Arc dispute defused

An aircraft surveyor was contracted to perform an airworthiness review in order to confirm eligibility for an ARC renewal on an Airbus A320. The review was conducted in accordance with EASA Part M Subpart I regulations, which require a thorough inspection of the aircraft and its records to confirm continued airworthiness.

After the ARC was renewed, the aircraft began to transition to a new lessee. The new lessee alleged that the aircraft had a non-compliant cabin modification, and that this should have made the aircraft ineligible for ARC renewal. The lessee made their concerns known to the lessor, who in turn initiated a professional indemnity claim against the surveyor. They claimed that they now faced potential significant financial loss and reputational damage as a result of the aircraft surveyor’s negligent airworthiness inspection. The surveyor notified ITIC and confirmed that they disputed the allegations of negligence entirely.

With the support of ITIC, the matter was investigated further to show that the cabin reconfiguration had been approved under a valid STC and that this had been properly documented in the aircraft records.  However, ITIC demonstrated that the new lessee had misinterpreted the applicability of the EASA regulations. The lessor was advised of this, and they responded to the lessee in these terms.

This matter highlighted the importance of maintaining and identifying clear, traceable records for all aircraft modifications and repairs. Crucially, ITIC were required to demonstrate how these supported the conclusions of the airworthiness review. It also showed how aircraft surveyors, especially those providing ARC review inspections, need to stay up to date with EASA regulations, and understand how and when they apply. Finally, it demonstrated the value of PI insurance in protecting professionals against liability that arises from regulatory misinterpretations and providing funding for the defence of meritless claims.