Pre Loved Aircraft Wanted

[APenNameAndThatA]

1 hour ago, jackc said:

My recent buying experience was a horror story,  I found an aircraft in Victoria  advertised by a broker that read as a good buy with great credentials, since I could not leave Qld to look at it I needed to find someone to fly it here to Qld, yep that could be arranged he said.  I asked the broker IF the owner could take a video of himself entering and exiting the aircraft so I could work out IF I could do same easily.  The video came back good. Now this aircraft was advertised as a 2020 model with 10 hours total time airframe and engine.  Well the whole deal went down a mineshaft from here on…..I find out it’s a 2010 kit finished and registered 2020 and the  engine 2011.  I find that the engine no longer made from around same date.   When I query about parts am told by owner no problem…….then I find out the engine is the only one of the model in Australia 😞. More due diligence finds aircrafts owner 2 years ago lamented on a blog in the U.S. there were no parts for his engine. 

So I told the broker about my concerns, he says I have first choice as there is an interested buyer in the U.S. if I don’t take it…

I said sell it, I am out of here. Next, I get the most abusive text msg from the owner working me over for stuffing him around.

So, for 3 days I think about this whole deceptive mess and decide to ring the broker…….telling him about the abusive message.

Hi says that I should not have to put up with that etc etc, then I tackled him about his deceptive advert and…….he said that’s the way all broker advertising is done!  I paused…….boiler pressure rising, fast!  I let him have it, yelled at him ’If that’s the case all you brokers are a pack of lying, rotten, unethical spiv c…..s.’The lowest of the low.  He said there is nothing illegal about the advert, I said I don’t give a f….. about the law, what you did was totally unethical…..from a fellow aviator.

I can believe he stayed on the phone, guess I have to credit him for that.   I might add that advert for the aircraft is still up with no wording change as of yesterday.  I really hope some aluminium termites sneak into the hangar and eat the machine to dust.

Scuse me for laughing, but the abusive text from the owner was kind of funny. Can you tell me the aircraft so I can make some enquiries of my own? 

[jackc]

25 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Scuse me for laughing, but the abusive text from the owner was kind of funny. Can you tell me the aircraft so I can make some enquiries of my own? 

So you want to buy a $34,000 aircraft that sadly has been the subject of allegedly unethical advertising?  Search for Flightstar……

[skippydiesel]

Jackc - I had my own (mis) adventure with a "broker" - refused to sign his no responsibility for anything sale contract - whole deal fell apart and I now see the aircraft in question has been pulled from the for sale listings.

 

I suppose they (vendor/broker) must catch enough poor buggers , thus making their false representation (much more than "gilding the lily") pay off. Just a smidgeon of due diligence will reveal their duplicity and sour the sale.

 

The aircraft for sale, that I know of,  has its when new photo used (without mention) and other possibly minor (depends on how you view these things) misrepresentations in the details. The first viewer will be pissed off that the aircraft is not as presented and from there I would expect the negotiations to go down hill.

[jackc]

As a man who has been in Aviation for decades told me a while back……the only thing lower than the Aviation Industry……is the Horse Racing Industry.

Guess I got my lesson in dealing with a broker,  I would have thought the advert would have at least been edited to reflect the real situation, but no it’s still the same. 😞 Can’t help but think I would rather deal with a sleazy car salesman over a $300 rusty Corolla……..

[APenNameAndThatA]

9 hours ago, jackc said:

So you want to buy a $34,000 aircraft that sadly has been the subject of allegedly unethical advertising?  Search for Flightstar……

I don’t want to buy it, just make some enquiries. 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I have a great SK Jabiru for sale and you will get no untruths. And it's only $20,900. I have never sold a horse in my life.

 

[jackc]

IF you have sold any $300 rusty Corollas you are ethical 🙂 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Never sold a rusty corolla either, but once I sold a P76 for $900.

A car restorer called Romeo nearly wept on account of how those p76's are worth good money now.

[jackc]

Just now, Bruce Tuncks said:

Never sold a rusty corolla either, but once I sold a P76 for $900.

A car restorer called Romeo nearly wept on account of how those p76's are worth good money now.

The good old 4 wheeled ‘F111’ 🙂. That 4.4L Alloy V8 found its way into many Range Rovers!

[Markdun]

A couple of legal issues raised.  First, false advertising is not fraud.  Secondly all photos are old, it’s just how old.  But that aside there is nothing legally wrong with using an old photo.  Most advertising is what is called in Iaw as an ‘invitation to treat’ and not an ‘offer to sell’. For example a pawn shop had a pistol in its window with a £10 price tag attached.  The owner was charged with the offence of offering a hand gun for sale.  He was acquitted as the court found the display of the gun with the price tag attached was not offering the gun for sale, but an invitation to people to come into the shop to offer to bargain or to make an offer to buy the gun. 

In Australia, thanks to Gough Whitlam’s reforming government, it is unlawful to engage in false and misleading conduct in trade and commerce.  This is reflected in both federal trade practices and consumer law as well as State and Territory fair trading legislation.  But these statutes dont cover all transactions.  They dont apply to government sales (like railways, buses, etc); they dont apply to selling by people not engaged in ‘trade and commerce’, like buying a secondhand car or aircraft from some guy on eBay or gumtree; and they dont apply to goods or services not normally bought by household consumers, say like an old aircraft carrier or Darwin’s port.

