Selling a plane

[Yenn]

A friend of mine is selling hiss plane and he tells me that to demonstrate airworthiness he has to take the buyer up and do some circuits, 360deg turns and stalls. He did that with no problems, now he is getting an experienced maintainer to do what I would call an annual, all so that it can be sold. The buyer couldn't do the flying and stalls because he is not cleared to fly the Foxbat.

I thought the inspection by an approved person would be the equivalent of proving airworthiness. I fail to see what the present owner flying the plane does to prove airworthiness, it just seems peculiar to me. I thought if you had an RAAus pilots certificate to fly the relevent aircraft, ie nose wheel, 3 axis, etc you could fly the plane. If not how does anyone fly a single seater?

Has anyone sold recently and knows what is required?

[tillmanr]

As part of the transfer process a report on flying the aircraft is included.

[facthunter]

What you get for transfer purposes is called a "Condition Report". I would prefer someone independent and familiar with the type as best for that  You want all log books also.. Nev

[Blueadventures]

1 hour ago, Yenn said:

A friend of mine is selling hiss plane and he tells me that to demonstrate airworthiness he has to take the buyer up and do some circuits, 360deg turns and stalls. He did that with no problems, now he is getting an experienced maintainer to do what I would call an annual, all so that it can be sold. The buyer couldn't do the flying and stalls because he is not cleared to fly the Foxbat.

I thought the inspection by an approved person would be the equivalent of proving airworthiness. I fail to see what the present owner flying the plane does to prove airworthiness, it just seems peculiar to me. I thought if you had an RAAus pilots certificate to fly the relevent aircraft, ie nose wheel, 3 axis, etc you could fly the plane. If not how does anyone fly a single seater?

Has anyone sold recently and knows what is required?

Sounds ok to me; providing that the prospective buyer is paying for the annual if the seller is not prepared to.  The buyer may be being cautious and if the sale goes through, he plans to do some instruction on the aircraft to become current and safe with the type.  Can't knock a through check over.

 

The conditions of the pre purchase are between the buyer and seller.  Hope aircraft is in good condition and the sale goes through.

 

Some points to be aware of on the condition report form are "If possible a flight demonstration should be performed by the owner or person nominated by the owner .........."

Sometimes at time of inspection a flight cannot be made for example heavy rain, wind etc and such would / should be noted in the condition report.

And,  "This certification does not infer that I consider the aircraft to be airworthy or otherwise."

 

The annual is a good thing as a maintainer will sign for the work carried out. into the aircraft log book.  

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, Blueadventures said:

Sometimes at time of inspection a flight cannot be made for example heavy rain, wind etc and such would / should be noted in the condition report.

And,  "This certification does not infer that I consider the aircraft to be airworthy or otherwise."

If you make or sign a Certification you're making a confirmation that the aircraft is worthy, so it has to be airworthy, and you've assumed the l;iability for that.

If you're not sure, you use other words.

You Certifying as part of a sales contract is not a good move because as we've read in these pages so many people buy an airctaft, tow it on a trailer for hundreds of kilometres then don't like the look of the hoses or decide to make other changes and these aircraft never fly again, but if they do and the aircraft crashes, who is to say anything has been changed since you certified it, unless you go to the scene and identfy a dofgy new part or failed reassembly.

The best path is for the buyer to bring his expert along who approves it and the buyer, expert and airctraft all disappear into the distance. That way the liability goes with them.

 

[Blueadventures]

18 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

If you make or sign a Certification you're making a confirmation that the aircraft is worthy, so it has to be airworthy, and you've assumed the l;iability for that.

If you're not sure, you use other words.

You Certifying as part of a sales contract is not a good move because as we've read in these pages so many people buy an airctaft, tow it on a trailer for hundreds of kilometres then don't like the look of the hoses or decide to make other changes and these aircraft never fly again, but if they do and the aircraft crashes, who is to say anything has been changed since you certified it, unless you go to the scene and identfy a dofgy new part or failed reassembly.

The best path is for the buyer to bring his expert along who approves it and the buyer, expert and airctraft all disappear into the distance. That way the liability goes with them.

 

The condition report I am referring to is the RAAus one that is a requirement of transfer of ownership and specifically states that the report does not infer that the aircraft is airworthy or otherwise (TECH form 013).

[old man emu]

What happened to caveat emptor? 

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, Blueadventures said:

The condition report I am referring to is the RAAus one that is a requirement of transfer of ownership and specifically states that the report does not infer that the aircraft is airworthy or otherwise (TECH form 013).

Maybe the form doesn’t include any certifying?

[turboplanner]

6 hours ago, old man emu said:

What happened to caveat emptor? 

It died in the mid 1980s.

[onetrack]

Quote

What happened to caveat emptor? 

Caveat emptor was deemed illegal by sharp lawyers, and they have turned it around to "Caveat Venditor" . There has to be a balance somewhere, and I guess the balance swings back and forth a fair amount, before the scales level out.

 

I always remember my insurance broker telling me that all insurance policy relationships operate on the basis of good faith - i.e., the insurance company believes you are being straightforward and honest, and not indulging in deception when you provide all the relevant insurance particulars. 

And the insured relies on the good faith of the insurance company, that it will do what it says in the documentation, to the letter of the law. Unfortunately, this is not often the case, and good faith in insurance companies is often sorely tested by their devious behaviour when insurance payouts have to be made.

Add in the fact that large insurance companies have virtually unlimited monetary resources when it comes to lawsuits, and the balance is not there, when individuals with little by way of financial resources, have to take them on.

