Buy a damaged airplane

[[email protected]]

Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
history, he said.

Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell if
he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the plane.

So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.

I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
with a counter, and I agreed.

The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there are
no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry, I
call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.

Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
proceeds from the sale."

Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
Warning, Will Robinson!"

Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
or the owner.

I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was very
sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
(Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.

So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:

Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet ages,
the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
damage?

[tom418]

Doesn't surprise me at all. I once sold a plane I had (with damage
history), and years later saw it advertised as "No damage history" . This
was after I discussed the damage hx with the buyer (and took less $$ than I
would have with NDH).
" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
> history, he said.
>
> Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell
if
> he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
plane.
>
> So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
> spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
> I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> with a counter, and I agreed.
>
> The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
are
> no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry,
I
> call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
> Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> proceeds from the sale."
>
> Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.
>
> I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
very
> sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
> So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
> Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
> many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
ages,
> the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
> damage?
>
>
>

[The Weiss Family]

I just bought a plane with damage history.
One accident was in the 1970's.
Then a wingtip ripped off pulling out of a hangar in 2000.
All repairs were fixed.
I don't even think twice about it.
Plane flies great and is beautiful.

My advice...
If you can't tell the difference, the plane flies straight and true and is
mechanically sound, then don't sweat it.
Especially if your going to fly it for a while, and not just turn around and
sell it.

Adam
N7966L
Beech Super III

[Almarz]

It all depends on what kind of damage and who repaired it. Remember a
bunch of guys built it, so a bunch of guys can theoretically make it
as good as new, BUT there must be some kind if references for the shop
and his work. For instance, Glen Biggs in Oklahoma can put a Bonanza
back together better than the factory and at a higher price, too!

I'd be interested to know the broker. What it that armstrong guy that
we've all come to know? Real nice of him to "let you out". You
should have sued his ass, not that he has anything to pay you. Sounds
like a typical scumbag to me.


On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:12:13 GMT, "
> wrote:

>Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
>brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
>history, he said.
>
>Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
>NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell if
>he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the plane.
>
>So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
>spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
>I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
>Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
>with a counter, and I agreed.
>
>The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there are
>no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry, I
>call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
>whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
>Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
>thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
>proceeds from the sale."
>
>Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
>collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
>Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
>Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
>history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
>qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
>database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
>the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
>or the owner.
>
>I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was very
>sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
>Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
>(Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
>Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
>So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
>Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
>consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
>many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet ages,
>the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
>should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
>damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
>considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
>damage?
>
>

[Tom Jackson]

I had a similar story (Piper Warrior):
A previous owner experienced oil failure in the late 80's. Engine seized,
had to put down in a parking lot. On rollout, hit a car with one wing.

Wing was replaced, engine was replaced. Didn't bother me one bit. My
pre-purchase A&P (also a broker, and personal friend of my dad) told me that
as long as the repair was fixed, it really didn't effect the value - as long
as it was mechanically sound, flew normal, had all the correct paperwork,
etc.

Also, my dad owns a Piper Comanche. A previous owner had installed an
automotive-grade oil hose, and we experienced and oil failure (ironic, huh?)
and had to put down in an oat's field. Engine was basically shot, and we
bent up a few wing skins and broke off one of the mains as we slid sideways
down the field.

Engine was replaced, wing skins replaced, repainted, etc. Plane looks
fabulous, flies great, has all the paperwork, etc. and should command full
value (accident was in 1975.)

Personally, I wouldn't sweat it, as long as you fully understand the extent
of the damage, and the related repair - especially if the damage occurred
some time ago ("time will tell".)


