Well that fell through.

[A64Pilot]

If it’s an issue and I don’t think it is, but a way out of it (in my opinion, and I’m not a lawyer so what it’s worth may not be much) but your being paid for your personal time, not as a pilot. 

But even though your the owner, in my opinion, which I think I have established it’s worth, it’s still a ferry flight for maintenance as inspections are maintenance

 

[kortopates]

As a commercial pilot, it’s 100% legal for me to be reimbursed as a ferry pilot and fly someone else’s airplane.  But when you are being paid by someone else to fly your own airplane, it gets hinky.  I was just wondering if Paul could provide some info from his end (if he had any).
But yeah, like [mention=20256]hubcap[/mention] said, these questions are usually resolved without issues.

Sorry, i’ve never been involved in setting up the ferry pilot. I can only say it’s never the buyer for the obvious insurance reasons but often the owner does it or a trusted agent of theirs and sometimes the shop has a qualifier pilot acceptable to the owner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kortopates]

Basically, are you allowed to be reimbursed for flight and ground time without being a part 135 or other type of commercial operation?

yes and more.

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/aircraftreviews/aircraft-repositioning-ferry-services-and-more/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pinecone]

22 hours ago, hubcap said:

Perhaps you didn’t realize that our entire economy is based on contracts.

Money is a contract.

 

[Pinecone]

19 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

It is but the reality of one of these types of contracts is that they are in fact pretty much un-enforceable.

By that I mean the cost for you to enforce it is likely to exceed the remuneration of the enforcement, so yes contracts are nice to have, when they mean something, but if they don’t they they don’t. The Lawyer is the winner, or Lawyers actually if you try to enforce it.

Example, you think a deposit by the prospective buyer means that as long as your aircraft passes the pre-buy then they have to purchase the aircraft, or you keep the deposit right?

Unless it’s some really unusual contract that I’ve not seen it doesn’t. The buyer can back out at any time, for pretty much any reason. 

Just as I’m pretty sure the seller can back out too, as a buyer you may get the money you spent on a pre-buy back if the seller is honest, but time and money traveling etc is most likely gone.

The system works because 99% of the time, especially if the prospective buyer has spent money they really do want to buy and by the time the seller has some time and money into it, they really do want to sell.

I have never seen a boat, car, airplane etc bought because the buyer was contractually obligated, maybe in a unusual circumstance like a partnership if there was a contract that stipulated if one of the partners lost their medical the other was allowed to buy them out at xxxxx dollars and if the partner wanted to then that’s an enforceable contract.

But the normal contract that I sign that says I agree to buy upon successful completion of a pre-buy and test flight isn’t.

It’s as simple as saying the Wife decided she didn’t like the color or it just didn’t handle well etc.

Then those are poor contracts.

The contract should be written to protect the buyer from the seller not acting properly.  And at the same time, protecting the seller if the buyer does not act properly.   And that is what the deposit it for.  To protect the seller and cover any costs, including the cost of turning down other offers during the period of the PPI and such.

Yes, if the buyer backs out for a reason allowed in the contract, the seller keeps the deposit.  

Actually, the buyer is the one who has little protection, as the best that can happen, without going to court, is that they get their deposit back.

[Austintatious]

As I stated earlier, part of the process I would expect is that the buyer put money in escrow.

When you have a purchase agreement, it outlines the reasons the sale can be halted...  and only those reasons let the buyer back out.   I wouldn't see why a seller would back out and cause the buyer to have to litigate to get his escrow money back, but they buyer would need very specific reasons to back out and not forfeit his escrow money.

That is literally the entire point of escrow.  It lets the seller know the buyer is serious, thus justifying all of the following actions towards the sale (relocation and PPI)

[hubcap]

49 minutes ago, Austintatious said:

As I stated earlier, part of the process I would expect is that the buyer put money in escrow.

When you have a purchase agreement, it outlines the reasons the sale can be halted...  and only those reasons let the buyer back out.   I wouldn't see why a seller would back out and cause the buyer to have to litigate to get his escrow money back, but they buyer would need very specific reasons to back out and not forfeit his escrow money.

That is literally the entire point of escrow.  It lets the seller know the buyer is serious, thus justifying all of the following actions towards the sale (relocation and PPI)

THIS ^^^^ is why you don't need to hide your plane in your hangar. You can take it off site and let someone else look at it.

[A64Pilot]

On 7/3/2023 at 10:57 AM, Austintatious said:

As I stated earlier, part of the process I would expect is that the buyer put money in escrow.

