Airworthiness Cert Still Valid?

[Carl Orton]

OK; I posted a few months ago about how a plane I was interested in was
"de-registered" a short time after it was repossessed by the bank. (we've
already speculated on whether there was malicious intent or not, so let's
not go into HOW it got de-registered.)

Anyway, it went out of annual. We could not get a ferry permit to get it to
my A&P for an annual/pre-buy until it was registered. So, the bank got it
re-registered after a 6 wk wait on the FAA.

However, now when I check the online registry, under "Airworthiness
Certification" it says "None."

I called the FAA, and the nice lady said that because the plane was
de-registered because of "destruction" (it wasn't), the a/w is now void.
She said that the FSDO has to issue a new airworthiness cert.

So, my question is: Since the plane still has the original a/w cert, will
that just be re-entered into the FAA database, or will the FSDO re-issue a
cert, WITH a new date?

Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date on a
1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the deal?
Would you "buy" my story as related above?

Or is this just something that happens from time to time?

Thanks;
Carl
Ft Worth TX

[C J Campbell]

"Carl Orton" > wrote in message |
| Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date on
a
| 1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the deal?
| Would you "buy" my story as related above?

I would think that there is something not right about the deal. There are
lots of airplanes out there. Let the bank keep theirs.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:26:53 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:


>I would think that there is something not right about the deal. There are
>lots of airplanes out there. Let the bank keep theirs.

I would tend to agree.

Have been involved in several de-register/re-register jobs. Really
doesn't matter whether the original airworthiness certificate is still
intact or not-if the Federales say its no good-it's no good.

In the cases I dealt with, the original airworthiness was
surrendered/de-registered, the aircraft was re-registered
experimental/r & d. McCauley was using them for testbed aircraft for
propeller conversions.

After they were done with their testing, I had to go back down, meet
with the local Fed, and sign off on a new application for a standard
(or whatever was applicable) airworthiness certificate. Basically, was
signing the app, certifying that the a/c was compliant with the type
certificate (or suitably modified from same), the equipment list/w & b
was current, all AD's were "in compliance".

Then we got a brand spanking new certificate, with the date of
issuance (sp?) being the date they handed it to me.

Have also had 'em fall apart (literally) in the airplane, then the
Feds come down, look things over, shuffle some paper, and give you
another certificate. It's been awhile, but pretty sure that they were
marked "replacement".

Have done a ton of pre-buys over the years, come across a lot of
heinous stuff. Can't say that the only "red flag" ever raised was a
new/replacement airworthiness cert.

Most of the guys rebuilding wrecks are smart enuff to avoid that.

Regards;

TC

[Carl Orton]

I just want to clarify:

The plane was not destroyed. For some reason, it got de-registered. It's
only been a paper chase. I'm not trying to minimize it, since I know that
logs are "just paper" but worth gold.

I was just seeing if this had happened to anyone else - having a new a/w
cert issued, and whether that created "obstacles" in the future.

Thanks again;
Carl


"Carl Orton" > wrote in message
...
> OK; I posted a few months ago about how a plane I was interested in was
> "de-registered" a short time after it was repossessed by the bank. (we've
> already speculated on whether there was malicious intent or not, so let's
> not go into HOW it got de-registered.)
>
> Anyway, it went out of annual. We could not get a ferry permit to get it
to
> my A&P for an annual/pre-buy until it was registered. So, the bank got it
> re-registered after a 6 wk wait on the FAA.
>
> However, now when I check the online registry, under "Airworthiness
> Certification" it says "None."
>
> I called the FAA, and the nice lady said that because the plane was
> de-registered because of "destruction" (it wasn't), the a/w is now void.
> She said that the FSDO has to issue a new airworthiness cert.
>
> So, my question is: Since the plane still has the original a/w cert, will
> that just be re-entered into the FAA database, or will the FSDO re-issue a
> cert, WITH a new date?
>
> Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date on
a
> 1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the deal?
> Would you "buy" my story as related above?
>
> Or is this just something that happens from time to time?
>
> Thanks;
> Carl
> Ft Worth TX
>
>

[Ricky Robbins]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:00:11 -0600, "Carl Orton" >
wrote:

>Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date on a
>1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the deal?
>Would you "buy" my story as related above?

At the least it would certainly make me renegotiate.

8)

Ricky

[TTA Cherokee Driver]

C J Campbell wrote:

> "Carl Orton" > wrote in message |
> | Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date on
> a
> | 1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the deal?
> | Would you "buy" my story as related above?
>
> I would think that there is something not right about the deal. There are
> lots of airplanes out there. Let the bank keep theirs.

IOW, if the deregistration was because of malicious intent, the
malicious guy wins.

[John Galban]

"Carl Orton" > wrote in message >...
> I just want to clarify:
>
> The plane was not destroyed. For some reason, it got de-registered. It's
> only been a paper chase. I'm not trying to minimize it, since I know that
> logs are "just paper" but worth gold.

That's the problem. Often the only way to get good information on a
prospective aircraft is to search FAA records. I've seen a lot of
logbooks that did not tell the whole story about accident related
repairs. According to the FAA paperwork, this aircraft was once
listed as destroyed. You're going to have to have some good
documentation to convince a prospective buyer of the true
circumstances. A smart buyer will be very suspicious about the
"destroyed" reference and will probably not just take your word for
it.

