1980Mooney

Spot on. And that "200,000" number of active GA planes per the FAA GA surveys includes helicopters, turboprops, jets, and amateur built. Even within a fleet/brand like Mooney consider all the modifications over time. That recent fatal M20J crash in Jacksonville, which seemed to struggle for power, had an early turbocharger modification done by an STC predecessor of Rocket Engineering. And then there are all the mods by defunct Mod Works and Mod Squad. I have a Missile conversion by Rocket. This year I had engine mount issues which were an incredible PITA - the shop had to "learn" at my expense because there are only about 50 nationwide and they had never seen before.

Sponsor?- GA airports in Houston are privately owned with the exception of Sugar Land. Yes KSGR gets some Federal money. I think there is some for the control tower and grants for improvements. Also got some CARES Act money. The City of Sugar Land bought the airport from Dr. Hull in 1990. Hull started the airport in 1953 when Houston's early urban sprawl consumed his favored airports at South Houston Airport and Sam Houston Airport in the early 1950s. The KSGR finances, especially capital spending, relies heavily on federal and TexDOT grants. I feel that the City will sell the land if they ever lose the federal/state funding. Let's face it, the City will make a much greater return directly (sales, rents and taxes) and indirectly if they turned it into a TopGolf and residential, etc. And yes that easiest and quickest way to settle an airport estate in Texas is just to sell to a developer. There is no zoning and no aviation authority to deal with - just a quick sale. Over the last 20+ years, in addition to Weiser Airport, urban sprawl on the west side of Houston has consumed Andrau Airpark (700 acres) and Westheimer Air Park GA airports. The land has been redeveloped as residential predominantly. Airports in the West have generally just been a way to use underutilized and undervalued land until it no longer is undervalued. I suspect in the next 10 years we will see West Houston (KIWS) and Hooks (KDWH) disappear. The owner/founder of West Houston is in his 70's. Land around West Houston Airport is now going for $500,000-600,000/acre. They have about 100 acres. Add in a nasty divorce, kids, lots of lawsuits from the ex and unhappy tenants. Do the math - it is just a matter of time. Hooks was sold by the Hooks family in 1989 to the Gill family. Growth around Spring, Tomball and Klein has surrounded the once remote airport. Land is going for $300,000-400,000/acre now. Another 100 acres. Just a matter of time.

Well you are in luck. Here is a whole topic on the saga of a stub spar replacement on an M20E (which is basically the same wing) with pictures.

You are right to wonder if the shop's liability is limited by contract or statute. That is because there is no statute that governs this situation or aircraft Pre-Purchase Inspections (PPI) or Pre-buy Inspections - the terms of the pre purchase inspection contract are what matters in this case. And we don't know all the terms of the contract nor all the facts of the inspection. Yet many have formed opinions of "it is a lead pipe case" to win, "Theres no reasonable way you'd lose this one", "It’s an open and shut case". As @LANCECASPER and @A64Pilot have both pointed out a PPI/Pre-Buy is not an inspection recognized by the FAA. There is no legal or recognized definition or standard for the PPI inspection. There is no requirement for it by statute. The requirements and standards of inspection of the PPI/Pre-Buy are set contractually, and only contractually and agreed to by the perspective Buyer. The inspecting shop may or may not have liability depending on the terms of the contract and the facts of the inspection. We don't know what the Pre-Purchase Inspection/Pre-Buy Contract actually says is there a written contract? does it stipulate that it will inspect 100% of the plane? does it state that it will inspect all surfaces for corrosion?..or only visible surfaces as seen from inspection ports? will it guarantee to inspect all hidden areas with mirrors and borescopes? does it guarantee that it will find 100% of all airworthiness issues and 100% of all other discrepancies? or does it say the shop will only use "reasonable efforts"? Importantly does the contract say the Buyer will release the Shop of all liability (waive any claims of liability)? We don't know if the shop provided a written report that stated that ALL the structural components and specifically the wing spar and rear false spar were all inspected and all were 100% free of corrosion. If there is a contract and the shop made specific guarantees or statements contrary to condition of the spar then the Buyer likely has a case. If the contract stipulated reasonable efforts, released the shop of liability, made no guarantee and the shop made no statement that the spars were 100% corrosion free then it will be hard (and expensive as @DonMuncy pointed out) to make a case against the shop. Some seem to think that a PPI/Pre-Buy automatically commits an A&P or shop to an implied opened ended contract in which "It’s as simple as it sounds. He paid to find deficiencies in the aircraft." And "judges I know are concerned with making things right ..not paper contracts" Also some think that a threating letter from an attorney will scare the shop into a settlement. @DXB seems to have some insight into the owner of this particular shop "Once you lawyer up, something tells me that this particular shop owner, who is a bit of a magnet for dissatisfaction and drama, is going to dig heels and fight rather than seek the path of least resistance even if its in his own interest." FlightLevel operates 11 FBO's - they are not a "mom & pop". At Norwood they led an 11 year legal battle to retain their monopoly and keep a new entrant out. I don't think the threat of a lawsuit would worry them at all. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2020-10-14/norwood-airport-fbo-spat-headed-back-court https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2021-07-06/norwood-fbo-and-running-after-11-year-battle Here is a similar case in aviation law. https://casetext.com/case/pissed-away-n6vc In this case in 2010 the mechanic (defendant) conducted a prebuy inspection on a 1945 GRUMMAN TBM-3. Following a pre-buy inspection the Buyer (plaintiff) elected to purchase the plane. As a part of the sale and purchase the the mechanic continued his inspection of the plane, conducting and logging a 100 hours Inspection and logging the plane as airworthy. The 100 hour inspection was logged after the sale was complete. Subsequently the Buyer, during an Annual, found and claimed that there was corrosion, improper rigging of flight controls and control cables, etc. that the pre-buy mechanic missed. The Buyer filed suit against the prebuy mechanic for negligence and fraud. The court acknowledged that the prebuy inspection and report by the mechanic established "causation" for the purchase. They argued about how difficult it would be to find all these issues. The mechanic argued that in inspecting the aircraft he only had a duty to the FAA, and not to Plaintiff, and that Plaintiff is thus not entitled under Missouri law to bring a claim of negligent misrepresentation against the mechanic. In the end the Court and Judge sided with the mechanic (defendant) and dismissed the claims of the Buyer (plaintiff). This is not a defense of the shop. It is just a recognition of reality. In a PPI/Pre-Buy you get what you pay for per the terms of your contractual agreement. The facts may be in favor of the Buyer in this case or they may not. But if he does pursue a legal settlement at this time there are other big problems. The plane is in Annual and in the possession of the shop. The shop may stop the Annual pending resolution. If the Buyer makes any threat to not pay then the shop will place a Mechanics Lien on the plane. Perhaps the best thing to do is pay to button the plane up, get a Ferry Permit and pay a pilot to move it to another A&P.

