October 9, 2025
ExcelAire is facing multiple lawsuits as the charter operator denies the allegations and claims that it misrepresented safety ratings.
ExcelAire LLC, a Long Island, New York-based private jet charter operator, is facing multiple lawsuits, all filed since July.
Both Marcos Antonio Bell, who is president of ExcelAire, and his father, Antony Stephen Bell, a pilot with the operator, dispute many of the allegations.
They state that the company is currently in full compliance with Federal Aviation Administration regulations and can perform charter flights.
Marcos Bell says, “With respect to operational authority, ExcelAire continues to operate in full compliance with FAA Part 135 requirements. We maintain all FAA-mandated Part 119 management positions and oversight functions, as approved by the FAA. Any statements to the contrary circulating on social media are not accurate.”
A spokesperson for the FAA tells Private Jet Card Comparisons, “ExcelAire, LLC, has a current Part 135 certificate.”
He declined to answer additional questions and directed us to the FAA’s website for the most current information.
Per the FAA, “This is a list of all aircraft operators and aircraft certificated under 14 CFR part 135 for commuter or on-demand operations. Both the aircraft operator and each individual aircraft authorized to fly under part 135 are listed.”
As of Sept. 17, 2025, ExcelAire N934HE, a large-cabin Gulfstream V jet, is listed.
The younger Bell tells Private Jet Card Comparisons, “We remain fully focused on providing safe, reliable service while addressing any matters through the appropriate channels.”
On July 18, 2025, Independent Jet Service Inc. filed a lawsuit against Excelaire in the District Court of Harris County, Texas.
The claim alleges breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices – Consumer Protection Act.
Independent Jet wants $57,000 refunded for a charter flight that never took place.
Nevada Jet Ventures LLC sued ExcelAire in the District Court of Central California on Aug. 15, 2025. It is seeking to recover $770,000 it paid to Excelaire.
Nevada Jet alleges the defendant “has engaged in what can only be described as a pattern of fraud and deception on (ExcelAire’s) part, all in a transparent attempt to convince and coerce (Nevada Jet Ventures) to pay for maintenance expenses that are plainly (Excelaire’s) contractual responsibility.”
Its case was dismissed last week without prejudice based on jurisdiction.
However, the counsel for Nevada Jet says his client plans to refile similar charges in short order.
Earlier this month, Private Jet Services, LLC filed a complaint for damages against ExcelAire in the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
It is seeking to recover $180,000 for flights it paid to the operator after it canceled a 10-leg multi-stop charter after two legs.
ExcelAire had offered to refund $120,000.
Private Jet Services is part of Elevate Aviation Group.
Of the filings from Independent Jet and Private Jet Services, which is known as PJS Group, the elder Bell says in both cases the operator was acting within the terms of its contracts.
The lawsuit from Private Jet Services contains a letter from Elevate Aviation Group General Counsel Hannah Blonshteyn to Marcos Bell, who is addressed as president of ExcelAire, LLC.
The letter states that on Aug. 11, 2025, ExcelAire canceled a 10-leg charter after just two legs. The trip was supposed to conclude on Aug. 24, 2025.
The letter claims:
‘On August 11, 2025, Nicholas Yapp emailed PJS’s VIP Operations department informing PJS that “[t]he owner of the plane has been called away on an urgent flight and the aircraft will not be available for the remainder of the tour,” and offered to wire an unspecified partial refund. PJS hereby demands a full refund of the $180,000.00 USD it paid for this charter. Nowhere in the General Terms (see attached quote and terms) agreed to between ExcelAire and PJS did it allow for ExcelAire to unilaterally cancel a charter once it has commenced just because the owner has requested his plane back.’
In her letter, Blonshteyn writes, “PJS has discovered that not only did this so-called reason appear to be completely fraudulent, but ExcelAire has repeatedly engaged in this behavior with other clients.”
Blonshteyn told Bell that PJS had tracked the Gulfstream jet.
It found “influencer/boxer Jake Paul posted a photo of himself on Instagram boarding the plane, where it then departed to Milan, Italy, where the plane is currently.”