Would you buy a used car that had a history of being totaled or
salvaged? Would you take the seller's word for it that is was just a
paper snafu?

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
(John Galban) wrote:

> "Carl Orton" > wrote in message
> >...
> > I just want to clarify:
> >
> > The plane was not destroyed. For some reason, it got de-registered. It's
> > only been a paper chase. I'm not trying to minimize it, since I know that
> > logs are "just paper" but worth gold.
>
> That's the problem. Often the only way to get good information on a
> prospective aircraft is to search FAA records. I've seen a lot of
> logbooks that did not tell the whole story about accident related
> repairs. According to the FAA paperwork, this aircraft was once
> listed as destroyed. You're going to have to have some good
> documentation to convince a prospective buyer of the true
> circumstances. A smart buyer will be very suspicious about the
> "destroyed" reference and will probably not just take your word for
> it.
>
> Would you buy a used car that had a history of being totaled or
> salvaged? Would you take the seller's word for it that is was just a
> paper snafu?
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

The best move -- only if you are truly interested in THIS plane -- is to
ge hold of an AI who specializes in this type of plane and do a THOROUGH
inspection for all compliances!

Actually, you should do this for ANY airplane purchase, as there are far
too many dogs out there waiting to run out from under the habgar and
bite you.

You should be able to negotiate a good price with the bank.

On an aside: it appears that the person from whom it was repossessed
deregistered the plane as one last salute to the bank. There is really
little YOU can do about this except negotiate a price well below "book
value."

[Craig]

"Carl Orton" > wrote in message >...
> I just want to clarify:
>
> The plane was not destroyed. For some reason, it got de-registered. It's
> only been a paper chase. I'm not trying to minimize it, since I know that
> logs are "just paper" but worth gold.
>
> I was just seeing if this had happened to anyone else - having a new a/w
> cert issued, and whether that created "obstacles" in the future.
>

Hi Carl, with good documentation for the reason of a replacement
certificate, it wouldn't bother me. In fact my Aero Commander will get
a new one when we get ready to fly it. I bought it as a partially
stripped fuselage and when we finish the paperwork on the bill of
sales, we will have to indicate that it is non-airworthy as the
original one dissapeared back in the '80s when it was parked. I've got
a good friend that is a DAR and will help me through the process when
I get ready to do mine.

Criag C.

[C J Campbell]

"TTA Cherokee Driver" > wrote in message
...
| C J Campbell wrote:
|
| > "Carl Orton" > wrote in message |
| > | Secondly, would YOU, as a future purchaser, see the 2004 a/w cert date
on
| > a
| > | 1960's plane, and think that there was something not right about the
deal?
| > | Would you "buy" my story as related above?
| >
| > I would think that there is something not right about the deal. There
are
| > lots of airplanes out there. Let the bank keep theirs.
|
| IOW, if the deregistration was because of malicious intent, the
| malicious guy wins.

Sadly, that is true. The same thing happens everywhere else, though. A guy
defaults on his mortgage, the bank repossesses the house, the guy sabotages
the house and clouds the title, and the bank can't sell the house for nearly
what they hoped.

As J.R. Ewing said, "Once your ethics go, the rest is easy." There is little
you can do to protect yourself against the completely unscrupulous, except
to not do business with them in the first place. That is a lot easier said
than done, of course, but let's face it. Most lenders do very little in the
way of checking out the character or even the identities of people they lend
money to. They figure the cost of doing that would exceed their losses from
the occasional scoundrel.

[Dan Thomas]

(Craig) wrote in message >...
> "Carl Orton" > wrote in message >...
> > I just want to clarify:
> >
> > The plane was not destroyed. For some reason, it got de-registered. It's
> > only been a paper chase. I'm not trying to minimize it, since I know that
> > logs are "just paper" but worth gold.
> >
> > I was just seeing if this had happened to anyone else - having a new a/w
> > cert issued, and whether that created "obstacles" in the future.


The law says the airworthiness certificate is not in force if
the airplane is not airworthy. And it's not airworthy if it's out of
annual, or has a flat tire, or the logs aren't in order, and so on.
Having the paper certificate guarantees nothing.

Dan

[PaulH]

My 69 Arrow has a new A/W dated 2000 because I bought it from a
Canadian owner. It had a valid Canadian cert and a complete set of
logs, so was no problem to re-register in the U.S. As someone above
pointed out, there can be several reasons to de-register - some
perfectly valid, others crooked.

I think the logs are the critical issue.

[Dave Stadt]

"PaulH" > wrote in message
om...
> My 69 Arrow has a new A/W dated 2000 because I bought it from a
> Canadian owner. It had a valid Canadian cert and a complete set of
> logs, so was no problem to re-register in the U.S. As someone above
> pointed out, there can be several reasons to de-register - some
> perfectly valid, others crooked.
>
> I think the logs are the critical issue.

I think the airplane is the critical issue. I swear, some people would fly
and pay top dollar for the worst piece of un-airworthy crap as long as the
paperwork looked good. They then complain about the untold thousands in
repairs it takes to get the plane to pass its next annual.