Narrative:

I am writing this over my concern for a 3rd party maintenance vendor. During my preflight I found numerous discrepancies after a [maintenance] check was performed. One of them; however; I thought was legitimate I found out later wasn't. The situation was during preflight I noticed 3 of the 6 cabin aisle lights would not work. At the time I thought that all 6 needed to be functioning when the aisle light switch is engaged. Therefore; I placed this in MEL under cabin interior lights and due to the other discrepancies that grounded the airplane we left it. The next day we were assigned this same airplane again so I reviewed the maintenance record. I noticed that the aisle light MEL was signed off stating that the bulbs were replaced. Therefore; I was happy to see that it was fixed. However; later in the day; in-flight I turned them on and noticed the same lights were inoperable. Therefore; I placed them in MEL and labeled it a 'repeat write up'. The next day I was assigned to another airplane. Therefore; I went to the manager and under maintenance noticed for the first aircraft that in the notes it stated that this was a non-led airplane and that this was normal. I then called maintenance control and found out that this was true. This was somewhat surprising to me as then why did the previous corrective action have the bulbs replaced; and if they were; would they not be operational checked to confirm they worked? To me this seemed as the initial write-up was 'pencil whipped' to sign of my MEL. The reason I bring this up as I also had a hydraulic leak that was signed off as over serviced after flying the airplane on the 7th. This most likely came from the same third party vendor as they had worked a hydraulic leak and signed off the airplane before my arrival. On top of that; after they did a [maintenance] checklist; I wrote up 12 discrepancies that were either placed in MEL; maintenance completed; or aircraft on ground. When correcting inoperative lights and the bulbs are replaced; maintenance should function test to make sure they work rather than sign it off as bulbs replaced but no function test.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Captain reported that a third-party maintenance vendor had not been properly testing completed work.

Narrative: I am writing this over my concern for a 3rd party maintenance vendor. During my preflight I found numerous discrepancies after a [maintenance] check was performed. One of them; however; I thought was legitimate I found out later wasn't. The situation was during preflight I noticed 3 of the 6 cabin aisle lights would not work. At the time I thought that all 6 needed to be functioning when the Aisle light switch is engaged. Therefore; I placed this in MEL under cabin interior lights and due to the other discrepancies that grounded the airplane we left it. The next day we were assigned this same airplane again so I reviewed the maintenance record. I noticed that the Aisle light MEL was signed off stating that the bulbs were replaced. Therefore; I was happy to see that it was fixed. However; later in the day; in-flight I turned them on and noticed the same lights were inoperable. Therefore; I placed them in MEL and labeled it a 'Repeat Write Up'. The next day I was assigned to another airplane. Therefore; I went to the manager and under maintenance noticed for the first aircraft that in the notes it stated that this was a non-LED airplane and that this was normal. I then called Maintenance Control and found out that this was true. This was somewhat surprising to me as then why did the previous corrective action have the bulbs replaced; and if they were; would they not be operational checked to confirm they worked? To me this seemed as the initial write-up was 'pencil whipped' to sign of my MEL. The reason I bring this up as I also had a hydraulic leak that was signed off as over serviced after flying the airplane on the 7th. This most likely came from the same third party vendor as they had worked a hydraulic leak and signed off the airplane before my arrival. On top of that; after they did a [maintenance] checklist; I wrote up 12 discrepancies that were either placed in MEL; maintenance completed; or aircraft on ground. When correcting inoperative lights and the bulbs are replaced; maintenance should function test to make sure they work rather than sign it off as bulbs replaced but no function test.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.