She adds, “Notably, Jake Paul is not the registered owner of the aircraft.”
Private Jet Services Group included images from ADSB Exchange tracking the 1999 vintage Gulfstream G-V tail N934HE.
The senior Bell says ExcelAire is the lessee of the aircraft and was acting as the owner of the aircraft.
He says the jet usage after canceling the PJS trip was related to an ill family member.
Bell tells Private Jet Card Comparisons the Paul images were from an unrelated trip.
Bell says the company was within its rights to withdraw the airplane.
The FAA website shows JEMB GV LLC as the owner.
The PJS lawyer also took issue with ExcelAire’s marketing of safety ratings:
‘A quick look into ExcelAire’s reported safety ratings shows that ExcelAire is marketing itself as having ARGUS Platinum and Wyvern Wingman status. However, it appears that ExcelAire has lost its ARGUS rating altogether and is simply a Wyvern Flight Leader without Wingman status. This is just more evidence of ExcelAire’s unfair and deceptive business practices.’
The allegations in the letter were also included in its recent court filing.
The safety ratings, as displayed on the ExcelAire website as of tonight, are pictured below.
PJS Group argues, “ExcelAire made these misrepresentations with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth, intending to induce PJS to contract for the charter services under the false belief that ExcelAire met the highest levels of operational safety and oversight.”
A spokesperson for ARGUS says, despite ExcelAire displaying an ARGUS Platinum rating on its website, “They are not currently rated by us, so that is not correct.”
A spokesperson for Wyvern says, “Excelaire is currently a Registered member in the Flight Leader program.”
Wingman is a separate and higher status.
On its website, ExcelAire writes:
‘At ExcelAire, safety is at the core of everything we do. As an ARGUS Platinum-rated, Wyvern Wingman Flight Leader, and IS-BAO Stage III operator, we meet and exceed the highest international standards for private aviation safety and operational excellence. These elite designations reflect our rigorous protocols, experienced flight crews, and unwavering dedication to providing a secure, seamless journey — every time you fly.’
The junior Bell, whose signature includes the ARGUS Platinum icon, tells us, “Regarding ARGUS, ExcelAire is currently evaluating continued participation in the program. We have concerns that the costs may outweigh the benefits, as the program functions primarily as a marketing designation rather than direct safety oversight. Because ExcelAire has historically maintained a Platinum rating and invested significantly in the program, the legacy designation remains displayed. Our new safety and management teams raised concerns that the process, particularly during our recent audit, was not fully focused on genuine safety practices and processes. This dialogue has remained active, and since our audit, exchanges between our auditors, ARGUS, and our safety and Part 119 teams have seemed primarily focused on financial aspects rather than operator safety.”
An ARGUS spokesperson responded:
‘At ARGUS, we take great pride in the Platinum Rating, which represents the highest standard of operational excellence and safety in the aviation industry. This rating is not only a mark of distinction but also a reflection of an operator’s ongoing commitment to safety, transparency, and continuous improvement. ARGUS actively supports Platinum-rated operators through cooperative marketing efforts, recognizing the value they bring to the industry and to passengers.
When significant changes occur within a client’s safety organization, it is natural for ARGUS to conduct a review to ensure that the operator continues to meet the rigorous standards required for Platinum status. This process is part of our contractual agreement with clients and is designed to uphold the integrity of the rating. Based on evidence collected during such reviews, ARGUS reserves the right to adjust or remove a rating if the standards are no longer met.
Additionally, the completion of the audit and the issuance of a rating are contingent upon fulfillment of payment obligations as outlined in the contract. In cases where payment is not received, ARGUS may withhold the rating until the financial obligation is met. Should a rating be removed, clients are contractually obligated to discontinue any use of the Platinum designation in their marketing materials, including websites and promotional content. This ensures clarity and transparency for passengers and stakeholders. While financial challenges can impact operations, ARGUS remains committed to promoting safety above all else. Our independent audits play a critical role in helping passengers identify operators who prioritize safety. We stand firmly behind all Platinum-rated operators who meet the audit standards and uphold their contractual commitments.’
