Buy a damaged airplane

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

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....)

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?