IO540,
I agree with you up to a point.
I agree that a strip owner, shouldn't invite someone if he knows there is a problem with the surface that needs attending. I agree that if they give people an open invitation to flyin unannounced, then they should make some effort to carry out regular inspections, perhaps weekly.
But what about a strip owner, who hasn't flown for 3 or 4 weeks....he gets a call from someone who's been in a number of times before asking if they can use the strip.
He says "Well, I don't mind you using it, but I haven't been down there in 3 or 4 weeks, so I don't know what the surface is like." The pilot agrees to "be careful" and accepts the risk themselves.
They then damage their aircraft on landing.
Should the strip owner really be responsible in that circumstance?
What about a strip owner that doesn't give people an open invitation to flyin unannounced, but doesn't get upset when someone drops in unannounced. Should they be liable if that person flying in unannounced again (because they didn't receive a hostile reaction last time) a couple of months later, and damages their aircraft due to a pot hole?
We're not talking about a public use airport here, but someone who has a private facility, but doesn't get upset if someone wants to use it at their own risk.
I agree too, that insurance can just attract claims. But when the PFA start to recommend people have it, there can start to develop an assumption that the strip owner will have the insurance. There can also be an attitude, that "well if they don't have it, they are stupid...even the PFA recommend it!"
A bit of a catch 22. I would sympathise with the strip owners on this one.
dp