Advice on a Mooney purchase

[jaylw314]

Just now, Yetti said:

Are you willing to pay for a week of work to accomplish the above?

Nope   Especially, if I know that the results will likely kill the deal for the buyer.  Then I'd be off to do the same thing with the next buyer.

[PTK]

31 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

As a buyer, I think if I approached a sale requiring a mechanic to know everything and the owner to fix everything before the sale, it probably would not be conducive to getting ANY sale done.  I'd see the prebuy as a way to look for game-stopper problems, and get at least some idea of the fixes to be completed, and then renegotiated based on what is found.  If you want something else out of a prebuy, it'd be best to discuss it with the mechanic you hire, e.g. "I want this prebuy to be at the detail of an annual inspection, I want every discrepancy that exists noted, and I will hold you accountable for any missed discrepancies."

As an owner, I certainly would refuse to allow any inspection that required any disassembly of any parts unintended to be disassembled (cowling, inspection plates).  Considering I might need to fly it afterwards, I would not want anything else touched by a mechanic who was not accountable to me.

This is not about the owner or how the owner feels. The owner doesn't have to fix anything.  And this is not about being conducive to any sale. This is about the buyer knowing in detail the airplane he/she is considering to purchase. The sale or not comes later.

[jaylw314]

3 minutes ago, PTK said:

This is not about the owner or how the owner feels. The owner doesn't have to fix anything.  And this is not about being conducive to any sale. This is about the buyer knowing in detail the airplane he/she is considering to purchase. The sale or not comes later.

I agree, if any buyer wants to know that detail, he has the right to ask, but the seller and the inspecting mechanic have the right to say no.  Not being clear about this ahead of time is where problems will arise.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, PTK said:

I regard the mechanic to be a qualified professional. As such my expectation is he/she be fully engaged and connected to their main paid profession. Therefore I don't find it acceptable to be casually told "...sorry I missed that!..."

While I agree somewhat, I would say to you “please provide me YOUR pre purchase check list and I will be happy to inspect it to that list”.  If something goes wrong that wasn’t on your list, you own it.  It’s an inspection not a warranty.

Clarence

[Guest]

This subject comes up so often.  There is no standard for a the conduct of a PPI, it is a loose term.  Some owners want a $500 PPI, some want a $500 Annual and call it a PPI. Call it what you want.

For many years I have done PPI which is an entire airplane inspection using th manufacturer ‘s inspection sheets using the highest level of inspection called for.  If it has a removable panel it comes, seats removed, floors opened, everything gets opened and looked at.  Cable tensions measured, control travels checked, log books read, AD’s researched, S/B’s researched.

An airworthy airplane is supposed to meet the Type Certificate and any associated Supplemental Type Certificates and ICA’s.

A list of the good and bad points is produced and provided to both parties to allow further negotiations.

Clarence

 

[steingar]

Best way to assure an inexpensive first annual is to have an annual inspection done as a pre buy and performed by the same guy who's going to do your annuals.  Anything short of that you takes your chances.  Sometimes you just have to roll the dice, one does't always have this option.

[Marauder]

Not to put Peter Garmin on a pedestal, but he does raise one point that I do, dare I say, agree with. I know of two Mooney PPIs that took an ugly turn. One of them resulted in the plane being sold for scrap. The potential buyer of that plane had the local IA (limited Mooney experience) conduct the PPI. The PPI discovered fuel tank leaks and nothing else significant. The plane was purchased with provisions to have bladders installed. Those bladders were installed and 2 months later the plane went into annual with the same mechanic who conducted the PPI. 

During the annual, a laundry list of issues were uncovered, including one that indicated that the wrong type of prop was on the plane. The owner elected to have a DER done during the annual to evaluate and generate the paperwork needed (to the tune of $2k). As this was being completed, the IA came up with $10k of additional airworthy discrepancies. Since this was a C model, the owner decided he was in too deep and sold the plane to Wentworth. I learned later, that Wentworth sold the plane and someone got it airworthy again.

Where this takes an interesting turn is when the logs were handed back to the owner. Wentworth went through the logs with the owner and unbelievable as it may be, discovered an original DER and FAA approval for the usage of the prop.

I think steingar's approach is the right way if you really want to minimize the risk. Make the PPI an annual. And if want to really make sure, have the PPI/annual at a MSC. What will become the sticking point is who will pay the bill. My MSC charges $2625 for an annual inspection. 

[jetdriven]

Thats criminally incompetent.  You know when you get an X-ray looking for a swollen kidney, they also check for other abnormalities, such as cancer. When they miss the cancer on the X-ray and you die a year later, your bereaved spouse sue the Doctor and wins, rightfully so.