"The Weiss Family" > wrote in message
...
>I just bought a plane with damage history.
> One accident was in the 1970's.
> Then a wingtip ripped off pulling out of a hangar in 2000.
> All repairs were fixed.
> I don't even think twice about it.
> Plane flies great and is beautiful.
>
> My advice...
> If you can't tell the difference, the plane flies straight and true and is
> mechanically sound, then don't sweat it.
> Especially if your going to fly it for a while, and not just turn around
> and sell it.
>
> Adam
> N7966L
> Beech Super III
>

[Matt Whiting]

Tom Jackson wrote:

> I had a similar story (Piper Warrior):
> A previous owner experienced oil failure in the late 80's. Engine seized,
> had to put down in a parking lot. On rollout, hit a car with one wing.
>
> Wing was replaced, engine was replaced. Didn't bother me one bit. My
> pre-purchase A&P (also a broker, and personal friend of my dad) told me that
> as long as the repair was fixed, it really didn't effect the value - as long
> as it was mechanically sound, flew normal, had all the correct paperwork,
> etc.

It doesn't affect the airplane, but it does affect the value. Most
appraisers deduct something for airplanes with damage history,
regardless of the quality of the repair.

Matt

[Ron Natalie]

>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.

The NTSB database isn't designed to be some sort of pre-sale reference.
Not all "incidents" are requierd to be reported there, and unless you're
very careful, you might even miss accidents that were reported.

Did you look at the log books? This isn't fool proof but is more likely
to give hints when "repairs" are made than looking around for accident
reports.

My aircraft has been twice damaged SINCE I OWNED IT. One when a renter
taxied it into another aircraft and another when the engine failed on me
during flight. Neither one was required to be reported to the NTSB.

"NDH" is VASTLY overrated. A documented fully repaired damage is much
better than undocumented painted over damage.

A thorugh search of the logs and a careful inspection of the aircraft is
more important.

[Dude]

Many people will not even consider a plane unless its NDH.

This means it will take longer to sell, and bring a lower price.

If the logs do not show the damage, then don't buy that plane. What else is
not in the logs?

If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for incompetence
at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and figure out what
every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any value to you at all.

The best kind of damage history is something that happened several hundred
hours ago and can easily be checked to see if the repair is still good. A
wheels up that happened long ago is a non issue to me, but not every buyer.

I would likely walk from this one, but I wouldn't be a NDH or nothing buyer.
I might change my mind if I knew more of the facts about the particular
plane.



" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
> history, he said.
>
> Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell
> if
> he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
> plane.
>
> So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
> spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
> I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> with a counter, and I agreed.
>
> The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
> are
> no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry,
> I
> call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
> Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> proceeds from the sale."
>
> Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.
>
> I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
> very
> sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
> So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
> Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
> many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
> ages,
> the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
> damage?
>
>
>

[[email protected]]

Hi Tom, thanks for your information. What would you consider "long ago?"
This accident happened in 1996, so the damage is only 8 years old.


"Tom Jackson" > wrote in message
news:Ms5jd.303124$wV.41147@attbi_s54...
> I had a similar story (Piper Warrior):
> A previous owner experienced oil failure in the late 80's. Engine seized,
> had to put down in a parking lot. On rollout, hit a car with one wing.
>
> Wing was replaced, engine was replaced. Didn't bother me one bit. My
> pre-purchase A&P (also a broker, and personal friend of my dad) told me
that
> as long as the repair was fixed, it really didn't effect the value - as
long
> as it was mechanically sound, flew normal, had all the correct paperwork,
> etc.
>
> Also, my dad owns a Piper Comanche. A previous owner had installed an
> automotive-grade oil hose, and we experienced and oil failure (ironic,
huh?)
> and had to put down in an oat's field. Engine was basically shot, and we
> bent up a few wing skins and broke off one of the mains as we slid
sideways
> down the field.
>
> Engine was replaced, wing skins replaced, repainted, etc. Plane looks
> fabulous, flies great, has all the paperwork, etc. and should command full
> value (accident was in 1975.)
>
> Personally, I wouldn't sweat it, as long as you fully understand the
extent
> of the damage, and the related repair - especially if the damage occurred
> some time ago ("time will tell".)
>
>
> "The Weiss Family" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I just bought a plane with damage history.
> > One accident was in the 1970's.
> > Then a wingtip ripped off pulling out of a hangar in 2000.
> > All repairs were fixed.
> > I don't even think twice about it.
> > Plane flies great and is beautiful.
> >
> > My advice...
> > If you can't tell the difference, the plane flies straight and true and
is
> > mechanically sound, then don't sweat it.
> > Especially if your going to fly it for a while, and not just turn around
> > and sell it.
> >
> > Adam
> > N7966L
> > Beech Super III
> >
>
>

[[email protected]]

Hi Ron, thanks for the information.

