How much do they actually care about falsified maintenance logs in general aviation? As in buyers/fraud etc? Do they care about IA falsifications or no? Bigger fish to fry?

Uh, that is the main and maybe only thing the feds care about in GA, that’s certificate action territory

I've heard of a IA loose his inspection certificate and reduced to an A&P, for playing footsy with the logs... Dave B

I’ve been reading about a dispute and blatant log falsification (not entering substantial damage repairs) on another forum. Guy buys a plane and finds out the plane was crashed an brought back to life under the table. The new owner finds this and reports it etc. I have not heard the outcome. Many telling him the fsdo doesn’t care about single log entries or lack therof.

Airfoil92 wrote:I’ve been reading about a dispute and blatant log falsification (not entering substantial damage repairs) on another forum. Guy buys a plane and finds out the plane was crashed an brought back to life under the table. The new owner finds this and reports it etc. I have not heard the outcome. Many telling him the fsdo doesn’t care about single log entries or lack therof.

Interesting. Falsifying logs for gain sounds like fraud. If the difference is very much money felony comes to mind. The FAA might be the smaller problem for the perp. Did the plane with the falsified logs move across state lines?

Unless it was incredibly gross and blatant, how would you prove it?
Every aircraft out there has undocumented repairs and probably a lot have documented non-repairs (overhauls are rarely Overhauls when done in the field).

Unless it became a safety of flight issue or resulted in a fatality, I doubt the FSDO would care much.

Depending on the damages, you’re better off in civil court.

IA owned
IA crashed - substantial damage
IA fixed substantial damage
Same IA sold it without any of that logged. Let that be a scenario for discussion.

Airfoil92 wrote:IA owned
IA crashed - substantial damage
IA fixed substantial damage
Same IA sold it without any of that logged. Let that be a scenario for discussion.

As long as the repair was properly performed (workmanship), I don't think the FAA is going to care all that much.
From my limited experience (and it is quite limited) undocumented repairs are very common.
I know people like to think that log books are the holy gospel of the airframe (infallible and complete) but that's just not the case.

Or, you might find that one guy at the FAA on a Tuesday afternoon thats just looking for an excuse to crawl up someone's ass...
But that someone might also be you, since you're now the owner of the airplane.


I went thru a similar exercise when I first bought my first airplane and I found a shoddy repair with no log entry. When I brought up the idea of calling the FAA on the last IA to my current A&P, he asked me; "Do you really want the FAA taking a special interest in an airplane you own?"
We decided to correct the issue ourselves and go flying instead.

It's always worth googling the tail number and owner names to see if you get any hits on accident reports or newspaper articles on incidents. I had an appointment to look at an airplane a few years ago that was advertised as NDH. Out of curiosity, I googled the tail number and came up with an NTSB report on an accident that resulted in significant damage and downtime. The repairs weren't logged and the seller professed not to know about it.

I've also experienced modifications made without STCs, and I'm not talking about seat belts here. It all got signed off and filed in the end, but there some anxious moments along the way.

Pretty good guess that if it was part of a pattern, i.e., same IA signed off a bunch of airplanes that weren't properly repaired, it would interest the FAA. But would just one incident? Hard to say. I suspect it would depend a lot on that IA's overall relationship with his "principal" at the FAA. Good relationship, don't do it again. Bad relationship, pull the inspection authority. And of course, if improper repairs led to accidents, that would heighten the FAA's interest.

Cary

Airfoil92 wrote:IA owned
IA crashed - substantial damage
IA fixed substantial damage
Same IA sold it without any of that logged. Let that be a scenario for discussion.

As is often the case on the internet, this just isn't enough information to say much about.

What are the circumstances? Basically, if you bought the plane, and didn't know about the repairs, you MAY have a civil case. Bring $$$$ for your attorney, and plan on lots of time to resolve. And, hope that you come out without losing money.

Otherwise, as Cary noted, the FAA may or may not do much, and as others have noted, if this is your airplane, do you want to hand it to the FAA as Exhibit A, not knowing precisely what their response will be.....?

