Falsifying engine log book

[Dham]

So I have a friend and fellow pilot who purchased a plane a couple of years ago after a recent annual it was brought to there attention they have 1200 more hours on the engine then the log book show. As well as non compliant AD on prop.   

Just curious on thoughts of recourse if any. 

 

[kortopates]

Falsifying records is serious and if truly done maliciously I would expect your IA, whom is unbiased, would want to bring it to attention of his FSDO to discuss investigating.
As for "recourse", are you referring to negotiated sale price based on misrepresented ads? It's easy enough to put a value on 1200 hrs of engine time. For starters one would have to ask is the potential value worth the lawyer fees you'll spend pursuing it. If the records were falsified before the prior owner it seems it gets very complicated quick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TonyK]

The AD I could understand.  But how would you know on the engine?  Or more directly.  How did they know?

[RLCarter]

Falsifying or was there an error on the times? My logs show 2 entries for the Tachometer being replaced, several entries later after each time the Tach time only gets picked up a carried forward and error continues. I've now have a log entry that shows current Tach time and Total Time in Service. Also while looking at the W&B docs there were several errors over the many years. 

[Dham]

From what it appears the prior owner represented a low time engine. When a crank case repair was made several years ago (14) it was ADDED 0 TSMO as well as other entries from previous owner showing low time line. After going thru all of the history of receipts an email was found to the previous owner from that previous seller showing true engine time as well as the previous owner acknowledging needed AD's on engine and prop. 

It seems they will not pursue any action against the previous owner. Sad people can do such  blatant misrepresentation (FRAUD)and have the safty of the cost of litigation to hide behind. 

Would there be a statue of limitations?

Just another example of money well spent with a prebuy from a reputable and qualified shop. Not necessarily the closest. 

 

[Guest]

It would seem that the shop doing the pre-purchase did not do the job in calculating the total times?  We're all logs present at the time of the PPI? 

I think we need to come up with a PPI check list for all to use.

 

Clarence

[Dham]

Yes. And it was another shop that found the fraud. The other shops where familiar with the plane not that it should influence there job but ?

[MB65E]

Our non compliant propeller hub was signed off by an MSC as an airworthy. "AD, does not apply" as it said in the logs. 

They missed that propeller AD, and a 6 inch crack in the case. 

That was after a 9k annual they did. 

I could have closed the shop probably, but didn't have the time and money to complain. 

Sucks,

-Matt

[29-0363]

Way back in around 2003 a friend of mine here in Australia purchased a 1996 TLS (27-0214) with around 750 TTIS sight unseen through a broker, somewhere in the North East United States.  He relied entirely on the advertised description and images, and through the broker arranged for a pre-buy inspection, which came up clean.  He then had it flown to Las Vegas to fit ferry tanks, and then the same ferry pilot (Bill Cox if I recall) flew it across the Pacific to Australia.  It takes about 50 hrs and an excellent reliability test for the engine.

Some months after it arrived Down Under I got to see it, and thought from the condition of paint and interior that it didn’t compare well with my then Ovation 29-0156 (formerly N60FW) which was also a 1996 build with just a hundred less hours.  I felt something was wrong there, so I compared the then Hobbs reading (+800) to the KLN 90B GPS (+1300).  I’m sure there’s a plausible explanation for the disagree between TTIS, but until somebody can show me, I keep thinking this was the equivalent of winding back the speedometer in a car.

SO, if you’re buying a used airplane, always inspect it yourself, even if it means an air ticket, accommodation and a week away from work.  Whatever the cost, it will be way cheaper than the cost of rectifying faults, or for the rest of the time you own it having that awful feeling that you were scammed on what was supposed to be your pride and joy.

Remember - not all Mooney sellers are your friends - CAVEAT EMPTOR

[Yetti]

There is probably too much confusion over various hourly acronyms and tach replacements and such to really make a case that most people could understand.  It sucks, fix it and move on.

[N6758N]

13 hours ago, MB65E said:

Our non compliant propeller hub was signed off by an MSC as an airworthy. "AD, does not apply" as it said in the logs. 

They missed that propeller AD, and a 6 inch crack in the case. 

That was after a 9k annual they did. 

I could have closed the shop probably, but didn't have the time and money to complain. 

Sucks,

-Matt

When I bought my airplane I had the the owner pay for a fresh annual as part of the sale price. The shop doing the annual (it might have been an MSC) missed the propeller hub AD and signed the annual off without an airworthiness cert in the airplane. Looking through the logbooks I realized the shop had been doing the annual for years this way, the hub AD had never been complied with and the airworthiness cert hadn't been in the airplane for years (we found it in a box of stuff the owner gave me). Always good to get a second set of eyes on something. I flew from Vegas to Northern CA to get the airplane only to turn around and fly commercial back to Vegas due to the missing paperwork. A total waste of a trip because the mechanic didn't follow ARROW...

[steingar]

When I bought mine I really wanted an inspection by an MSC and was willing to pay for one.  The seller balked (can't say I blame him) and I went with a local mechanic with self-described Mooney familiarity.  To be honest, it was a post from a former owner on this very site that made up my mind to go for it.  I knew it was a risk, but it seems to have turned out all right.

No matter what, if you're buying an airplane you want someone to inspect it who hasn't deal with it before.  The absolute best person to inspect it will be the one working it most.

[Oldguy]

I was absolutely lucky when finding and buying my J. I had been to visit the plane and taken lots of pictures for my mechanic (former MSC mechanic). The current owner had the last two annuals done at a MSC in northeast Texas and was scheduled to come within 40 miles of my mechanic to see his daughter for a weekend. He landed at my home drome, pulled the plane into my mechanic's hangar and I took him to his daughter's house. By the end of the weekend the PPI was done, we had everything agreed in writing, and he took a commercial flight home on Monday after we finished everything with the escrow company.

I could not have fantasized a smoother purchase. He provided all of the logs in electronic format early in the process, included about 4 inches of documentation from owners over the previous 20+ years in addition to the logbooks, and answered any and every question my mechanic and I had. Over four years later, the plane has been everything it showed itself to be during the PPI and what the logs said it was. I have been fortunate enough to meet some of its previous pilots and owners here on MS and in person.