I agree that a log search is the best way to know what is going on but with
the fleet pushing 35 to 40 years of age, you could take a weekend to read
through it all. The broker FAXed me the pages that talked about the repair.
(Once I told him what dates to look for.) One could really read it over and
not know what they were reading. The statement was something like "replaced
left flap with serviceable used part IAW Cessna service guide."

So, I agree with you that some of the blame falls on me for not reading the
logs thoroughly but again, that could be 3 days just for the airframe.

By the way, should something like this require a 337?


"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> >
> > Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> > history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> > qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> > database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go
see
> > the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the
broker
> > or the owner.
>
> The NTSB database isn't designed to be some sort of pre-sale reference.
> Not all "incidents" are requierd to be reported there, and unless you're
> very careful, you might even miss accidents that were reported.
>
> Did you look at the log books? This isn't fool proof but is more likely
> to give hints when "repairs" are made than looking around for accident
> reports.
>
> My aircraft has been twice damaged SINCE I OWNED IT. One when a renter
> taxied it into another aircraft and another when the engine failed on me
> during flight. Neither one was required to be reported to the NTSB.
>
> "NDH" is VASTLY overrated. A documented fully repaired damage is much
> better than undocumented painted over damage.
>
> A thorugh search of the logs and a careful inspection of the aircraft is
> more important.
>

[[email protected]]

I agree with you about known damage. I also agree with you that the broker
may be a little incompetent. I kind of picked that up even before this all
came down.

The logs do show the damage. I had the broker FAX me the pages from the
dates after the accident. All it says is that they replaced the flap.

From the NTSB report, the helicopter's rotor hit the flap of the airplane.
This happened in 1996. Do you think that 8 years is enough time for any
latent problems to be found?


"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> Many people will not even consider a plane unless its NDH.
>
> This means it will take longer to sell, and bring a lower price.
>
> If the logs do not show the damage, then don't buy that plane. What else
is
> not in the logs?
>
> If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for
incompetence
> at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and figure out what
> every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any value to you at
all.
>
> The best kind of damage history is something that happened several hundred
> hours ago and can easily be checked to see if the repair is still good. A
> wheels up that happened long ago is a non issue to me, but not every
buyer.
>
> I would likely walk from this one, but I wouldn't be a NDH or nothing
buyer.
> I might change my mind if I knew more of the facts about the particular
> plane.
>
>
>
> " > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> > Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> > brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No
damage
> > history, he said.
> >
> > Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> > NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can
tell
> > if
> > he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
> > plane.
> >
> > So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your
normal
> > spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
> >
> > I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> > Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> > with a counter, and I agreed.
> >
> > The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
> > are
> > no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than
sorry,
> > I
> > call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> > whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
> >
> > Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> > thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> > proceeds from the sale."
> >
> > Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> > collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> > Warning, Will Robinson!"
> >
> > Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> > history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> > qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> > database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go
see
> > the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the
broker
> > or the owner.
> >
> > I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
> > very
> > sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> > Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> > (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> > Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
> >
> > So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
> >
> > Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> > consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are
so
> > many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
> > ages,
> > the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> > should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> > damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> > considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with
major
> > damage?
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

Eight years is certainly long enough. Until recently, most airplanes were
basically hand built so a repair should be every bit as good as the
original. In fact, it is not unlikely that the repair is better quality
than the original. You also have to consider what type of aircraft it is.
It is reasonable to expect no damage history on a 1970 Bonaza but if you
find a 1970 Super Cub being sold with wheels, floats, skis and all the
Alaska mods it is exceedingly unlikely that it has no damage history.