Edited March 1, 2018 by jetdriven

[PTK]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

Thats criminally incompetent.  You know when you get an X-ray looking for a swollen kidney, they also check for other abnormalities, such as cancer. When they miss the cancer on the X-ray and you die a year later, your bereaved spouse sue the Doctor and wins, rightfully so.

Maybe we need to raise our expectations and hold mechanics to that level of accountability. 

[MIm20c]

21 minutes ago, PTK said:

Maybe we need to raise our expectations and hold mechanics to that level of accountability. 

Sounds good to me as long as you pay for the time spent finding all those problems. The example that @jetdriven used sounds great.  If a mechanic was paid to change a tire and did not notice a wheel cracking down the middle that is incompetent. If they missed a failing fuel pump during the process of changing the tire I’d call that out of the scope of repair. 

If the buyer wants to spend a few hundred dollars on a inspection and expects the mechanic to find corrosion under the fuel tank sealant (or similar) he needs to find a new hobby. 

[PTK]

21 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

Sounds good to me as long as you pay for the time spent finding all those problems. The example that @jetdriven used sounds great.  If a mechanic was paid to change a tire and did not notice a wheel cracking down the middle that is incompetent. If they missed a failing fuel pump during the process of changing the tire I’d call that out of the scope of repair. 

If the buyer wants to spend a few hundred dollars on a inspection and expects the mechanic to find corrosion under the fuel tank sealant (or similar) he needs to find a new hobby. 

Of course the mechanic will charge accordingly. Does anyone expect the mechanic to work without proper compensation for his/her services? In an inspection everything about the airplane is within the scope and nothing is outside the scope. As a buyer I’d want to know every detail. The seller btw should be able to provide this level of detail about the airplane they are representing. This is what aggreements of sale worth the paper they’re written on are for!

[Yetti]

Doc already provided the list.   If I had a dog in this hunt, I would go find it, then someone would sticky it

[Yetti]

1 hour ago, PTK said:

Of course the mechanic will charge accordingly. Does anyone expect the mechanic to work without proper compensation for his/her services? In an inspection everything about the airplane is within the scope and nothing is outside the scope. As a buyer I’d want to know every detail. The seller btw should be able to provide this level of detail about the airplane they are representing. This is what aggreements of sale worth the paper they’re written on are for!

I think the point is that people are willing to pay for a pre buy, but not willing to pay to know every detail about the plane.  That being said  three annuals into this ownership thing, I know way more about the plane than the IA.  

[PTK]

38 minutes ago, Yetti said:

I think the point is that people are willing to pay for a pre buy, but not willing to pay to know every detail about the plane.  That being said  three annuals into this ownership thing, I know way more about the plane than the IA.  

I don't know what their point is. But I can tell you what my point is: We need to get serious as buyers. We need to hold sellers and mechanics accountable before the funds exchange hands. Until we mature to being able to do so without any guilty feelings and tiptoeing around a very sensitive subject there will always be horror stories.

[mooniac15u]

A PPI is for risk mitigation.  When doing a risk assessment you do not normally attempt to mitigate all risk, only those risks that are both likely and severe.  Otherwise the cost of mitigation will exceed the expected expense associated with the risk.

Paying a mechanic to inspect every part and system on an aircraft to the level that they will guarantee it is like buying an extended warranty on a $20 toaster.  If it helps you sleep at night, go for it but it is unlikely to net you a positive return on your investment.

[bonal]

1 hour ago, PTK said:

I don't know what their point is. But I can tell you what my point is: We need to get serious as buyers. We need to hold sellers and mechanics accountable before the funds exchange hands. Until we mature to being able to do so without any guilty feelings and tiptoeing around a very sensitive subject there will always be horror stories.

Went to look took a test flight read the logs (which might as well been in Chinese) wrote a check had it delivered.  Cant get much more serious than that.

[steingar]

When i purchased the Lucky Strike a local mechanic and I went through everything we could think of on the aircraft, we really couldn't find any discrepancies beyond the coffee stains in the interior and busted ADF.  I was happier with a busted ADF than a working one (no one would ever ask em to USE it).  It was a risk since I didn't have a local mechanic going through it.  but it was the nature of the deal, and I had to live with it.  Knock on wood, so far everything has been fine with the aircraft.  Its pilot could sure use some work, though.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Yetti said:

Doc already provided the list.   If I had a dog in this hunt, I would go find it, then someone would sticky it

I will email the PPI list to anyone who can up load it to this site, I’ve tried but can get it to go.

Clarence

 

[MikeOH]

8 hours ago, mooniac15u said:

A PPI is for risk mitigation.  When doing a risk assessment you do not normally attempt to mitigate all risk, only those risks that are both likely and severe.  Otherwise the cost of mitigation will exceed the expected expense associated with the risk.