MTV

Unless he stated “all logs” one could have been “lost”. After the next annual you have no regulatory reason to keep previous logs except AD compliance. Without pulling out my FAR’s, you probably don’t need the AD compliance record either, but some are pretty invasive. He logged it on a loose sheet of paper and it got lost.

Not saying it is right...

Rod

Wa180 wrote:Unless he stated “all logs” one could have been “lost”. After the next annual you have no regulatory reason to keep previous logs except AD compliance. Without pulling out my FAR’s, you probably don’t need the AD compliance record either, but some are pretty invasive. He logged it on a loose sheet of paper and it got lost.

Not saying it is right...

Rod

This is one huge difference between you guys down in the US and us up here in Canada. I think we have it better up here. Journey logs that must be in the plane for flight and is the first thing stuff gets entered into. Then it gets transcribed into the Tech logs that sit in your house/hangar/AMEs hangar. So 2 records of everything. When the journey log gets filled it has to be kept for at least 2 years. All tech logs are kept. So the records are quite thorough up here...

Ok... here is the scenario.
IA buys a plane
IA flew and crashed the plane out of annual and not registered NTSB- substantial damage, ripped the gear off it.
NTSB lists it as "Substantial damage" Gear ripped off and prop strike
IA owns and fixes the aircraft over 25 years
IA never logged or submitted anything stating the damage
IA put 2 hours total time on the aircraft over 25 years. He wrecked it and parked it. Then fixed it and sold it.

New owner looked it over and bought it. Then 2 months go by and the new owner can't register it. During the search for the new owner finds an NTSB report about the crash. The prop has 2 hours on it since new as well.

Here is the sequence of events.
IA buys, flys and crashes his new toy
IA puts a new prop on it and fixes the damage.
IA never logs the damage, new prop (according to logs he did log that part), repainted the aircraft etc
IA sells the airplane
New owner can't register it.
New owner digs around for previous owner info for registering. New owner finds the NTSB report and no signs of repair, has logs since new. All accounted for

I feel bad for this guy but I don't know much legal recourse he has at this point. Its obvious the IA crashed and covered up his damage. It's interesting the IA flew and crashed it out of annual and unregistered as well. Going to be interesting to see how it works out.

Buyer beware.

Sounds like a whole bunch of stuff the buyer should have researched and looked for before purchasing the aircraft.
How did he not find the NTSB report prior to buying?
How did he not verify the registrations prior to buying?

You can hire a lawyer and sue for anything your heart desires in our great country but I think the buyer should chalk this up as one of those lessons in life that our fathers tried to warn us about when we were too young to listen.

.

If the new owner was flying around for 2 months with a screwed up registration, it’d be best for him to keep his mouth shut and not run to the FSDO. Get the registration figured out, have a trusted mechanic go over the plane, and chalk it up as a learning experience.

My question is why can't the new owner register it?
The unlogged repairs thing (aka NDH) is a whole nother issue.
BTW far as I know, there's no requirement to log the damage- just the repairs.
Are the repairs done properly, as in is the airplane airworthy & in good shape?
And how do you know / can prove the IA owner flew the airplane when out of annual?

What does the new owner want to do?
1) get the airplane registered and fly it?
2) Get some money back for "not as represented"?
3) Punish the seller, because he feels taken advantage of?

CenterHillAg wrote:If the new owner was flying around for 2 months with a screwed up registration, it’d be best for him to keep his mouth shut and not run to the FSDO. Get the registration figured out, have a trusted mechanic go over the plane, and chalk it up as a learning experience.

He hasn't been flying it. He's trying to find out what to do. I think its had a prop strike and bigger issues than trying to get it registered. It sounds like most everybody doesn't care much about the FAR's and legal aspects of aviation. Perhaps the FAA doesn't care either. I guess I worry too much about putting 8.50's on my AC without an STC. I didn't for that reason. It sounds like I can put a 180HP upgrade, big tires, and prop and there is no legal issues. I would think the FSDO would help with the registration. I wonder what they will do on the prop strike/gear repair without documentation. Buyer beware doesn't supersede fraud. Sure he could have done more due diligence, but he assumed an IA wouldn't break federal law so blatantly I guess.. It'll be interesting.

Then call the FAA and take it up with them.
You asked for opinions, you got opinions. Sorry they don't match what you wanted to hear.