Mike
MU-2


" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>I agree with you about known damage. I also agree with you that the broker
> may be a little incompetent. I kind of picked that up even before this
> all
> came down.
>
> The logs do show the damage. I had the broker FAX me the pages from the
> dates after the accident. All it says is that they replaced the flap.
>
> From the NTSB report, the helicopter's rotor hit the flap of the airplane.
> This happened in 1996. Do you think that 8 years is enough time for any
> latent problems to be found?
>
>
> "Dude" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Many people will not even consider a plane unless its NDH.
>>
>> This means it will take longer to sell, and bring a lower price.
>>
>> If the logs do not show the damage, then don't buy that plane. What else
> is
>> not in the logs?
>>
>> If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for
> incompetence
>> at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and figure out what
>> every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any value to you at
> all.
>>
>> The best kind of damage history is something that happened several
>> hundred
>> hours ago and can easily be checked to see if the repair is still good.
>> A
>> wheels up that happened long ago is a non issue to me, but not every
> buyer.
>>
>> I would likely walk from this one, but I wouldn't be a NDH or nothing
> buyer.
>> I might change my mind if I knew more of the facts about the particular
>> plane.
>>
>>
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>> > Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
>> > brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No
> damage
>> > history, he said.
>> >
>> > Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check
>> > the
>> > NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can
> tell
>> > if
>> > he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
>> > plane.
>> >
>> > So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your
> normal
>> > spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>> >
>> > I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy
>> > it."
>> > Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam
>> > back
>> > with a counter, and I agreed.
>> >
>> > The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
>> > are
>> > no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than
> sorry,
>> > I
>> > call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
>> > whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD
>> > report.
>> >
>> > Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
>> > thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
>> > proceeds from the sale."
>> >
>> > Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
>> > collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
>> > Warning, Will Robinson!"
>> >
>> > Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
>> > history when a midair collision with substantial damage would
>> > definitely
>> > qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
>> > database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go
> see
>> > the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the
> broker
>> > or the owner.
>> >
>> > I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
>> > very
>> > sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
>> > Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major
>> > repairs.
>> > (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's
>> > either.)
>> > Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>> >
>> > So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to
>> > know:
>> >
>> > Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you
>> > shouldn't
>> > consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are
> so
>> > many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
>> > ages,
>> > the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
>> > should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
>> > damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what
>> > is
>> > considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with
> major
>> > damage?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

[Rich]

Because most buyers will try to avoid it... because subsequent buyers
will try to avoid it. Believe me... I've been there.

I agree that a well repaired airplane should sell for full value... but
the market just doesn't behave that way.

If you are sure you will own the plane in question in perpetuity... no
problem. Otherwise, buy right so you can sell right.

Rich

Matt Whiting wrote:
ically sound, flew normal, had all the
>> correct paperwork, etc.
>
>
> It doesn't affect the airplane, but it does affect the value. Most
> appraisers deduct something for airplanes with damage history,
> regardless of the quality of the repair.
>
> Matt
>

[Ron Natalie]

Dude wrote:

> If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for incompetence
> at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and figure out what
> every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any value to you at all.

The broker most likely is representing the seller. I've never seen a broker
even open the log books. The onus is on the purchaser and his representatives.

[Ron Natalie]

wrote:

> I agree that a log search is the best way to know what is going on but with
> the fleet pushing 35 to 40 years of age, you could take a weekend to read
> through it all.

Yep, and well worth it if you're going to plunk down $$$ on an aircraft.
I had 45 years worth of reading to do on 27K.

> By the way, should something like this require a 337?

No. Part 43 Appendix A describes major repair. It primarily
covers "fixing" structural compoents where the repair involves
something that is different than the way it manufactured (like I
put a doubler on a broken spar or something). Replacing a flap
isn't a major repair, you're just replacing one approved part with
another one.