The Nevada Jet Ventures lawsuit, which was dismissed without prejudice, and whose counsel says will be refiled, alleged:
‘This lawsuit is the result of Excel’s naked misrepresentations in connection with an Aircraft Dry Lease Agreement NJV signed with ExcelAir LLC (“Excel”) on June 2, 2025, and under which Excel leased a Gulfstream GV N626JE bearing serial number 642 (the “Aircraft”), and a pair of Rolls Royce BMW engines with serial numbers 11396 and 1197.1 But since that Agreement was signed, Excel has engaged in what can only be described as a pattern of fraud and deception on Excel’s part, all in a transparent attempt to convince and coerce NJV to pay for maintenance expenses that are plainly Excel’s contractual responsibility. NJV will not allow this deception to continue.’
The lawsuit alleges ExcelAire “was engaged in nothing more than a fraudulent scheme to induce NJV to fund nearly $1 million in repairs that are Excel’s responsibility under the Agreement.”
Nevada Jet said it paid over $770,000 to ExcelAire.
The filing continues:
‘NJV repeatedly conveyed to Excel that it was prohibited from using any of the funds NJV provided – and indeed, demanded that it be returned. NJV further demanded that Excel immediately undertake to conduct and complete any maintenance required on the Aircraft, which is the lessee’s responsibility under the Agreement. Excel has refused. This lawsuit consequently ensued.’
The lawsuit by Nevada Jet further alleges that ExcelAire used the airplane for illegal charter flights.
Nevada Jet states:
‘NJV received a citation letter from the FAA on July 11, 2025, indicating an anonymous complainant had reported that “on June 14, 2025, Operator ExcelAire LLC operated and illegal 135 charter using aircraft tN626JE, call sign XLS502, from Addison Airport (ADS) in Addison, Texas to Eagle County Regional Airport (EGE) in Eagle County, Colorado then on June 19, 2025, from June 19, 2025 from George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) in Houston, Texas, to EGE. Excel, in short, not only defrauded NJV, it created regulatory problems through its unlawful operation of the Aircraft – the same Aircraft it now contends is not flightworthy.’
The initial lawsuit was from Independent Jet Service.
It engaged ExcelAire to fly three passengers from Moffett Field in California to Teterboro Airport in New Jersey on April 3, 2025, for a flight at midnight the next day.
Independent Jet Service says it wired full payment of $57,000 to ExcelAire on April 4, 2025, the morning of the flight.
Independent claims an hour before the midnight departure, Bell, the president, told them that “high winds” had impacted the crew’s duty schedule and proposed three alternatives.
Bell, per the filing, suggested pushing back the departure and moving the departure airport, which Independent Jet says its clients agreed to.
Later in the evening of April 4, 2025, ExcelAire allegedly said it could not reposition the jet from John Wayne Airport in Southern California to the new departure airport, San Jose International, due to local noise abatement restrictions, which restricted its departure.
The flight never took place, and Independent Jet says it filed its lawsuit in July after Bell evaded requests for a refund.
During a telephone interview, the senior Bell said that the charter flight was booked as a one-way flight.
He says the delays were related to crew rest and airport restrictions.
The passengers decided not to wait until the flight could be rescheduled, he says.
As a result, they were not entitled to a refund.
Marcos Bell, in written comments, added, “We deny all false allegations made against the company and do not associate ourselves with any of the allegations. ExcelAire remains committed to maintaining a professional, safe, and compliant workplace.”
Earlier today, he told us, “As far as I am aware, nobody from ExcelAire or our attorneys has been served.”
A lawyer representing Independent Jet did not respond to a request for comment.
As of yesterday, the court docket shows Marcos Bell was served on Aug. 4, 2025, and lists the case as active.
According to court records, the PJS Group lawsuit is also listed as active.
Find the perfect solution for your private aviation needs
Save Time. Buy Confidently.
Receive an apples-to-apples comparison of programs that meet your needs from more than 500 jet card and fractional options covering 65 points of differentiation and over 40,000 data points.
