Certification adds a ludicrously disproportionate cost to every aircraft...not such a problem , to certify a passenger-jet seat,where tens of thousands are going to be made, but a deal-breaker in something unlikely to hit a production much over a thousand units.....
Why not simply do as LAA approval seems to? Apply "Fitness for purpose" WITH THE DESIGNER CARRYING THE BURDEN OF PROOF
The regulatory inspector need only be held culpable in cases of gross incompetence, dereliction of duty or wilful omission.....
That way, the inadequate float, which should sell for less than £10, could be cheaply and easily withdrawn and replaced. The manufacturer should have mandatory product-liability insurance to include punitive damages cover, in the event of any lying, cheating, falsification and denial where a fault manifests.
It works in the motor industry( though I have reservations about the exploitative misuse of monopoly for computer "brains")
By and large, the motor industry tries to get it right first time....Failure to recall can prove expensive......I cannot understand why, in the cases quoted, the damages were pared down to a fraction of their award. Whilst there is no massive fine, for failure to act in a timely and responsible fashion, they will continue to have an incentive to cover-up known faults.
Perhaps the punitive damages should be awarded to the regulatory authority, thus incentivising them to actively seek out the real cause of accidents and get them addressed.
GA will never be a large market in the UK, whilst certified machines cost an average-man's wage to keep in the air...In that way, Aviation, UK style, is elitist. Those who are allowed the "Permit" route to fly, are penalised by limitation on types and operations....artificial barriers erected to justify the Certified regimen.