Corporate Vehicles, questions (maybe a rant?)

[jimmydeanno]

I truly think that many people make the van repair process significantly more difficult than it's supposed to be.  As pointed out, major repairs are paid for by the repair budget.  If your unit has a van that is in so bad of shape that it needs constant repair, someone hasn't been doing the job correctly in the first place.

The unit isn't responsible for the cost of the major repairs and most wings include routine maintenance into their budgets (fluid changes, etc). 

If routine or major maintenance isn't being performed, in most cases, it is just because the unit that has possession of the vehicle is either a) unfamiliar with the transportation regs or b) too lazy to take the time to get it done.  Either way, it's inexcusable.

All of the vehicles repairs I've ever had to have done on our vans has been covered.  I've never had to even front the money for the repairs because of prearrangement with the shops to just receive the checks from NHQ or Wing HQ.  On top of that, there has only been one occasion that I've had an actual problem with a van.  It had been -30 the night before and some condensation on the alternator pulley caused it to freeze.  When the engine started it burned the belt off.  Even that was just an $8 repair and was covered.

So, have a conversation with your local leadership about van maintenance if its an issue and see what the wing reimburses.  There is no reason that the local units should be paying for anything except gas.  In the past there were wings who exploited units with large checking accounts.  They'd transfer vans to the unit that had maintenance issues.  The unit would repair the van and then it would be taken away, replaced for another clunker.  But, I'm pretty sure those days have passed.  YMMV.

[arajca]

Seriously, what's the actual issue here?  Has anyone fronted money they didn't get back?

Yes.

Well, I wasn't asking you, but I challenge that assertion.

If you weren't asking EVERYONE on the board, then you need to specify who you are asking.

Assuming that the process for maintenance was followed correctly, that is a serious charge and probably an area for an FW&A complaint or similar, if not a civil suit against CAP.

Head, Wall. Wall, Head. Play nice. For the amount involved, it's not worth a civil suit.

[Eclipse]

Assuming that the process for maintenance was followed correctly, that is a serious charge and probably an area for an FW&A complaint or similar, if not a civil suit against CAP.

Head, Wall. Wall, Head. Play nice. For the amount involved, it's not worth a civil suit.

The its also not worth mentioning in the context that CAP is making units cover vehicle maintenance, which it isn't.

[mynetdude]

Assuming that the process for maintenance was followed correctly, that is a serious charge and probably an area for an FW&A complaint or similar, if not a civil suit against CAP.

Head, Wall. Wall, Head. Play nice. For the amount involved, it's not worth a civil suit.

The its also not worth mentioning in the context that CAP is making units cover vehicle maintenance, which it isn't.

I don't know if it is or not, I have seen it go both ways.  I talked to my commander, and he expressed to me that a particular member has been paying for all preventative maintenance plus change for other routine maintenance which I will find out more about this week.

So far this particular member has paid for just about everything the van has needed except for tires or brakes. It needs tires, don't know if it needs brakes so will have to get it inspected if we continue to keep the van.

Another squadron I was in had their van's windshield replaced at no cost but that squadron pays for oil changes and wipers.

Again cost of oil changes and wipers can't be more than $100 a year (oil change 2x a year @ $40 + $20 wipers) and this assumes we put 6,000 miles per year, I am not sure what the milage requirement is in order to satisfy NHQ and it is not like we use it every day so I would expect to use considerably less miles than a POV would.

[Camas]

I talked to my commander, and he expressed to me that a particular member has been paying for all preventative maintenance plus change for other routine maintenance which I will find out more about this week.

So far this particular member has paid for just about everything the van has needed except for tires or brakes. It needs tires, don't know if it needs brakes so will have to get it inspected if we continue to keep the van.

Another squadron I was in had their van's windshield replaced at no cost but that squadron pays for oil changes and wipers.

CAPR77-1 states in part that wing will be responsible for maintenance. Does that mean wing pays for oil changes? I don't know. But if those tires need replacing that's not something to fool with. Get that done now!

[mynetdude]

I talked to my commander, and he expressed to me that a particular member has been paying for all preventative maintenance plus change for other routine maintenance which I will find out more about this week.

So far this particular member has paid for just about everything the van has needed except for tires or brakes. It needs tires, don't know if it needs brakes so will have to get it inspected if we continue to keep the van.

Another squadron I was in had their van's windshield replaced at no cost but that squadron pays for oil changes and wipers.

CAPR77-1 states in part that wing will be responsible for maintenance. Does that mean wing pays for oil changes? I don't know. But if those tires need replacing that's not something to fool with. Get that done now!

Looks like I will be digging into the transpo regs before heading up to wing staff meeting.  I agree tires need to be replaced, the summer is coming the heat will kill these tires so it will be my job to make sure that the tires will be replaced with a DOT approved tire for that vehicle.