Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Maintenance Bay' started by Salty, Oct 31, 2017.
The thread is open again minus unnecessary bickering and personal attacks.
The bold underlined parts are what I mean.
Seller - blatantly disregards FAA regulation and sells a non-airworthy aircraft with falsified documentation. No repercussions.
Buyer - gets ripped off by the immoral ratbastards. FAA is down his throat.
That story doesn’t really make sense. Unless the buyer kept flying after his mechanic informed him of the issue(s) and they were not fixed.
I see what you mean. It's not about the contractual relationship (which as others point out, they get to make their deal) but the FAA response. I can answer part of it,
I never said or even suggested the FAA was down the buyers' throat. I said he was investigated. You may be assuming a lot that didn't happen (@Salty too?j*. The FAA was satisfied the buyer didn't know after a relatively brief conversation. Far more concerned the airplane didn't fly again until properly repaired.
Why the FAA didn't look at the mechanic, I never figured out, but I have my speculative suspicions. I'm not surprised they didn't do anything about the seller. I didn't figure they would. Proving anything more than he unknowingly flew one would have been difficult and expensive, and would have been dealing with events in the past which were not not a present threat to safety. Not a particularly good allocation of priorities and resources.
[*sorry. I was using "investigate" neutrally, as in "to find out the facts.". I forgot the word can be loaded with all sort of extra meaning]
Time to move on, I have seen aircraft tied up for years for things like this and costing many times more than just fixing the problems. Dumb and dumber, move on their are bigger fish to fry.
The post you quoted was made in early Nov. Some of us have moved on. lol
Actually, I have no news to report on this. The buyer is still waiting on some of the parts from the factory.