated after all. It will take time to build back credibility. I am willing to wait and hopefully credibility and transparency will return. Time as always will tell.
I never listen to the engineers. I listen to the people on here!
I do listen to the engineers when the rhetoric is not contrived for survival...which some may disagree with. but this whole..."hey cracks are just fine" is just that. And I am sure they are right...that is most of those QB aircraft will outlast many owners...but they don't want the costs to fix them. And yes...of course this is easy to understand why...for the survivability of the company. Hey this time will come and go...people will forget about the whole LCP disaster EXCEPT those caught up in it.
Look you can hate it or like it but at least now you know Vans position on this and nobody can tell you “just give them some time”. They stated it under oath in court.
Those who are dismissing Vans engineers are not correct, those who are dismissing builders who feel uncomfortable with cracking parts in their aircraft are also not correct. I specifically recall one lecture from my strength of materials professor during undergrad. "You will reach the users comfort limits well before you ever come close to the structural limits." His example was if you build a bike that the engineering says is sound, but the deflection of the frame felt by the user while riding is enough to make the user uncomfortable then that is a problem. You do not need to recall the bike, but making changes for the next iteration to make users feel more comfortable is important. That is the situation we are in at the moment. If you believe Vans engineers ethics are compromised because the analysis was done after the fact you should not be building this aircraft. I don't believe that any builder truly thinks this is the case and is just mad that Vans rescinded the statement that all LCP will be replaced, and questioning engineering is the best argument trying to hold them to that statement. As an engineer I have to do analysis on countless non conformities when machine shops mess up. My boss asks if the part is fine with these errors, so far not a single one of these errors has actually resulted in the part needing to be scrapped. You are well within your right to acknowledge that while the engineering may be sound your threshold of comfort has passed its limit. That is the situation I am in. I do not believe Vans owes me anything related to LCPS. I will gladly pay to have them replaced to cross back into the realm of comfort, but that is my decision. This stopped being an engineering discussion and has become a public relations discussion with premature statements from the company.
And after all that two questions. Do you believe in the public’s eye there will be a stigma attached to those affected aircraft? And if not two rv7’s side by side. Both equal but one riddled with cracks from 2022 and one not from 2023. Which one would you buy? Let’s put aside the whole engineering logic for now and also look at human emotion. This is being conveniently overlooked.
I 100 percent believe there will be a stigma, that is not overlooked in the slightest. That is quite literally what you and I are both agreeing that we are not comfortable with. Once again, public relations, not engineering.
Probably one of the best summations of this whole mess to date.
Wasn't the "judge" that said that - judge wasn't in the meeting - Stephen Arnott said it and then didn't give the email address (at least I didn't hear it)
[email protected]
I think it is a rational interpretation because that is what those numbers indicate. It is unclear when the business is expected to at least start breaking even again. A lot probably depends on how many customers agree to revised contracts as well as how many new customers place orders, and then Van's capacity to deliver those orders. Otherwise, they will need more external funding. The inventory is valued at $25 million so if that can be converted to revenue it will be a big help.
Possibly the best summary of the LCP issue I’ve seen. Well said.
Equally difficult listening to builders swooning and saying how they will gladly pay more.
I remember hearing that even when compared to externally manufactured punched parts, LCP are still more expensive. So punching is cheaper no matter how you look at it.
I don't know about "emerges from chapter 11", but I have been told by an attorney that if I do not file a claim that I will effectively have no rights, particularly if the company does not emerge from chapter 11.
If they emerge and cannot perform, assuming your money really is in escrow, the court should be able to return your money. However, if your money has been moved out of escrow to start the manufacturing process I would think you are going to be SOL if they don't perform.
Depends on the terms of the trust, no ?
You can pay up and file a claim.
I was initially very concerned about the cracking, even though I have very few LCP (5) in my RV-10 empennage, which are being replaced (hopefully soon). I spoke to an A&P and read all the documents before the C11 filing and became quite comfortable with Van's process and not concerned with respect to the "do not need to be replaced" parts.
Robert, can you elaborate on this? Can a claim be filed even if a contract with the new pricing was signed?
