Cessna buyers in So. Cal. beware !

Juan Jimenez wrote in message .. .
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in
s.com:


Why do you think this airplane is "super low priced"?

Why would it be priced that low if it were airworthy?

What does the price of a plane have to do with its airworthiness? When did
the FAA include price of the airplane in its definition of airworthiness?

What FAR requires a plane to be Airworthy to sell? Sounds like the
owner was willing to sell a project plane cheaply. The fact that he
wasn't upfront about it is annoying, but sadly, the norm. When I was
looking at Champs 4 out of 5 were not technically airworthy according
to ADs. That doesn't make them illegal to sell, or a bad deal.

-Robert

(Robert M. Gary) wrote in
om:

Juan Jimenez wrote in message
.. .
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in
s.com:


Why do you think this airplane is "super low priced"?

Why would it be priced that low if it were airworthy?

What does the price of a plane have to do with its airworthiness?
When did the FAA include price of the airplane in its definition of
airworthiness?

What FAR requires a plane to be Airworthy to sell? Sounds like the
owner was willing to sell a project plane cheaply. The fact that he
wasn't upfront about it is annoying, but sadly, the norm. When I was
looking at Champs 4 out of 5 were not technically airworthy according
to ADs. That doesn't make them illegal to sell, or a bad deal.

-Robert

The original poster never implied the effort to sell the a/c was illegal.
Whether or not something is a bad deal is up to the seller and buyer to
decide. What he did warn people about was that the one seller he met was
particularly egregious in his attempts to misrepresent the aircraft.
Apparently there are a few people around here over whose heads this all
went...

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...
(Robert M. Gary) wrote in

What does the price of a plane have to do with its airworthiness?
When did the FAA include price of the airplane in its definition of
airworthiness?

What FAR requires a plane to be Airworthy to sell? Sounds like the
owner was willing to sell a project plane cheaply. The fact that he
wasn't upfront about it is annoying, but sadly, the norm. When I was
looking at Champs 4 out of 5 were not technically airworthy according
to ADs. That doesn't make them illegal to sell, or a bad deal.

-Robert

The original poster never implied the effort to sell the a/c was illegal.

Whether or not something is a bad deal is up to the seller and buyer to
decide.

And how would they determine that?

What he did warn people about was that the one seller he met was
particularly egregious in his attempts to misrepresent the aircraft.

How did he "misrepresent" it?

Apparently there are a few people around here over whose heads this all
went...

Yours.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in
:

And how would they determine that?

If I have to explain that to you you shouldn't be in this thread in the
first place.

How did he "misrepresent" it?

And I if I have to teach you to read as well, you should reconsider your
decision to be doing anything at all on Usenet.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
om...
Juan Jimenez wrote in message
.. .
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in
s.com:


Why do you think this airplane is "super low priced"?

Why would it be priced that low if it were airworthy?

What does the price of a plane have to do with its airworthiness? When
did
the FAA include price of the airplane in its definition of
airworthiness?

What FAR requires a plane to be Airworthy to sell? Sounds like the
owner was willing to sell a project plane cheaply. The fact that he
wasn't upfront about it is annoying, but sadly, the norm. When I was
looking at Champs 4 out of 5 were not technically airworthy according
to ADs. That doesn't make them illegal to sell, or a bad deal.

He must not have ever heard of "parting out", "fixer upper"...

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
om...
Juan Jimenez wrote in message
.. .
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in
s.com:


Why do you think this airplane is "super low priced"?

Why would it be priced that low if it were airworthy?

What does the price of a plane have to do with its airworthiness? When
did
the FAA include price of the airplane in its definition of
airworthiness?

What FAR requires a plane to be Airworthy to sell? Sounds like the
owner was willing to sell a project plane cheaply. The fact that he
wasn't upfront about it is annoying, but sadly, the norm. When I was
looking at Champs 4 out of 5 were not technically airworthy according
to ADs. That doesn't make them illegal to sell, or a bad deal.

-Robert

If you look hard enough 10 out of 10 airplanes are unairworthy. Nowhere did
the buyer justify his claim the plane was not airworthy. His post sounded
to me like he seriously failed in his questioning before looking at the
plane then tried to blame the seller for his poor questioning. His
assumptions were based on what he thought he heard and wanted to hear not on
what the seller said. Jim Weir hit the nail squarely on the head on this
one.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
gy.com...

If you look hard enough 10 out of 10 airplanes are unairworthy. Nowhere
did
the buyer justify his claim the plane was not airworthy. His post sounded
to me like he seriously failed in his questioning before looking at the
plane then tried to blame the seller for his poor questioning. His
assumptions were based on what he thought he heard and wanted to hear not
on
what the seller said. Jim Weir hit the nail squarely on the head on this
one.

Yup...Caveat Emptor.

Likewise a car need not be roadworthy, or a building be inhabitable...and
it's the buyers responsibility to find out.

Tom Sixkiller wrote:

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
gy.com...

If you look hard enough 10 out of 10 airplanes are unairworthy. Nowhere

did

the buyer justify his claim the plane was not airworthy. His post sounded
to me like he seriously failed in his questioning before looking at the
plane then tried to blame the seller for his poor questioning. His
assumptions were based on what he thought he heard and wanted to hear not

on

what the seller said. Jim Weir hit the nail squarely on the head on this
one.


Yup...Caveat Emptor.

Likewise a car need not be roadworthy, or a building be inhabitable...and
it's the buyers responsibility to find out.

But (at least in the state where I live) the seller of a car is required
by law to voluntarily disclose any accident damage exceeding 25% of the
vehicle's value. sounds like that people don't seem to think the same
standard applies to airplanes.

Also in this state, a seller of a building is rquired by law to
voluntarily disclose a whole laundry list of problems and potential
problems, BEFORE an offer can be tendered.

So in both of the above cases, if hte seller were selling a car or a
building, what he did would be either illegal, or very questionable in
legality.

TTA Cherokee Driver wrote:

But (at least in the state where I live) the seller of a car is required
by law to voluntarily disclose any accident damage exceeding 25% of the
vehicle's value. sounds like that people don't seem to think the same
standard applies to airplanes.

Also in this state, a seller of a building is rquired by law to
voluntarily disclose a whole laundry list of problems and potential
problems, BEFORE an offer can be tendered.

None of this is required in any of the States in which I have lived.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:


TTA Cherokee Driver wrote:

But (at least in the state where I live) the seller of a car is required
by law to voluntarily disclose any accident damage exceeding 25% of the
vehicle's value. sounds like that people don't seem to think the same
standard applies to airplanes.

Also in this state, a seller of a building is rquired by law to
voluntarily disclose a whole laundry list of problems and potential
problems, BEFORE an offer can be tendered.


None of this is required in any of the States in which I have lived.

According to the Rogue's Gallery page you live in New Jersey.

Less than 5 minutes with Google yields the following info about New Jersey:

C. Disclosure of Body Damage

N.J.A.C. 13:45A-26A.7 entitled unlawful advertising practices makes
unlawful:

"The failure to disclose that the motor vehicle had been previously
damaged and that substantial repair or body work had been performed on
it when such prior repair or body work is know or should have been known
by the advertiser; for the purposes of this subsection, "substantial
repair or body work" shall mean repair or body work having a retail
value of $1,000 or more.";