A title problem, but I want to buy. How handle?

By refusing to process a registration application and bill of sale they
essentially do the same. Try to convince a finance company the airplane is
yours and they should give you money against it when you can't put your name
on the registration. And try to get a registration change from an estate
without a legal document saying the people signing are the estate executors,
for example. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
No, they do not establish ownership. There is no title on an aircraft,
no pink sheet, no title to sign over. You can put any name on the
registration you want. You cannot sue to change a registration, etc.

Under what situation will they refuse to handle the change of
registration? I've never heard of this before. I've bought airplanes
from people who have never been on the registration before, the FAA
doesn't care.

-Robert

Gee, on deja.com they are all lined up (the reply box does not provide
the option to quote original". So Juan said..

"You have any idea how hard it can be to clear up some of these
problems? You
can't 'buy' something that doesn't belong to the person selling it to
you."

Which makes no sense because there is nothing regarding the FAA
registration that determins ownership.

Newps, you might want to check your news browser. All the replys show
up nicely under the original post to me in a tree layout.

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Newps, you might want to check your news browser. All the replys show
up nicely under the original post to me in a tree layout.

You shouldn't depend on everyone having the same view of the ordering of
postings that you have. Each news *server* is independent and may receive
postings in different order. This fact has nothing to do with the choice of news
*client* software.

Please include a little context (as I have above, for example) so we can see
what you are replying to.

Thanks.

Dave

Robert M. Gary wrote:


Newps, you might want to check your news browser. All the replys show
up nicely under the original post to me in a tree layout.

They would for me too if I had all the posts displayed. I only display
new posts. Who wants to wade thru all that crap?

On 8/29/2005 06:31, Dave Butler wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Newps, you might want to check your news browser. All the replys show
up nicely under the original post to me in a tree layout.

You shouldn't depend on everyone having the same view of the ordering of
postings that you have. Each news *server* is independent and may receive
postings in different order. This fact has nothing to do with the choice of news
*client* software.

Yes it does. News postings are threaded. Each posting retains a headers
which identifies it's thread and parent posting. Most news reader clients
look at these headers and provide the user the option of organizing the
posts accordingly.

I've only used 4 or 5 different news reader clients over the years, but
they've all provided this feature. I wouldn't consider using one that
didn't, but that's perhaps just personal preference.


Please include a little context (as I have above, for example) so we can see
what you are replying to.

Thanks.

Dave


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student
Sacramento, CA

Mark Hansen wrote:
On 8/29/2005 06:31, Dave Butler wrote:

You shouldn't depend on everyone having the same view of the ordering
of postings that you have. Each news *server* is independent and may
receive postings in different order. This fact has nothing to do with
the choice of news *client* software.

Yes it does. News postings are threaded. Each posting retains a headers
which identifies it's thread and parent posting. Most news reader clients
look at these headers and provide the user the option of organizing the
posts accordingly.

Not wanting to start a ****ing context here, but your direct contradiction of my
statement is wrong. Your choice of news client *does* have exactly nothing to do
with the fact that news servers are independent and may receive postings in
different orders.

I've only used 4 or 5 different news reader clients over the years, but
they've all provided this feature. I wouldn't consider using one that
didn't, but that's perhaps just personal preference.

That's my preference, too. If the posting that is replied to hasn't been seen
yet by my news server, no news client software can show it. I'm not sure whether
that's what happened here, though.


Please include a little context (as I have above, for example) so we
can see what you are replying to.

....and I still think this is good advice.

Anyway, this meta-discussion is off topic and I'd like to bring it to a close.

Dave

On 8/29/2005 07:53, Dave Butler wrote:

Mark Hansen wrote:
On 8/29/2005 06:31, Dave Butler wrote:

You shouldn't depend on everyone having the same view of the ordering
of postings that you have. Each news *server* is independent and may
receive postings in different order. This fact has nothing to do with
the choice of news *client* software.

Yes it does. News postings are threaded. Each posting retains a headers
which identifies it's thread and parent posting. Most news reader clients
look at these headers and provide the user the option of organizing the
posts accordingly.

Not wanting to start a ****ing context here, but your direct contradiction of my
statement is wrong. Your choice of news client *does* have exactly nothing to do
with the fact that news servers are independent and may receive postings in
different orders.

True, but the order with which the news server receives the posting is of
less consequence when the client threads the postings in the correct order.


I've only used 4 or 5 different news reader clients over the years, but
they've all provided this feature. I wouldn't consider using one that
didn't, but that's perhaps just personal preference.

That's my preference, too. If the posting that is replied to hasn't been seen
yet by my news server, no news client software can show it. I'm not sure whether
that's what happened here, though.

I've never experienced that problem (in 15 years, anyway).



Please include a little context (as I have above, for example) so we
can see what you are replying to.

...and I still think this is good advice.

Anyway, this meta-discussion is off topic and I'd like to bring it to a close.

Dave


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student
Sacramento, CA

("Dave Butler" wrote)
[snip]
Please include a little context (as I have above, for example) so we can
see what you are replying to.


The key word here is "little." g

Wait a minute. R.M.G. actually "over-trimmed" ...a first!

Forget the (gentle) rebuking - give that man a medal instead :-)


Montblack

If an airplane is owned by a person who dies and the registration is changed
to the estate of the deceased based on a court order, the only way the
registration can be changed when the aircraft is sold is if the legal
executors of the estate sign the bill of sale -- all of them if there are
more than one. I know this first hand because a man who is being sentenced
this week in Arizona tried to steal an aircraft this way. He kept the money
and then tried to do a change of registration with only one of the estate
executors' signatures. Then he tried it again, this time signing it himself.
Both times the FAA refused to process the change of ownership. They most
certainly do care.

Juan

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
Under what situation will they refuse to handle the change of
registration? I've never heard of this before. I've bought airplanes
from people who have never been on the registration before, the FAA
doesn't care.

-Robert