Back in 2019 Maxwell posted here that they had done 4 spar cap repairs that year each requiring about 120-150 shop hours. This repair may be less or more extensive. Today that probably means $15,000 - 20,000 including parts and repaint as needed. "Looks like it’s at the splice plate where the inner spar connects to the outer spar. It’s repairable by replacing the spar cap and maybe the doubler. Requires drilling down the bottom wing skins from the belly outward knocking out the huck bolts and drilling out a lot of rivets and detaching everything in the way. We’ve replaced four spar caps in the last year. Although a lot of work at 120-150 hours still cheaper than getting a new wing and transferring it. If you have some questions on it give us a call be happy to give some advice to whoever decides to tackle this. "

Does anyone think that looks like more corrosion on the skin under and potentially behind the spar cap?

There are no AD’s or SB’s for Mooney metal wings, spars or spar caps. This is not like certain Cessna or Piper where there are either advised or mandatory specific instructions where and how often to look for corrosion or other issues. However it will be interesting to see the final NTSB report on the Mooney bravo crash in Minnesota last August where the wings folded up. If corrosion played a role I would expect to see a mandatory service bulletin for immediate inspections. The original Mooney’s with wooden wings had a SB

Uhhh....well here is one that Mike Busch tells about a Cirrus SR22 sale. The Seller wrote a contract that said “The aircraft…is being sold in an airworthy condition with all of its systems being functional and operating.”. The Buyer prevailed although there were mistakes made by all parties involved. I suspect there are more cases. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/july/pilot/savvy-maintenance

An MSC is only as good as the people working for it. I think what’s missing and not said here is that the General aviation Industry has lost a lot of experience and talent. Let’s face it everyone is getting older. A&P’s that joined the industry when it was in its growth phase of the 70s are retiring or have retired. My first A&P gained his experience working at Cessna in the 1950s. He was already in his late 60s when he first starting working on my plane in the late 90s. He was a wizard repairing anything aluminum and steel. My next A&P early on saw the growth potential of Cirrus and became one of the first certified service centers. His shop has become basically exclusive Cirrus. Last year he was full up with Cirrus work and didn’t have the staff to do my scheduled Annual. I was already out of annual at that point so I had to find another. The A&P I used this year was less than satisfactory Due to lack of experience on Mooney’s. I had to constantly check on them. I found them performing unnecessary work and wasting hours troubleshooting why the starter would not turn over after they caused the damage by breaking the wire off my starter solenoid. I found them removing my ignition switch when that was not the problem. Then the next day after everything was reinstalled my ignition was shorted out. This industry is not attracting new talent. And there is a lot of service/supplier consolidation going on due to owners retiring. There was a topic on Dawley Welding and Exhaust last year. Sold to Tailwind and the shop closed, everyone terminated. This crap about having to fly halfway across the country to get fuel tanks sealed is just crap. The founder/owner of Rocket Engineering is in his 70’s and still working supporting the Missile and Rocket. But I have no illusions about support in the future. Might the business name continue? …maybe but once the founder is gone so much know how will be lost. So this is why Mooney owners have to get deeply involved in and hover over any work or Annual that an A&P performs.

Ummm...isn't @M20Doc at Tri-City both an MSC and Certified Cirrus Center?.......