The other thing that Gough Whitlam’s trade practices law codified was the the law of equity on ‘unconscionable conduct’ which I think in Australia includes the legal doctrine of ‘equitable estoppel’.  What this means is that if a seller make a false representation (or fails to declare a known defect) about something they are selling, and knows you are relying on that representation, and fails to disabuse you of it (say by saying that buyers should make their own inspections etc), they can be liable.  But this is quite hard for you to prove in court.  I have only tried this once in court and it wasn’t looked at by the judge because I won on an easier to prove ground.

in general the courts are pretty soft on false advertising as in their view a person of average intelligence expects ‘huff and puff’ in advertising, and therefore a lie in advertising is unlikely to mislead people.  Hence, telcos for years got away with clearly false advertising of ‘capped’ mobile phone plans when in fact they were the exact opposite of what was advertised ie. instead of payments being capped to a certain maximum amount each month the ‘capped amount’ was actually the minimum monthly payment.

[facthunter]

There are safety implications with claims re Aircraft condition. it's not the same as just having to pay more than you hoped for a phone bill.  Getting a VH back in service is difficult without records and IF they were falsified I  would imagine considerable penalties would  apply.. IF Casa are interested in  safety and it is a fact that planes have low standards of verification of condition then it's negligent in it's job given under Laws of the national government and perhaps ICAO compliance. Nev

[jackc]

In other words, don’t trust ANYONE until you can prove otherwise. I thought ‘aviation’ was above many other industries etc.   Well, the Broker I dealt with has left the same deceptive advert up for a month now?  And the aircraft owner is a knowing participant.  Makes it hard for any Broker who IS honest?  Do they exist?

If I find someone is deliberately trying to rip me off……I rain C17 loads of steaming turds on them!  I am too old to put up with it any more.

 

[Flightrite]

Buying anything S/H is a risk, we’ve all probably been burnt sometime!

The law’s an ass in this corrupt nation!

Edited October 17, 2021 by Flightrite

[Markdun]

Nev, I’m well aware of that. But ownership and registration (or safety) are totally different things. I once contemplated buying an ex RAN Vampire jet for a few thousand dollars, complete with spare engine cans etc. Probably some dry rot in the wood.  However, the RAN had lost the aircraft log books.... nothing on total hours etc.  it would have required disassembling and reassembling the wings etc to even get close to being approved for registration.  ‘Static display’ only.

[jackc]

7 minutes ago, facthunter said:

There are safety implications with claims re Aircraft condition. it's not the same as just having to pay more than you hoped for a phone bill.  Getting a VH back in service is difficult without records and IF they were falsified I  would imagine considerable penalties would  apply.. IF Casa are interested in  safety and it is a fact that planes have low standards of verification of condition then it's negligent in it's job given under Laws of the national government and perhaps ICAO compliance. Nev

And that’s why I think a condition report can be a con job,  It should be an ‘airworthiness inspection report’ A condition report can see a flying death trap take to the sky, at worst.

 

[facthunter]

A "condition report' for a RAAus plane is next to worthless. Numbered reg planes don't have to be ICAO compliant. Your "Certificate'  has no validity outside Australia.. Covered by dispensations.

 IF a VH registered plane is fitted with any bogus part not properly made  reconditioned by an authorised person or not covered by a release note the plane is UNAIRWORTHY.  Nev

[Flightrite]

I’ve got a VH plane with numerous Bunnings Aerospace parts, after market parts, battery is like you would find in any Rec Vehicle, all legal👍

Edited October 17, 2021 by Flightrite

[skippydiesel]

My very limited understanding si:

 

If its GA certified or RAA factory build certain standards have to be met. If not ,then the aircraft can not be legally flown or sold as a flying proposition. They could be sold as a project, parts only or some other description, that does not claim or suggest a claim of airworthiness.

 

The law is one thing (often an ass, slow to reflect societal expectations) lack of ethical behaviour is another - any half decent seller will  "guilds the lily" to some degree however anyone who goes down the track of false claims/misleading statements  is just scum.

 

Pre purchase condition inspection/report : Well done has a lot of value to the potential purchaser, may have limited standing in law but is a valuable tool in the search for the right aircraft. So far I have commissioned two and have yet tp purchase an aircraft - tells you something.

[spacesailor]

Those Roulette aircraft are now being bid on, with bids ranging from $ 25 to $100,000. 

The sailplanes are around $35,000.

spacesailor

[facthunter]

You play "Roullette' and you are gambling , Right?  IF they had the right documentation they would fetch higher prices. Nev

[spacesailor]

In their discription, there is the words after the prop hours, " unserviable " , whether it,s the prop only or the aircraft hard to tell !.

Two are up to $ 499.500. 

spacesailor

[Bruce Tuncks]

Good onyer flightrite. I guess you already know that the Wright Bros were very illegal by today's terms....  not a single aircraft approved part in the whole plane.

Actually it's silly to use expensive bits where a hardware shop item would be just as good and where there are no adverse consequences of a failure.

[facthunter]

Might have been the case a long time ago. You want to be careful. Some fasteners I wouldn't use anywhere on anything mechanical let alone a flying machine where weight is kept to a minimum.. Nev

[jackc]

My personal attitude only,  buy the best for the job and hang the cost.

I have already spent the money on the plane so I won’t complain about the cost of a few AN nuts and bolts.  I always buy spares, but may never need them.

I bought a spare set of Wingtech skins, even though the ones on the plane are 3 years old.  May never get to use them but if I do…….

Ordered a new crate 582, might not need it but……

Bunnings Aerospace is the place to go for…..Billycart parts!!   If only they were around when i was a kid 🙂 

[facthunter]

WWW =  Worlds Worst Wheelbarrows= Worlds dearest landfill. Nev