Fatal Crash During Pre-Buy Flight - Obligation to Disclose Mech Probs?

tomokc

Well-Known Member
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20130112X64931&ntsbno=ERA13FA109&akey=1

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...ne-trouble?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

A plane crashed during a pre-buy inspection flight, killing the pilot and a prospective buyer (also a pilot, but not rated in the aircraft, and presumably PNF). It was apparently the first flight in the airplane since an emergency landing due to a mechanical failure, and subsequent attempts to repair. Earlier in the day and before the buyer arrived, witnesses reported seeing a mechanic having difficulty starting the airplane, but eventually a high-speed taxi was performed. It crashed immediately following takeoff.

So the question: Although caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) exists and the logbooks would have disclosed the recent mechanical problem, does the seller or his mechanic have a legal or ethical obligation to explain that the plane hasn't flown since the previous mechanical failure and emergency landing, and they had difficulty starting it that morning? If so and YOU were the buyer, would you be the first to board and fly?
 
The first flight after an emergency should absolutely not, under any circumstances be a prebuy inspection flight.
This could of easily been avoided. What a shame.
 
So the question: Although caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) exists and the logbooks would have disclosed the recent mechanical problem, does the seller or his mechanic have a legal or ethical obligation to explain that the plane hasn't flown since the previous mechanical failure and emergency landing, and they had difficulty starting it that morning? If so and YOU were the buyer, would you be the first to board and fly?
Ethical, a matter of opinion. Legal, perfectly legal. If I were the seller, I would have disclosed that I had trouble starting the plane earlier in the day and described the remedy and testing to determine airworthiness. As the buyer, the description of the remedy and testing provided by this accomplished owner/builder/repairman MIGHT be enough for me.
 
Last edited:
I cannot imagine flying any aircraft I was looking to buy without a thorough reading of all the logs, a complete visual inspection inside and out, some testing, and a full mx inspection by the mechanic of my choosing, speaking to the FBO and other owners nearby to get their info/opinion on the aircraft and the current owner. I would also want to speak to whatever mechanic/facility has worked on the plane over time also and further, I would want to gain some perspective of the owner and his history in regards to flying and maintaining aircraft.

That being said, what the owner did or did not not disclose (and it is not clear from the report or the article what he did and did not disclose especially about the issues even starting the plane that very morning) would be to me, completely unethical and may have cost two people their lives.
 
Last edited:
Buying an experimental is a challenge as it is possible that no mechanic has ever worked on the plane other than the seller. When buying an experimental, it is wise to find a mechanic or builder that knows the aircraft type and can determine its airworthiness.

I cannot imagine flying any aircraft I was looking to buy without a thorough reading of all the logs
All the entries could have been made by the owner/builder/repairman.

a complete visual inspection inside and out
Can be tough with fiberglass homebuilt.

a full mx inspection by the mechanic of my choosing
I agree, but unless the mechanic had some experience with this amateur-built type, few mechanics could determine airworthiness.
 
Last edited:
Buying an experimental is a challenge as it is possible that no mechanic has ever worked on the plane other than the seller. When buying an experimental, it is wise to find a mechanic or builder that knows the aircraft type and can determine its airworthiness.
My assumption would be to take a mechanic along who has actual experience with the specific type of aircraft that I would be looking to purchase and perhaps an owner of such an aircraft if I had no experience myself in that specific type myself. If only the owner has worked on the plane then I would need to query him on the details of his ability, training, experience and again look at the maintenance records.

I think it would be potentially a red herring to buy used experimentals because of these issues, unless you knew the plane and the owner, trusted him/her and had some experience/knowledge yourself with the specific type of plane.
 
I think it would be potentially a red herring to buy used experimentals because of these issues, unless you knew the plane and the owner, trusted him/her and had some experience/knowledge yourself with the specific type of plane.
BINGO! Buying an amateur-built plane can be a dangerous minefield.
 
Well in any case it sounds like this was engine failure of a standard Lycoming or Conti which is something joe blow aircraft mechanic should be able to inspect adequately.
If I were the buyer and the seller was unknown to me, I'd have other Seawind builders and a mechanic inspect the aircraft. However, if the seller is known to me and regarded as a top-notch builder and mechanic, I MIGHT place my trust in him.

Buying an E-AB aircraft presents some interesting challenges.
 
Last edited:
the estates of the deceased should sue them for reckless endagerment or worse. @
 
Last edited:
the estates of the deceased should sue them for reckless endagerment or worse. @jtrain609 ?

I'm not licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction, and cannot provide any help.

I recommend that anybody that has a legal question to obtain an opinion on their legal rights and responsibilities from counsel that is licensed in their jurisdiction.
 
actually I was wondering if there were other courses available…I will remove the tag, although I'm certain it has no negative effect. An opinion of possibilities, not acting as representation is not violation of ethics, nor would it result in any viable action against you. Your opinion on what other courses are available would not be practicing law…as you have not been retained nor have you offered your services. This is why attorneys can go on the air and give widely general opinions about options.
 
I visited a guy selling a 172 a few years back with one of our club CFI's. Guy offered to let us take it up even though it had been out of annual for over a year. We politely declined, but he flew it down to our field for a pre-buy. Turns out part of the vertical tab was being held together by tape.
 
actually I was wondering if there were other courses available…I will remove the tag, although I'm certain it has no negative effect. An opinion of possibilities, not acting as representation is not violation of ethics, nor would it result in any viable action against you. Your opinion on what other courses are available would not be practicing law…as you have not been retained nor have you offered your services. This is why attorneys can go on the air and give widely general opinions about options.

I disagree. We can discuss this in person if you'd like, but I'd rather not have this discussion out on the forum.
 
Back
Top