[Dude]

Yes, if it has flown a reasonable amount over that time, the repair should
be considered to be just fine.

I don't think most people would worry too much about this kind of repair.
The real worries are repairs to the hull and wings that may have left
weakness or corrosion in the structure. I suppose some of the force of the
incident could have gone into the wing, but it would likely show up on the
skin ( I am no AP, so I would definitely get someone in the know to look to
see any possible affects of that incident on the rest of the wing).



" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>I agree with you about known damage. I also agree with you that the broker
> may be a little incompetent. I kind of picked that up even before this
> all
> came down.
>
> The logs do show the damage. I had the broker FAX me the pages from the
> dates after the accident. All it says is that they replaced the flap.
>
> From the NTSB report, the helicopter's rotor hit the flap of the airplane.
> This happened in 1996. Do you think that 8 years is enough time for any
> latent problems to be found?
>
>
> "Dude" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Many people will not even consider a plane unless its NDH.
>>
>> This means it will take longer to sell, and bring a lower price.
>>
>> If the logs do not show the damage, then don't buy that plane. What else
> is
>> not in the logs?
>>
>> If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for
> incompetence
>> at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and figure out what
>> every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any value to you at
> all.
>>
>> The best kind of damage history is something that happened several
>> hundred
>> hours ago and can easily be checked to see if the repair is still good.
>> A
>> wheels up that happened long ago is a non issue to me, but not every
> buyer.
>>
>> I would likely walk from this one, but I wouldn't be a NDH or nothing
> buyer.
>> I might change my mind if I knew more of the facts about the particular
>> plane.
>>
>>
>>
>> " > wrote in message
>> ink.net...
>> > Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
>> > brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No
> damage
>> > history, he said.
>> >
>> > Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check
>> > the
>> > NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can
> tell
>> > if
>> > he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
>> > plane.
>> >
>> > So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your
> normal
>> > spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>> >
>> > I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy
>> > it."
>> > Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam
>> > back
>> > with a counter, and I agreed.
>> >
>> > The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
>> > are
>> > no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than
> sorry,
>> > I
>> > call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
>> > whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD
>> > report.
>> >
>> > Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
>> > thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
>> > proceeds from the sale."
>> >
>> > Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
>> > collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
>> > Warning, Will Robinson!"
>> >
>> > Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
>> > history when a midair collision with substantial damage would
>> > definitely
>> > qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
>> > database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go
> see
>> > the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the
> broker
>> > or the owner.
>> >
>> > I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
>> > very
>> > sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
>> > Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major
>> > repairs.
>> > (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's
>> > either.)
>> > Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>> >
>> > So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to
>> > know:
>> >
>> > Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you
>> > shouldn't
>> > consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are
> so
>> > many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
>> > ages,
>> > the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
>> > should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
>> > damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what
>> > is
>> > considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with
> major
>> > damage?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

[Dude]

Well, I guess you get what you pay for. If a broker is not representing the
plane, but merely taking phone calls, then he isn't worth much money to
either party. I would not consider working with a broker like this to buy
because all he is doing is sheilding you from information you could be using
to help you make a decision.



"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> Dude wrote:
>
>> If the logs do show the damage, then your broker is suspect for
>> incompetence at best. Its his job as broker to pour over the logs and
>> figure out what every 337 means. Otherwise, he isn't really adding any
>> value to you at all.
>
> The broker most likely is representing the seller. I've never seen a
> broker
> even open the log books. The onus is on the purchaser and his
> representatives.

[NW_PILOT]

Beware the scam-brokers that hide the N number and Serial Number's of the
aircraft untill they get your money "deposit" by law they dont have to give
you your money back after they give you the aircraft info as that is whay
you are buying. Resources: Washington State Bar Association, Better Business
Bureau.

When I was looking for an airplane I lost funds to one of these scam-brokers
that said he would find me what I want for XXX amount when he asked for more
money and produced no results except for junk with liens and hidden damage
history I took the rest of my money and ran. you got lucky that you were
able to get out.