The designation of an MSC is determined by Mooney International. Just like Cirrus controls which service centers are "certified". MSC is not some designation for life that can be handed down. Now Mooney Int'l in its near dead state may not be paying much attention to the MSC's which may support your observation of no training, no quality control, etc.

State tax laws vary. Some states charge sales tax but have "fly away exemptions" but not all like for example, Hawaii, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina do not have a fly away exemption. I think an out of state buyer has to pay the sales tax in those states and then they get a credit for anything due in their home state. https://www.bjtonline.com/business-jet-news/flying/flying-away-from-state-sales-taxes https://www.natlawreview.com/article/legal-insight-implications-lessor-and-fly-away-state-tax-exemptions-associated

That is a Globe GC-1B Swift made by Temco with a 210 hp mod from the original 125 hp. Perhaps when @201er says it has been done before he means that Roy Lopresti, of Mooney M20J development fame, later developed the Fury based upon the GC-1B "In the late 1980s, the Swift enjoyed a kind of revival when the Lopresti Fury appeared. Originally designed by Roy Lopresti when working at the Lopresti Piper Aircraft Engineering Company, the aeroplane was closely based on the Globe Swift. The Fury was powered by a 200hp Lycoming IO-360-A1B6 engine, and had a maximum speed of 222mph. Lopresti secured the rights to the aircraft when the company went into bankruptcy. There were then hopes that the aircraft, which had drawn a lot of attention, would be put back into production with Aviat, powered by a 180hp engine, but nothing seems to have come of it." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoPresti_Fury https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/remembering-the-lopresti-fury/ https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/39749579/n80707-1946-swift-gc-1b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globe_GC-1_Swift

You may or may not have seen my earlier question. Did you have a chance to look at your Purchase Contract carefully. Does it say that 1) all Airworthiness Issues found before the sale will be repaired by the Seller or does it say 2) The Seller certifies that the plane is Airworthy at the time of sale. If it is the first it means on the day of the sale (afterthe Pre-buy) that all identified Airworthiness issueshad been addressed by the Seller before passing title to you. ( I e closing or completing the sale) Anything found after sale closed is your cost. If it is the second then the Seller is on the hook because he sold you a plane that has Airworthiness Issues (i.e. Not Airworthy). There are cases on line that tell Sellers to never agree to this language in a sale for this very reason

Hmmmm…well we are nearly half way there. Cirrus has been shipping “plastic” planes for 23 years and Diamond for 24 years. Like Mark Twain, rumors of their premature demise seem to be greatly exaggerated.

Is this plane the same one that you posted about previously in which the A&P borrowed it and had a prop strike? If so is it the same A&P that for whatever reason missed or overlooked the flaking corrosion on the spar cap during the last Annual?

Service mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 1 of 2.pdf mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 2 of 2.pdf Parts mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney M20J Illustrated Parts Catalog.pdf POH - 2 since I don't know whether you have a newer or older serial number M20J-POH.pdf (nqac.com.au) M20J_3203B (e-monsite.com)

Here is a topic from a couple years ago that is good description with pictures of a similar corrosion issue and repair....

….keep the status quo and refuse new way of doing things. ? I am not following. What are you referring to?…how to or new ways to purchase an airplane?

Well maybe it does make sense for a first time buyer to use a Broker - maybe they do add value in a case like this with advice and insight. - like this current topic by @spitzfyre (I hope he reads this thread)

Agreed. Although it was 23 years ago I traveled to the be present at the Pre-buy which was hundreds of miles away from my home base so that I could witness first hand for these reasons. I understand than not everyone has the time to do that.

What A&P or MSC gives a guarantee of their services to find issues on a pre-buy? - NONE Also since based on your description this sounds like this corrosion has been going on for more than a year that the A&P that conducted that last Annual should have caught it and it should be noted in the logs. - Wont the MSC argue this also? At most they might refund the Pre-buy expense but they will say the Seller needs to pay for repairs. Both parties might take responsibility as @aggiepilot04 suggests but the odds don't seem good.

You need to look at your Purchase Contract carefully. Does it say that 1) all Airworthiness Issues found before the sale will be repaired by the Seller or does it say 2) The Seller certifies that the plane is Airworthy at the time of sale. If it is the first it means on the day of the sale (after the Pre-buy) that all identified Airworthiness issues had been addressed by the Seller. It was only after title had passed to you that an Airworthiness Issue was found. Anything found after sale is your cost. If it is the second then the Seller is on the hook because he sold you a plane that has Airworthiness Issues (i.e. Not Airworthy). There are cases on line that tell Sellers to never agree to this language in a sale for this very reason

T This does sound like a nightmare now. The MSC does not sound competent. Heavy defoliating flaking corrosion sounds like it is easily visible if they actually looked. But since they have found corrosion on a spar cap and have already flagged it as serious and involved Mooney Int'l Corp the plane is no longer Airworthy. And it is seems unlikely that you will be able to get a Ferry Permit from the FAA to move it to another A&P shop. I agree with Clarence that a lawyer will need to get involved probably sooner than later.

17 hours should have paid for a thorough pre buy inspection by the MSC - plenty of hours to open everything.. The MSC should know to look for corrosion without being told.