 

It's an unfortunate fact of life that many sellers are less than truthful when selling items, and are often intent on hiding faults, or a less-than-stellar history of use, and are fully intent on maximising the sale price, regardless of the outcome.

That is why when a large purchase investment in a highly complex item of machinery is being contemplated, it always pays to seek out independent professional advice as to the likelihood of any potential problems in the machine or its history.

 

The linked article below is a U.S. site, based on U.S. laws - but Australia follows U.S. legal decisions and legislation more closely today, than it ever did in the past.

 

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/caveatemptor.asp

 

 

Edited October 28, 2022 by onetrack

[Old Koreelah]

29 minutes ago, onetrack said:

It's an unfortunate fact of life that many sellers are less than truthful when selling items, and are often intent on hiding faults...

Too true, OT. A mate bought a plane (from a bloke who had a high profile on this forum) and after carefully carting it across half the continent, found lots of faults and corrosion. He stripped it and started again, but is still years from flying it. He’s out of cash and already old.

[Yenn]

What seems odd to me is that RAAus require the vendor to fly the plane through certain manouvers To demonstrate its airworthiness. I fail to see how flying a circuit and doing stalls demonstrates airworthiness. Nobody has answered my question.

[facthunter]

Yes it might have severe problems but the Vendor can mask them. It's BS and probably just to look as if things are being covered.  I used to fly a school Auster that dropped the right wing at stall no matter what you did  No one else really used it and it was cheap to hire. Nev

[spenaroo]

22 hours ago, Yenn said:

I thought if you had an RAAus pilots certificate to fly the relevent aircraft, ie nose wheel, 3 axis, etc you could fly the plane. If not how does anyone fly a single seater?

Has anyone sold recently and knows what is required?

This is what is confusing me,
I was under the same understanding that there isn't a type certificate, just design features.

I know flight schools like you "checked out" on aircraft - but my understanding is that those are an operations rule, created by that operator

Foxbat should just be an basic RPC, no need for extra endorsement for circuit flight

[facthunter]

It's not ridiculous to do a bit of a check for someone who you don't know before you let them drive your plane. An experienced instructor can pick a dud in a couple of circuits. You'd be considered negligent IF something happened. Nev

[BrendAn]

On 27/10/2022 at 4:56 PM, Yenn said:

A friend of mine is selling hiss plane and he tells me that to demonstrate airworthiness he has to take the buyer up and do some circuits, 360deg turns and stalls. He did that with no problems, now he is getting an experienced maintainer to do what I would call an annual, all so that it can be sold. The buyer couldn't do the flying and stalls because he is not cleared to fly the Foxbat.

I thought the inspection by an approved person would be the equivalent of proving airworthiness. I fail to see what the present owner flying the plane does to prove airworthiness, it just seems peculiar to me. I thought if you had an RAAus pilots certificate to fly the relevent aircraft, ie nose wheel, 3 axis, etc you could fly the plane. If not how does anyone fly a single seater?

Has anyone sold recently and knows what is required?

raaus only require a condition report for transfer. thats it. no test flying.  

and now they have brought in the 12 year engine life rule which will be expensive for people with old engines.

thats for aircraft that have lapsed rego, i do not know if it applies to registered craft.

[jackc]

On 28/10/2022 at 10:23 PM, BrendAn said:

raaus only require a condition report for transfer. thats it. no test flying.  

and now they have brought in the 12 year engine life rule which will be expensive for people with old engines.

thats for aircraft that have lapsed rego, i do not know if it applies to registered craft.

Mmmmm……..what is this 12 year engine rule?   I thought that kind of thing would be up to the relevant engine makers?

[RFguy]

No, that's a specific manufacturers rule. If RAA brought that in I think we'd all get together and change the entire board of RAA in one go with an extraordinary  general meeting.....

Edited October 29, 2022 by RFguy

[jackc]

If that rule was brought in…… I would erase my rego number and fly ‘stealth mode’ RAA?  Who ‘were’ they 🙂 

[Bruce Tuncks]

It would be insane to change a 12 year-old engine which has done only a few hundred hours for a new one. It would also  be counter-productive reliability-wise, as anybody who has read Mike Busch knows. He shows graphs which demonstrate that teething troubles make the most problems.

Edited October 29, 2022 by Bruce Tuncks

[BrendAn]

Ask Jared at raaus. He said they have now brought calender time in for raaus aircraft starting about 6 months ago. For rotax that means 12 years. For jabiru I have no idea. From what I understand it only effects new rego so don't let it lapse.

[BrendAn]

8 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

It would be insane to change a 12 year-old engine which has done only a few hundred hours for a new one. It would also  be counter-productive reliability-wise, as anybody who has read Mike Busch knows. He shows graphs which demonstrate that teething troubles make the most problems.

You can keep your motor but it has to be rebuilt.

[BrendAn]

I will ring raaus on Monday and get clarification on this because I got it from someone who registered an old plane.

[Old Koreelah]

Many of our little engines only do a dozen or so hours per year. I’ll be expecting a birthday telegram from the King before mine even nears 1,000 hours.

[facthunter]

Seals and cork gaskets, some neoprene can deteriorate with time. In most cases that would be an oil leak which would be noticed. If a seal goes in a 912 the oil may not return properly as it relies on the crankcase positive pressure to return it. Those engines have always had an elapsed time life limit.. Strip and replace a few seals etc is all that's required. NOT an engine rebuild BUT it would be silly not to look at things while it was stripped.  Nev