When you have a purchase agreement, it outlines the reasons the sale can be halted...  and only those reasons let the buyer back out.   I wouldn't see why a seller would back out and cause the buyer to have to litigate to get his escrow money back, but they buyer would need very specific reasons to back out and not forfeit his escrow money.

That is literally the entire point of escrow.  It lets the seller know the buyer is serious, thus justifying all of the following actions towards the sale (relocation and PPI)

I have never seen a contract that listed every possible reason the sale can be halted.

Every one I’ve seen has verbiage similar to “successful completion of inspection and test flight” not every single possible failure listed.

As the buyer you can decide the 74 psi compression didn’t meet your requirements or even that the color isn’t to you liking, I expected it to be faster or it handled heavy, or even it looked better in the pictures.

People that think they have some kind of iron clad contract haven’t been to court. Thankfully I haven’t myself but have been an expert witness and personal knowledge of a few. Nothing is a sure bet, I’ve seen a slick lawyer completely turn the truth around.

But the truth is if it ends up in court you have lost, even if you win the case. These things aren’t done and finished in a week and the whole time it’s going on your stressed and wasting time and spending money.

I don’t need that kind of hassle myself.

I have never seen an instance where the buyer was made to complete the purchase, nor have I ever seen an instance where the buyer was able to force the sell and I’ve seen both buyers and sellers back out, it happens.

[Pinecone]

If it not listed in the contract, then the buyer cannot back out without penalty.

"successful completion" needs to be defined.  You can successfully complete an inspection with many findings, some of them that could total the aircraft.

Language should be more on order of stating that airworthiness findings will be corrected by the seller or are grounds to terminate the sale.

[wombat]

On 7/1/2023 at 2:53 PM, FlyingDude said:

No. They just don't trust "any" mechanic. In other words, I'm not letting you fly my plane to an unknown location where your potential mooney-illiterate guy can butcher my plane and then I'll have to foot the bill to fix it. I don't trust contracts either, because how am I actually going to get the cash to compensate for the damages? Will I have to spend more in lawyers and collectors than how much is owed to me?

I've had some shoddy car mechanic experiences and I've heard enough about other people's plane experiences to be sure that my approach is "cautious" and not "unrealistic" or "paranoid".

With the decreasing number of GA planes and even lower number of flying planes (read the article on hangar Queens on this month's Mooney flyer), it'll remain a seller's market...

 

 Don't forget everybody, this only happens AFTER you have a contract signed, and if the aircraft is as it was advertised, you'll never see it again!!   It's barely your plane any more.  You are trying to sell the junk heap, remember?  You don't have to foot any bills, if the plane is as you advertised it, you won't own it in another week.

 

If you are too afraid of someone 'butchering' your plane, it's because your plane is barely holding on as it is and you have mis-advertised it as a level of quality that it isn't.

 

Now on all of this I'm being deliberately excessively negative, I don't actually think this way, but also I think the fear of a 'mooney-illiterate guy' butchering your precious baby is extreme and negative too.  

[EricJ]

48 minutes ago, wombat said:

Now on all of this I'm being deliberately excessively negative, I don't actually think this way, but also I think the fear of a 'mooney-illiterate guy' butchering your precious baby is extreme and negative too.  

Unfortunately it happens with great regularity, though, even from "Mooney-literate" MSCs. 

[hubcap]

18 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Unfortunately it happens with great regularity, though, even from "Mooney-literate" MSCs. 

I don't know what "great regularity" actually means. Does it mean it happens twice a year? Or 200 times a year? Or 2000 times a year?

One time is too many for a plane to be "butchered" whatever that means, but how many planes are bought and sold a year without any issues? It seems that people are making choices based on emotions rather than facts.

[A64Pilot]

One of the things that chat rooms bring out is how frequent problems actually are, maybe Lycomings cams have always failed at the same rate but now with aviation specific chat rooms we hear about it, maybe or maybe not.

So while I doubt anyone can come up with a percentage of times they occur based on what I hear in this chat room, maintenance induced problems are not rare.

I also believe as most owners are not maintenance experienced they don’t see most of the improper materials and fasteners, clamps etc that are put on an airplane. Sure you can put a sheet metal screw into a nut plate it will hold, but it’s darn sure not right.

I believe over the years I could equip a tool box from all the tools I’ve found in aircraft, top of the cylinders seem to be a favorite spot. I’ve even found a bucking bar inside of a wing that was left there from it being built decades ago.

