Need advice / sharing my concerns with someone

[DonMuncy]

 It is easy to say "it is a lead pipe case" to win. I agree that from my perspective, the OP likely has a very good case, but there are other considerations before suing or even threatening to sue. The cost to remediate the error is an easy place to start. There are many winning cases that simply are not worth enough money to justify litigation. Second, what is it going to cost to litigate it. Who is going to pay that (much of it on the front end)? Can you find a plaintiff's attorney willing to take the case on a contingency basis? Again the amount of damages is a primary consideration. If you can't, do you have many thousands of $ to invest early on in the suit? And even more importantly what are the odds of collecting $ if and when you win? Does the shop have insurance to cover the loss? If it were in Texas, and the shop was not that big (or well insured), it might be awfully difficult to collect on a judgment, If is not covered by insurance, how much money does the shop have, or is willing to invest to defend it. In a case like this,  the case would almost certainly hinge on expert testimony, and if the other side get a more believable expert than yours, there could be real problems. We would all like to believe that the justice system is good enough that "if you are right, you will win". Unfortunately that is not always the case.

I was a litigator in Texas for more than 25 years before I retired about 15 years ago.

[MooneyMitch]

6 minutes ago, DonMuncy said:

 It is easy to say "it is a lead pipe case" to win. I agree that from my perspective, the OP likely has a very good case, but there are other considerations before suing or even threatening to sue. The cost to remediate the error is an easy place to start. There are many winning cases that simply are not worth enough money to justify litigation. Second, what is it going to cost to litigate it. Who is going to pay that (much of it on the front end)? Can you find a plaintiff's attorney willing to take the case on a contingency basis? Again the amount of damages is a primary consideration. If you can't, do you have many thousands of $ to invest early on in the suit? And even more importantly what are the odds of collecting $ if and when you win? Does the shop have insurance to cover the loss? If it were in Texas, and the shop was not that big (or well insured), it might be awfully difficult to collect on a judgment, If is not covered by insurance, how much money does the shop have, or is willing to invest to defend it. In a case like this,  the case would almost certainly hinge on expert testimony, and if the other side get a more believable expert than yours, there could be real problems. We would all like to believe that the justice system is good enough that "if you are right, you will win". Unfortunately that is not always the case.

I was a litigator in Texas for more than 25 years before I retired about 15 years ago.

Wisdom from experience!  Excellent real information.

[JWJR]

So based on the photos and location of the corrosion does anyone want to guesstimate the eventual repair invoice?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1980Mooney]

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

[redbaron1982]

3 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

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

I also thought that, but isn't intergranular corrosion a problem of extruded parts and not of rolled parts like the skin?

[1980Mooney]

53 minutes ago, JWJR said:

So based on the photos and location of the corrosion does anyone want to guesstimate the eventual repair invoice?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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. " 

 

 

[RobertGary1]

1 hour ago, DonMuncy said:

 It is easy to say "it is a lead pipe case" to win. I agree that from my perspective, the OP likely has a very good case, but there are other considerations before suing or even threatening to sue. The cost to remediate the error is an easy place to start. There are many winning cases that simply are not worth enough money to justify litigation. Second, what is it going to cost to litigate it. Who is going to pay that (much of it on the front end)? Can you find a plaintiff's attorney willing to take the case on a contingency basis? Again the amount of damages is a primary consideration. If you can't, do you have many thousands of $ to invest early on in the suit? And even more importantly what are the odds of collecting $ if and when you win? Does the shop have insurance to cover the loss? If it were in Texas, and the shop was not that big (or well insured), it might be awfully difficult to collect on a judgment, If is not covered by insurance, how much money does the shop have, or is willing to invest to defend it. In a case like this,  the case would almost certainly hinge on expert testimony, and if the other side get a more believable expert than yours, there could be real problems. We would all like to believe that the justice system is good enough that "if you are right, you will win". Unfortunately that is not always the case.

I was a litigator in Texas for more than 25 years before I retired about 15 years ago.

I wonder how likely it is that their liability is limited to the cost of the prebuy either by contract or by statute. 

[DonMuncy]

11 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

I wonder how likely it is that their liability is limited to the cost of the prebuy either by contract or by statute. 

Good question. I have no idea what the law might be up there.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, DCarlton said:

Is spar cap corrosion common and a major issue in Mooneys?  Does anyone know of a service bulletin, AD or inspection procedure to reference?  I'm aware of the service bulletins for the steel tubing and the flap hinges but that's all.  

I wouldn’t say that it’s common, but it’s also not unheard of.

Clarence

[Guest]

1 hour ago, JWJR said:

So based on the photos and location of the corrosion does anyone want to guesstimate the eventual repair invoice?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought that in another thread an enterprising owner was doing a similar repair on an earlier model, and in the past others have posted the same corrosion issue with poor outcomes.