I would buy a properly repaired airplane after I had a title search done and
a pre buy inspection and extra time allotted for inspecting the repair and
things attached to that repair + the log books. If deemed airworthy time for
a test flight and not just around the pattern plot out a nice cross county
flight and test all the systems after about 3 hours 1 way check the
airplane's oil usage out. Call you mechanic have him/her be there when you
return to give the engine a through run through. Grab a sample of oil and
send it in to be tested wait for results don't ever trust the owner they are
just trying to sell an airplane and the brokers are just trying to make
their commission.

If a seller, broker or owner dose not allow you to pre buy the aircraft or
is not willing to wait of an oil check or title search thank them for their
time and walk. Listen to your gut if the owner give a lame answer for a
simple question or evades the question that a pilot/owner should know then
walk. If they don't let you test fly the aircraft at your expense with them
along then walk as they may be hiding something.

Don't scrape the bottom of the barrel leave some for someone that can handle
the bottom of the barrel.


" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
> history, he said.
>
> Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell
if
> he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
plane.
>
> So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
> spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
> I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> with a counter, and I agreed.
>
> The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
are
> no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry,
I
> call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
> Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> proceeds from the sale."
>
> Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.
>
> I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
very
> sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
> So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
> Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
> many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
ages,
> the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
> damage?
>
>
>

[OtisWinslow]

I think it shouldn't be a problem if the damage is properly repaired and
documented.

I looked at a plane about a year ago that had a couple accidents in the
NTSB database showing "substantial" damage. There was nothing in the
logs .. and no 337s showing it had been repaired. So who knows how
it was fixed.

The seller had said "no damage history". Needless to say I walked away
from that one.




" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
> history, he said.
>
> Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell
> if
> he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
> plane.
>
> So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
> spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
> I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> with a counter, and I agreed.
>
> The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
> are
> no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry,
> I
> call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
> Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> proceeds from the sale."
>
> Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.
>
> I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
> very
> sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
> So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
> Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
> many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
> ages,
> the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
> damage?
>
>
>

[Dan Thompson]

Thanks, Ron. I was hoping someone would point out that a 337 is not
required every repair. The only way to sniff out all damage history is to
read the maintenance records. Replacing parts like wing tips and landing
gear are not normal maintenance items, so "there's your sign."

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that a log search is the best way to know what is going on but
>> with
>> the fleet pushing 35 to 40 years of age, you could take a weekend to read
>> through it all.
>
> Yep, and well worth it if you're going to plunk down $$$ on an aircraft.
> I had 45 years worth of reading to do on 27K.
>
>> By the way, should something like this require a 337?
>
> No. Part 43 Appendix A describes major repair. It primarily
> covers "fixing" structural compoents where the repair involves
> something that is different than the way it manufactured (like I
> put a doubler on a broken spar or something). Replacing a flap
> isn't a major repair, you're just replacing one approved part with
> another one.

[Dan Thompson]

Another way to look at things: it is better to buy a plane with perfectly
repaired damage history. If there is any discount off the price, you get
that going in. Then if you ding up and repair the plane while you own it,
it does not go down in value. In fact, since "time since repair" seems to
be the test of whether the damage should be a factor, the value goes up the
whole time you own the plane.

We are now pushing 20 years since Beech, Cessna, Piper were selling planes
in large quantities. There have been only a handful of new planes a year
since then. An NDH plane is probably a hangar queen. Turning up one's nose
at a plane with perfectly repaired damage history is a dumb way to buy a
plane.

