DHowardAir

To bring everyone up to speed, we suggested all inquiring parties to remain patient while we acquired the full details from our due diligence. Only one person refused our advice on that and had off the chart unrealistic expectations. The price was adjusted only twice at our request to the seller in order to get the plane priced closer to market value after we had had a chance to fly the plane to Tulsa, then lay eyes on the plane and its records. A few minor squawks were tended to which is the norm in this business, and this Mooney checked out to be a very clean, attractive, and well maintained bird. The buyer was very pleased and got a nice bird at a very fair market price. All of the concerns by those who were not yet provided with the details ended up being concerned over what became non issues. I wish we had several more in inventory just like it as it was an 'well above average' Mooney. Many thx!

Cruiser, from my experience, it is all subjective, but fairly uniform to those who have engaged in discussions about the rating system. The Aircraft Bluebook Price Digest had (or it at least had had in the past of not now) a rating scale definition table of sorts near the front of the book. It pretty well labeled each rating of 1 thru 10. I never give anything a 10 unless it just rolled off the assembly line. So, new paint and or new interior (if done professionally) would start at a 9+. Most folks would rate an airplane with serviceable but old, oxidized, or dated paint with little or no gloss, but intact and not peeling off as a 5 to 6. I recall the Bluebook as labeling peeking paint as a 4, paint nearly gone as s 3, exterior corrosion a 2, and flat out unairworthy as s 1.

Cruiser, from my experience, it is all subjective, but fairly uniform to those who have engaged in discussions about the rating system. The Aircraft Bluebook Price Digest had (or it at least had had in the past of not now) a rating scale definition table of sorts near the front of the book. It pretty well labeled each rating of 1 thru 10. I never give anything a 10 unless it just rolled off the assembly line. So, new paint and or new interior (if done professionally) would start at a 9+. Most told rare and airplane with serviceable but old, oxidized, or dated paint with little or no gloss, but intact and not peeling off as a 5 to 6.

Gentlemen, A few weeks ago I said I would take a one look at the bird in question here and report back. In an effort to keep my word, I thought I would post a few photos as photos can speak 10,000 words. Also, the annual inspection was indeed completed prior to the erroneous suggestion of the original poster of this thread. The logbook entries were in an envelope in the logbooks and were inserted in the logs afterwards. I flew this bird from California to Tulsa, OK about a week ago. We opened it up somewhat today to track down a loose wire and were successful in such. While it was open I wanted to take some photos as I am very very pleased with what I have seen of this airplane this far. She flies very well, and the cosmetics were MUCH nicer and cleaner than I originally had expected it would be. Hope this clears up any ambiguity caused by the 'buyer beware' statement in the title of this thread. Many thanks for all the kind words.

Hello. This is Dan Howard, First of all, "fantom", I do know better. However, I wish you would have obtained the facts about what happened here in an unbiased fashion prior to making such a derogatory statement about me, because you've done so in error. I have been out of town the past week, picking up two aircraft, and I just returned yesterday. Today, yes, today, was the very first day I have heard anything about this situation. Mr. Wilson never tried to contact me, never left a message for me to contact him, to attempted to resolve the situation. I can understand him being upset about his perception of the condition of the aircraft, if it did not meet his expectations, but, his statements about the annual inspection due dates are incorrect, and his insinuation that we misled him intentionally are absolutely false. We very recently listed this aircraft, the more recent set of logbooks are still with the airplane in California, and the owner is currently in Washington state and has been unable to coordinate getting log copies of the current logs to us. We are scheduled to go pick up the aircraft sometime in the next two weeks. Matter of fact, we were supposed to go get the aircraft a couple weeks ago but the owner decided to have the annual inspection and some needed repairs prior to us picking it up so we would not need to make a 1,300 mile trip on a ferry permit. Thus, this has delayed us getting the records. When we get those logs here we plan to thoroughly review them, make adjustments were necessary in the ad, and be able to provide scanned copies of the entire logs to anyone interested. Mr. Wilson was advised that we have not seen this aircraft yet, that we have just listed it, yet he chose to go ahead and go see the aircraft right away. Our specifications always state that verification of all the times and equipment are the responsibility of the buyer upon inspection. That is the industry standard in this business because there are so many variables that come into play. Some of them are subjective, some of them are objective. We always list damage history, any damage history that we are aware of. We listed all damage history that the owner told us about. Many many times we run across owners that have an aircraft that has damage history that they are unaware of, or the owner has been dishonest with us, or failed to disclose that information to us. But, we normally find it ourselves once we get our hands on the logs and the aircraft and can do our in-depth research. I have been doing this for 18 years and we are 10 planes away from reaching our 1,000th aircraft sold. We routinely have very good working relationships and rapports with our customers. However, there are times when customers have misttreated my employees. When that occurs, it is hard for me to find much sympathy with that customer. My employees have been with me for many years, they are very valuable assets to my company, and I've come to rely on them and I have a lot of confidence in them. So, I'm going to defend them when I feel they're being mistreated. Also, when an employee tells me that a customer states that he/she is a police officer and then demands to be wife reimbursed for his travel expenses, and that customer has never reached out to me, I tend to not have a very good taste in my mouth. I also am a retired state police officer, a former state police pilot ias well, and I run my business with good ethics and I try my best to see that my customers are treated well and satisfied. But, that is very difficult to do when someone does not afford me the courtesy of requesting that I contact them and subsequently give me an opportunity of knowing that they have a problem. It is very hard to handle situations when they arise if one isn't made aware of the fact. I am an old-school kind of man, if I have a problem I go directly to that person and I try to resolve said situation with them one-on-one. I have good people skills and strive to excel in conflict resolution if given the chance. That did not happen here, and I'm really disappointed in that. If any of you gentlemen are seekers of the full facts, and would like to discuss this with me and get more details, you're welcome to give me a call during the week at my office and I will gladly discuss this with you. And I will be glad to relay to you gentlemen what I actually do discover once I get to go pick up this aircraft and get to physically inspect it and the entire logbooks. Thank you for taking the time to hear me out. Respectfully, Dan W. Howard (President) Dan Howard Aircraft Sales, LLC Tulsa, OK