Either I am too stupid to find out (and happy with it) or had enough luck with my purchases.
You can do an easy test. Do you have the Form 1 for Engine and Prop?
Also tolerate no crap from illiterate sellers. One would think anybody who has a plane must be able to read and write but that doesn’t work So a lot of sellers will not be able to answer questions adequately. With illiterate sellers, walk away. They will have applied the same attitude to maintenance…
100% 💯
Rami1988 wrote:
For example in my business (financial services), I have to be 100pct honest and TRANSPARENT in everything – even having to disclose precise cost price. Not that I ever want to be dishonest about anything but even making a simple human mistake in this business can land me in prison very quickly.
Welcome to Aviation and namely the General part of it! You´re fast starting to smell the coffee, now if you equally fast find your ways around it – you´ve started out well. Take note of one more thing – starting out in aviation. You only know about half of what you think you know – and theoretical knowledge is one of the foundation for learning how the real world of aviation functions. Learn from other aviators, their mistakes and success, and always take it all with a grain of salt! Keep learning – you´ll find you airplane.
A simple human mistake in many industries may land you in prison – that same simple mistake in aviation may well land you dead in the grave (together with you pax). So, the “price tag” on mistakes, and its consequences, should probably be put in perspective.
UdoR wrote:
From my very limited experience I cannot tell the same. Either I am too stupid to find out (and happy with it) or had enough luck with my purchases. I once bought a glider and my current steed and both were fine. I knew about what’s up to do and was openly told about it. No real surprises.
You and I in the same space. I´m a new aircraft owner rookie (which most of us were at some point), but not a rookie in aviation in general.
It´s not all bad experiences, in that first airplane acquisition, but I do believe that there´s an element of luck in finding that sweet balance of meeting expectations, finding a trustworthy seller, and flying away with confidence. Let´s face it – it´s only really after that first (of your own) annual maintenance is done, and you´ve got your new ARC, that you know what you´ve actually bought (and even then – something could be overlooked!). It´s all a learning experience.
Snoopy wrote:
Snoopy07-Jan-24 10:3816
Either I am too stupid to find out (and happy with it) or had enough luck with my purchases.You can do an easy test. Do you have the Form 1 for Engine and Prop?
Mmmm. Yes to both (boxes checked). Does that mean that I´m dumb as f@ck and just lucky or that I´m freakin´ awesome or what?
Yeager wrote:
Mmmm. Yes to both (boxes checked). Does that mean that I´m dumb as f@ck and just lucky or that I´m freakin´ awesome or what?
I’m still in good contact with the former owner. Seldomly met a guy so honest like him. There’s absolutely nothing that I could blame him for and in the meanwhile I know the most part of all the screws present in my aircraft by name. Because most of the screws are there to be opened on each annual, you know, if not there are rivets 
I’m actually in my third annual and still fine. I am now nearly through it all and am totally confident that I will have some nice flying years ahead.
Other than that I’ve seen the documentation of my aircraft, the CAMO that holds all the documents is fine with all of it and I’m still in the air without any major issues “on hold” or the like. There are still some bugs in it that need further investigation, but nothing that prevents the plane from flying. That’s what counts to me. It has to be safe enough to be trustworthy and nothing that grounds it. That’s it for me.
Honestly, I don’t know at the moment without looking in the maintenance log whether there are Form 1 documents for an engine that has been originally installed in 1970. There was a recent top overhaul and that is well documented. When I went through it together with the guys from my CAMO they said that it’s all fine. Why should I care about it more than that?
Planes are like houses – they are sold “as seen” i.e. the seller can lie and the buyer has no comeback.
There are specific exceptions to the above (obviously country dependent) and in general if you make a specific warranty (e.g. the engine was overhauled in 2023 but wasn’t) then you can be sued. But in reality almost nobody will sue. One employee I had years ago would exchange contracts on a house and complete but refuse to move until ready, some weeks later. Never got sued 
And people sell planes for same reasons they sell cars and houses. Sometimes for genuine reasons but often to get rid of a problem.