"Rich" > wrote in message
...
> Because most buyers will try to avoid it... because subsequent buyers will
> try to avoid it. Believe me... I've been there.
>
> I agree that a well repaired airplane should sell for full value... but
> the market just doesn't behave that way.
>
> If you are sure you will own the plane in question in perpetuity... no
> problem. Otherwise, buy right so you can sell right.
>
> Rich
>
> Matt Whiting wrote:
> ically sound, flew normal, had all the
>>> correct paperwork, etc.
>>
>>
>> It doesn't affect the airplane, but it does affect the value. Most
>> appraisers deduct something for airplanes with damage history, regardless
>> of the quality of the repair.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>

[Ron Natalie]

Dan Thompson wrote:
> Another way to look at things: it is better to buy a plane with perfectly
> repaired damage history. If there is any discount off the price, you get
> that going in. Then if you ding up and repair the plane while you own it,
> it does not go down in value. In fact, since "time since repair" seems to
> be the test of whether the damage should be a factor, the value goes up the
> whole time you own the plane.

I forgot what sort of plane we're talking about here. If it's unusual, or
really old, damage history isn't such a big deal. You can always try to
use it as a negotiating point, but the seller is free to tell you to take
a hike. At the other end, the ubiquitous old 172 is also less phased by
damage as most of these come and go into the training pool and end up being
ragged out pretty bad even if not "damaged" formally.

The place it hurts you value wise is in the cross-country four+ places (Arrows,
later Bonanzas, 210's....)

[The Rebel]

Damned good thing you did your homework. The 40K lien would make me look
real hard and make sure that the legalisties of the lien wouldn't follow me
(and the only way is if the seller pays it off or transfers the lien to
another piece of property, like his home).

The non-specified damage history would make me walk away -if he lies about
something that significant, then what else is he lying about?

" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Almost bought an airplane. Talked to the guy over the phone. He's
> brokering it for someone else. Asked him about damage history. No damage
> history, he said.
>
> Now, one thing I always do before I go to see an airplane is I check the
> NTSB database. Actually, I do this before I call the owner so I can tell
> if
> he's lying to me or not. The NTSB database showed no records for the
> plane.
>
> So, I flew out (it is in Utah, I'm in Virginia) looked okay. Your normal
> spam can. Not overly sweet, but better than average, I thought.
>
> I'm kind of tired of looking so I thought, "what the heck, I'll buy it."
> Made the broker an offer less than the asking price. The owner cam back
> with a counter, and I agreed.
>
> The broker sends me the contract, and it specifically stated that there
> are
> no liens on the plane. But, always wanting to be safe rather than sorry,
> I
> call AOPA to get a title report. Well, I decide to splurge and got the
> whole shootnmatch, title search, NTSB report, AD listing, and SD report.
>
> Bam! First salvo hits. The plane has a $40,000 lien on it. "Well," I
> thought, "maybe they meant that they were going to pay it off with the
> proceeds from the sale."
>
> Whoa! Incoming! NTSB report comes back with that it had a mid-air
> collision with a helicopter in 1996. Substantial damage. "Warning!
> Warning, Will Robinson!"
>
> Okay, now I'm ****ed. I'm ****ed that they told me there was no damage
> history when a midair collision with substantial damage would definitely
> qualify as a damage history to me. I'm ****ed that the on-line NTSB
> database didn't show me this. I'm ****ed that I spent over $600 to go see
> the plane. And I'm ****ed that I don't know who's lying to me, the broker
> or the owner.
>
> I called the broker. Told him about the lien and the accident. He was
> very
> sympathetic. Claims he didn't know. Seems to be ****ed at the owner.
> Claims that he looked through the logs and didn't see and major repairs.
> (Interestingly enough, the AOPA search didn't turn up any 337's either.)
> Before I could tell him that I want out, he offers to let me out.
>
> So, now you know my story. Here's what my inquiring mind wants to know:
>
> Up until the past decade or so, the common wisdom was that you shouldn't
> consider an airplane that ever had an accident. Why bother? There are so
> many non-damaged airplanes to be had. Recently, however, as the fleet
> ages,
> the wisdom has since changed to, "well, if the damage isn't recent, it
> should be ok." So what do you all think? Never consider a plane with
> damage history? Consider it if the damage isn't recent? If so, what is
> considered "recent?" How much would you deduct for an airplane with major
> damage?
>
>
>