Paying a mechanic to inspect every part and system on an aircraft to the level that they will guarantee it is like buying an extended warranty on a $20 toaster.  If it helps you sleep at night, go for it but it is unlikely to net you a positive return on your investment.

Best post in the whole damn thread, IMHO.

Those that think their PPI/annual fee entitles them to free repairs regardless of what is later found are really looking for a cheap "extended warranty" Not the way it works.  And, if pushed we may find ourselves without mechanics even willing to touch our 40 year old planes.  Be careful what you demand.

[Andy95W]

12 hours ago, PTK said:

Maybe we need to raise our expectations and hold mechanics to that level of accountability. 

You'll have to pay an amount comparable to your actual doctor so that the A&P can purchase malpractice insurance, just like your actual doctor.  

And he probably won't release your airplane back to you after an annual inspection unless every single discrepancy, no matter how trivial, is repaired with brand new factory parts in order for him to satisfy his insurance company.

And then you'll complain that his prices are too high and you, his only customer, will take your airplane to someone else.

[MikeOH]

3 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

You'll have to pay an amount comparable to your actual doctor so that the A&P can purchase malpractice insurance, just like your actual doctor.  

And he probably won't release your airplane back to you after an annual inspection unless every single discrepancy, no matter how trivial, is repaired with brand new factory parts in order for him to satisfy his insurance company.

And then you'll complain that his prices are too high and you, his only customer, will take your airplane to someone else.

BINGO!

Again, be careful what you demand.

[PTK]

8 hours ago, Andy95W said:

You'll have to pay an amount comparable to your actual doctor so that the A&P can purchase malpractice insurance, just like your actual doctor.  

And he probably won't release your airplane back to you after an annual inspection unless every single discrepancy, no matter how trivial, is repaired with brand new factory parts in order for him to satisfy his insurance company.

And then you'll complain that his prices are too high and you, his only customer, will take your airplane to someone else.

Well, I as the pilot carry liability insurance for pax injuries and third party damage which may result from my mistakes. Why shouldn’t the mechanic working on my airplane? And there’s something called “informed consent.” As long as the condition of the airplane along with the recommended course of action and the potential consequences (financial and/or safety) if I don’t follow his/her recommendations have been explained to me in great detail, I will sign on the dotted line. This is how it needs to be and you’ll never hear me complain. I’ll gladly pay the cost of admission for this level of care!

BTW this is serious stuff but very simple to comply with as outlined in FAR part 43.

[mike_elliott]

Most pilots carry a 1M/100,000 per seat policy with a 5K medical. This wont begin to cover pilot mistakes that cause injuries to your pax. The maximum payout of 100,000 would go something like this: 33K to the pax atty, 5K to the pax atty expenses, balance to the pax health insurance co for their subrogated claim. 

One should re-evaluate being responsible pilot if they have this kind of minimal coverage while demanding errors and omissions coverage in addition to liability coverage from mechanics and expecting a new plane condition and warranty. If someone wants that, they should buy a new plane, and have their mind at ease.

 

[PTK]

2 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

Most pilots carry a 1M/100,000 per seat policy with a 5K medical. This wont begin to cover pilot mistakes that cause injuries to your pax. The maximum payout of 100,000 would go something like this: 33K to the pax atty, 5K to the pax atty expenses, balance to the pax health insurance co for their subrogated claim. 

One should re-evaluate being responsible pilot if they have this kind of minimal coverage while demanding errors and omissions coverage in addition to liability coverage from mechanics and expecting a new plane condition and warranty. If someone wants that, they should buy a new plane, and have their mind at ease.

 

You are right on that your typical 100K sub-limits don’t offer much protection. After the lawyers 33k that leaves 66k for plaintiffs. Not much motivation there for them to settle. Personally I carry 1mil smooth and will try to go to 2 mil smooth next month at renewal if I can get it. I know I pay extra for it but it’s worth it.

[Marauder]

4 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

Most pilots carry a 1M/100,000 per seat policy with a 5K medical. This wont begin to cover pilot mistakes that cause injuries to your pax. The maximum payout of 100,000 would go something like this: 33K to the pax atty, 5K to the pax atty expenses, balance to the pax health insurance co for their subrogated claim. 

One should re-evaluate being responsible pilot if they have this kind of minimal coverage while demanding errors and omissions coverage in addition to liability coverage from mechanics and expecting a new plane condition and warranty. If someone wants that, they should buy a new plane, and have their mind at ease.

 

I went to a $1M smooth a few years ago. At one point, my company required owners who wanted to use their planes for business travel to have $5M liability. Talk about a premium payment...