DURING PREFLIGHT; PILOT OF A B737-800 NOTICES THE CARGO LOADING SYSTEM HAD NOT BEEN DISABLED PER A REQUIRED MEL PROCEDURE. PLACARD ISSUED BUT NOT FOLLOWED. ACFT HAD FLOWN APPROX 24 FLTS SINCE MEL ISSUED.

Narrative

I COUNT ON OUR ACR TO ACCOMPLISH MAINT WORK ON AN ACFT. THAT LEVEL OF TRUST SHOULD NEVER BE BROKEN. I AM NOT A CERTIFIED A&P THEREFORE WHEN A STATEMENT IS PLACED IN A LOGBOOK THAT WORK HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED; ONE THAT IS NOT EASILY VERIFIED SUCH AS A TIRE CHANGE; THAT LEVEL OF TRUST IS EVEN HIGHER. A VIP WAS ON BOARD AS WELL AS EVERY EQUALLY IMPORTANT OTHER PAX AND 5 CREW MEMBERS. THE LOGBOOK STATED THAT WE WERE FLYING UNDER MEL AND THAT PROCS MANUAL HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. THIS WAS ON PLACARD TO DISABLE THE CARGO LOADING SYS DUE TO IT TURNING ON BY ITSELF IN THE CARGO HOLD COMPARTMENT. MY PREFLT INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THIS HAD NOT BEEN DONE AT ALL AND THE PAPERWORK HAD BEEN MADE TO LOOK LIKE IT HAD. THIS ACFT HAD FLOWN FOR SEVERAL DAYS AND APPROX 24 FLTS LIKE THIS. WHEN I WENT BACK MOMENTS AGO TO THE ACR COMPUTER MY VERY DETAILED WRITE-UP OF THIS INCIDENT HAD BEEN 'CONDENSED' AND IN MY OPINION SHORTENED SO THAT A COMPUTER REVIEW OF LOGBOOK ENTRIES FOR ACFT MAINT HISTORY WOULD NOT SHOW MY STATEMENTS SHOWING HOW MANY TIMES THE ACFT HAD FLOWN WITHOUT THIS PLACARD BEING ACCOMPLISHED. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS AN ISOLATED INCIDENT BUT I HAVE SEEN THIS BECOMING AN ISSUE MORE OFTEN THAT YOU WOULD THINK. MEL'S ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. THEY ARE REGS THAT ALLOW AN ACFT TO FLY WITH LESS THAN PERFECT MAINT BUT THEY ALSO CONTAIN RESTRS AND REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED. THE VERY NEXT DAY ON A DIFFERENT ACFT I WOULD SEE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MEL AND THE PROBS THAT CAUSED. THIS PRACTICE MUST CEASE!