Since these parts are acceptable by engineering then why would Vans reject returning them for credit? Seems like a no brainer. Old retail was say $10 which means kit credit is probably $6 new retail is $17.50. You pay a guy $6 for a part and resell it at $17.50. Plus there are lots of folks clamoring to “gladly pay more”.
is it really so tough to understand that different folks have different perspectives based on the differing impacts we all face? Some haven’t started building yet. Some need just one more kit. Some have many thousands of dollars in deposits at risk. Every individual has a certain level of risk tolerance and for many, paying more money to reduce or eliminate their risk is reasonable. They don’t want to see the company fold. Maybe others do want to see that outcome, for instance if they stand to lose very little money and feel that this outcome somehow represents a justice done in their eyes…
I agree, and I think I have said this before, but I am going to say it again. There is a whole industry of people who are hurting now due to this situation. No, I am not speaking about myself or my business, as the maintenance business will always be there. It is all of the "add-on" suppliers, for the lack of a better term. They have made a lot of difference in customizing or just plain enabling us to finish our RV's over the years. Everything from interiors, instrument panels, engine shops, wheels/brakes, control locks, dimple/die sets, etc. I bet I could go on for multiple pages just listing half of the ones I have used over the years, including this very forum. Many of them have been hurting for a while now due to the slow down in building because of the LCP/bankruptcy issues. For those who might have a bone to pick with Van's, I'm not here to say whether you are right or wrong. Everyone's situation is different. But, again, it is a whole lot bigger than just Vans. Let's not lose sight of that. I've been around long enough in the corporate world to know mistakes have a way of working themselves out over time, and usually everone ends up better and stronger for it. If this doesn't happen at Vans it would be very surprising and certainly an outlier. Maybe every individual won't have a "win" in their eyes, and I understand that. Quite candidly, with my lack of patience, if I had been building now I know it would be showing. But in the end, I think the hwole industry is going to get better and stronger.
Yes, at the hearing last week, there seemed to be a lot of "we can't", "we won't", "we don't know", and it seemed almost like "we don't care". At least as it related to the customers.
My favorite was the "circle back to you" comment, followed by I'm instructing my client to not answer! Its in the hands of the Lawyers , not pilots & Builders.
Because there parts mark up is 4-5x as shown in the claims filed so if they made the part it would only cost them 3.50$ so why would they pay 6$ and still have to deal with perception issues?
Received my last backorder from fuse kit(Feb 2023 order), yesterday. I was definitely upcharged for it and that happened 12/29. But I’m just happy to get parts at this point. They told me if I did not pay then the backordered parts would cancel. Not sure why I got stuck into that category for backorders.My big take away is that backordered items will be honored (with no upcharge.) Big news for those of us with big ticket items on backorder (seats, wheels, brakes, did I mention seats?
How did the upcharge get applied? Did Vans retroactively increase the fuse kit price, then charge you the difference in order to ship your BO parts? Or, did they upcharge only the BO parts and ask for a smaller increase to cover just those parts?
I’ve been receiving B/O parts from the time I received my fuse kit(no shipping charge). These last few B/O pieces are not much money, thankfully. But I received an email from vans after the ch11, stating I owe $ or my B/O will be cancelled. I called and asked why I owe. They said I owed for the part, I said I had paid for the kit in full. They then said it was for shipping. Then said they really didn’t know why but I had to pay or get parts cancelled. I paid. The receipt I received with the parts showed it was for the parts. So even B/O parts from paid for kits a year ago may get upcharged.
I get the feeling someone has messed up there.
Many things have been said that aren’t exactly the truth. I count this as a win to just get a part from the monsters mouth. Now, If I could just get the in stock part orders from them.
I don't understand the "Van's Must Survive," mantra. Claim #184 is from a smaller company in the experimental space many of us know well: Cleaveland Tools. Unlike Van's, Cleaveland's owner has been upfront about his company's troubles (likely fallout from Van's). He even made a video asking for our support. He didn't disappear millions in deposits and paid-for orders, but instead asked us to go to his website and order a t-shirt. What does Van’s do? It stiffs Cleaveland Tools out of thousands of dollars! I'm not sure Van's deserves any consideration it doesn't extend to others itself.
For me “vans must survive“ is for purely selfish reasons, as it is for most of us I imagine.
It's ridiculous to accuse Van's of consciously "stiffing" anyone. Yes, it's unforgivable that they fell asleep at the wheel and ended up owing more to creditors than they were making. I do not get why Cleaveland would deserve favor over any of their other bills. If Van, as the majority owner, wanted to stiff anyone, he would have closed up shop, filed chapter 7, let the courts liquidate the company assets while he fully retired in comfort. Instead, he pumped $6 million of his own money back into the company (and essentially to his suppliers,) and filed Chapter 11, which may well lead to his suppliers eventually getting all of what's owed back. At Van's age, I truly believe his actions are because he wants to do the right thing.