Clarence

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

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. " 

 

 

I think you’re confusing main spar issues with rear false spar.

Clarence

[ArtVandelay]

I wouldn’t say that it’s common, but it’s also not unheard of.
Clarence

It’s weird that it looks so clean with exception of the corrosion. Makes me wonder what caused it?

[corn_flake]

Can someone draw circle on the parts diagram exact where this corrosion is?  Is this visible once the seat is removed?  

[Mcstealth]

7 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

That's so terrific!  Would you please enlighten us on his business?  Website,etc?  Thank you.

I had his new card....... Looking for it

[Mcstealth]

4 hours ago, jetdriven said:

It’s been several years, but the guy owned that owned bought Dugosh from Ronnie or some guy who had a bonanza and made a fortune printing billboards with a printer.  When I was there they were about 15 airplanes in there, nobody had a license and only half of them were Mooney‘s. But that was a few years ago. 

Long story short: Long time Dugosh AP David, bought it from "that guy" who was in tax trouble. David legally purchased the name and business for $1. He got everything up to speed and hasn't looked back. Good for him. 

[LANCECASPER]

15 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

No.  I believe it is visible via the small oval inspection panel all by itself under the wing and near the entrance step.  Only visible with a light and mirror.  I’m in no way defending the shop, but if it is where I think it is I can easily see how it could be missed.  Especially since the rest of the surrounding structure looks so good.  Who would have thunk?  It’s very interesting to me that such severe corrosion would form in such an isolated area.  

No idea if this is from a similar cause, but a few years ago corrosion on the cage was caused by rodents living in the airplane (mouse urine).

 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, corn_flake said:

Can someone draw circle on the parts diagram exact where this corrosion is?  Is this visible once the seat is removed?  

It’s behind the landing gear well on the lower surface of each wing, there is one inspection panel. 
 

Clarence

[redbaron1982]

44 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

I think you’re confusing main spar issues with rear false spar.

Clarence

@M20Doc so maybe this repair, being in the stub is south of the 150 hours of the other ones mentioned that were in the main spar? I'm just trying to find some hope here while I wait for mooney reply...

[philiplane]

Isolated pockets of corrosion, like this one, are relatively easy to miss. You simply aren't expecting it, in an otherwise clean area. That's what makes it easy to miss. When you open a panel, and see shiny, clean structure, you don't spend the time you would when you open the panel and say...crap, look at this mess. I wonder how bad it is in the corners?

This type of corrosion often can be repaired with the help of a DER. Rather than the invasive procedure to pull it all apart, and replace the piece, you grind down to remove the existing corrosion. Then an overlay piece is riveted or huck bolted in place, after treating and sealing the cleaned area. I have done several repairs like this, with an engineer's guidance. We did a main spar repair on a Seminole that ordinarily would have required spar replacement. The corroded area was similar in size, around two rivets. There is less stress on fore and aft stub spars, so you might enlist of the help of a structures DER asap.

[redbaron1982]

4 minutes ago, philiplane said:

Isolated pockets of corrosion, like this one, are relatively easy to miss. You simply aren't expecting it, in an otherwise clean area. That's what makes it easy to miss. When you open a panel, and see shiny, clean structure, you don't spend the time you would when you open the panel and say...crap, look at this mess. I wonder how bad it is in the corners?

This type of corrosion often can be repaired with the help of a DER. Rather than the invasive procedure to pull it all apart, and replace the piece, you grind down to remove the existing corrosion. Then an overlay piece is riveted or huck bolted in place, after treating and sealing the cleaned area. I have done several repairs like this, with an engineer's guidance. We did a main spar repair on a Seminole that ordinarily would have required spar replacement. The corroded area was similar in size, around two rivets. There is less stress on fore and aft stub spars, so you might enlist of the help of a structures DER asap.

I've contacted today Southwest Aviation, at Smithville TX. 

Do you think they would be able to help with this?

[philiplane]

6 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

I've contacted today Southwest Aviation, at Smithville TX. 

Do you think they would be able to help with this?

Maybe, but you should enlist the services of a Boston area DER to examine the problem and devise a repair, unless you are already committed to replacing the part. 

[jetdriven]

We also have a great DER we work with if you need his info, send me an email at byron (at) flyrpm.com

[carusoam]

Southwest Texas aviation…  JD and Laura Casteel.

These fine folks come with many good pireps…

https://mooneyspace.com/search/?q="Southwest Texas aviation"&quick=1&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy

 

More for once you get home than a place to go right now…  

Either way a good resource to get to know.

Best regards,

-a-

 

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

I've contacted today Southwest Aviation, at Smithville TX. 

Do you think they would be able to help with this?

As I mentioned Saturday, about three years ago they worked with a DER on resolving a similar situation.

[1980Mooney]

9 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

I wonder how likely it is that their liability is limited to the cost of the prebuy either by contract or by statute. 

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.  

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by 1980Mooney