A sloppy mechanic can at best cause a lot of work to go back and correct their problems, and only rarely have I seen someone remove a 40 yr old or older plastic interior without causing a lot of damage, stripped and missing fasteners etc. it takes a lot of time being careful not to break that stuff. You have to treat it like eggshell.

When it comes time to sell mine I intend to find it a good home, and that’s to a pilot that wants to be present for the inspection. I’ll take it as far apart as is reasonable and they can look for themselves, while they may not be an A&P if they have owned aircraft for awhile and done preventative maintenance, they know what corrosion looks like and what chafed wires look like and loose worn heim joints feel like, and they can read if they don’t.

I’m not interested in selling mine to someone who wants to learn to fly in a Mooney or it’s their first airplane etc. I want to find it a good home, it matters.

[1980Mooney]

2 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

One of the things that chat rooms bring out is how frequent problems actually are, maybe Lycomings cams have always failed at the same rate but now with aviation specific chat rooms we hear about it, maybe or maybe not. 

“One of the things that chat rooms bring out is how frequent problems actually are”

Really?…

A minority of Mooney owners are registered users of MooneySpace. 

A minority of MooneySpace members participate in or post anything to any of the chat rooms. 
 

An even smaller handful of members participate regularly.  

Rarely does anyone post events that went well.

Usually people are motivated to post when they have a burr in heir saddle and they think they have been wronged. 
 

Generally people only post their side of the situation (their “interpretation” of reality).  They consciously or subconsciously leave out contributing factors which might have been caused by themselves.  
 

Generally people that post think they are right  and everyone or every other possible explanation is wrong. Perceived explanations are binary. 
 

When problems occur (and they do occur) the issues can get magnified way out of proportion. 
 

I don’t think you can draw any conclusions of frequency of problems from chat rooms.  You need statistic sampling and real facts  

 

Edited July 5, 2023 by 1980Mooney

[EricJ]

3 hours ago, hubcap said:

I don't know what "great regularity" actually means. Does it mean it happens twice a year? Or 200 times a year? Or 2000 times a year?

Often enough that it seems to be reported here in these forums fairly frequently.    One could peruse the threads and posts here to get an actual estimate if necessary.

[1980Mooney]

11 hours ago, hubcap said:

I don't know what "great regularity" actually means. Does it mean it happens twice a year? Or 200 times a year? Or 2000 times a year?

One time is too many for a plane to be "butchered" whatever that means, but how many planes are bought and sold a year without any issues? It seems that people are making choices based on emotions rather than facts.

 

8 hours ago, EricJ said:

Often enough that it seems to be reported here in these forums fairly frequently.    One could peruse the threads and posts here to get an actual estimate if necessary.

And when perusing the threads let's not double and triple count rehashes of earlier incidents.  For instance, Redbaron1982 discussed and expressed dissatisfaction with spar cap corrosion that was missed by a East Coast MSC in a pre-buy many times in several threads as well as "comments' about the repair by Maxwell.  

So let's think about the numbers.  There are probably about 8,000 Mooney's still flying.  They need to be opened-up in an Annual every year.  If you add in other repairs, oil changes, Pre--buy Examinations, avionics repairs/upgrades let's say there are 18,000 chances per year for the Mooney fleet to be "butchered" by a mechanic.

How many real legitimate complaints of "butchering" or major misses are there per year here on MS?   Maybe 10?  Less?  That is about 1 in 1,800 visits to the mechanic/A&P.  We never hear about the other 1,790 visits that go without a material problem.

I get it that @hubcap says it should be and mechanic/A&P's should strive for "zero".  Just like we should strive for "zero" incidents, accidents, hangar rash or damage of any kind while flying or moving our planes.  Unfortunately, people are human, 

[A64Pilot]

21 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

I don’t think you can draw any conclusions of frequency of problems from chat rooms.  You need statistic sampling and real facts  

I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on that to happen if I were you. 

Need in one hand and what is it in the other? See which one fills up first.

So as no other real data is available you go with what is, or just decide that it’s all BS?

I go from my own experiences as a Repair Station manager for I guess ten years, an A&P for thirty  something and an IA for I’d guess fifteen or so.

Not that I’ve owned all that many aircraft but one of the first things I do is order a screw kit and go through replacing all the incorrect fasteners and usually end up with at least a handful.

Maintenance induced failures are real, actually occur at least as often as actual failures, especially in electronic and electrical in my experience. Way more common for electrical problems in my experience to be cold solder joints, bad splices or loose / bad grounds for example, usually the component isn’t the fault.

Edited July 6, 2023 by A64Pilot