Personally, dealing with illiterate people is what I find hardest (as a foreigner I learnt the written language first) but unfortunately that is pretty normal across life and business. 50 years ago, illiterate people were doing manual jobs. Today, they are doing all sorts of jobs including customer interface (in companies managed by stupid people). So one is often pulling teeth to get some bit of info. My approach is: if it smells fishy, it is a fish. Walk away, unless you are really keen, and then do extra due diligence.
whether there are Form 1 documents for an engine that has been originally installed in 1970
There can’t be, from 1970.
But there should be records from the “top overhaul” which is a Release to Service. Those records make earlier records irrelevant. A Form 1 isn’t a RTS; it is just a traceability document which doesn’t say anything about whether the engine is even applicable to the aircraft type
Also, the vast majority of owners don’t retain stuff like a Form 1. They should obtain a copy of the work pack for each job (annual, engine OH, mag OH, avionics install, etc) but they don’t. These papers end up in some maintenance company, and tend to vanish over time…
My approach is: if it smells fishy, it is a fish. Walk away, unless you are really keen, and then do extra due diligence.
My approach has been to ignore the previous owner’s stories as much as possible and start a relationship with the plane and its records – most of which will have been generated before the current previous owner came into the picture.
You cannot realistically “regulate” the process of buying a decades old plane. The owner likely doesn’t know much, and what he knows or doesn’t know is impossible to determine. It is your job as buyer to ferret though whatever records are available and to examine the plane itself until you are satisfied that owning the plane warrants the amount of money you’ll give to somebody you’re never going to see or hear from again. You’re not starting a relationship with the previous owner. If the purchase doesn’t work out it is your fault, not the sellers fault unless the seller lied to you in way that is easily proved, which isn’t worth betting on.
I bought my plane with a couple of significant safety issues, one of which was for example an intermittent propeller control issue that I found when I started flying it. Also some unlogged damage history as mentioned in a previous post. Whether the seller knew about any of the above is not clear because they didn’t know much about anything else either. My approach was to examine the plane and determine that it had “good bones”, negotiate the price down by 30% based on what I saw as a weak owner and little recent flying time, and buy it anyway. I was later able to connect with another long term owner, one who had it for almost 30 years, and learn a lot. Most of the boxes of records that came with the plane were generated by he. However he also declined to tell me elements of the planes history that I learned over time from others who could tell me more ‘oral history’ In this way I slowly built an accurate picture, addressed all the issues and ended up with a bargain. It’s not a risk free process, you have to manage the risk however you feel comfortable because nothing with planes is risk free.
Much the same as @Silvaire I had a good result buying my RV from a clueless seller (in this case a dealer) and doing my own due diligence on the plane, relying on nothing whatsoever from the seller but instead speaking to previous owners, the original builder and a bunch of other people that knew the plane well, as well as in depth inspection in person.
Therefore I was able to make a lowball offer and walked way happy.
Personally I think any GA plane is a project, given how crude and unrefined they are compared to eg. a modern car. The more particular you are, the more problems you’ll find. The previous owner of my plane was clueless which is A) why he sold it through an equally incompetent dealer and B) the thing still worked fine as far as he knew, but I immediately spent two months fixing stuff after I bought it.
Peter wrote:
Planes are like houses – the seller can lie and the buyer has no comeback
This is not the case both for houses nor for any other sale, even in the UK. If the seller answers a specific question with a lie (Did the engine ever have a prop strike – No) and you rely on that information in your purchase you can usually claim damages. If it is a deliberate falsehood it constitutes fraud.
It will be of course difficult in practice to get the damages (and end up in the black after legal fees, depending on if you get them all from the seller).
The various jurisdictions will differ if it comes to whether the seller has to disclose material facts without being asked, but I would be very surprised if ANY county would allow the seller to make deliberate misrepresentations to the detriment of the buyer. Whether the sales materials are a representation or just gumpf may also vary.
Indeed with real estate the seller has to fill in Property Information Form which includes the buyers specific questions. If any information on there is false, its considered misrepresentation and courts can award damages and/or rescind the contract (sale).
And here there’s no risk to anyones life. Whereas in aviation there is.
