Ethics of selling an aircraft

[Kingy]

Let's say that you have a homebuilt aircraft for sale. It's got no POH, it's a single seater and is a tailwheel.

Someone views the aircraft, he has no, or limited tailwheel time, has never flown a small (twitchy) single seater and does not ask the 'right' questions.

Said person offers to buy the aircraft even though the vendor (you) points out the aircraft may be unsuitable for him.

Would you:

A: Decline his offer on the basis that you are worried he may come to grief.
B: Take the money and suggest he has some extra training before he collects it.
C: Stuff it, take the money - he's got a license and is a grown up after all. It’s not your responsibility...

All hypothetically of course
:D

Kingy

[Keef]

Been there! Not with a little tailwheel, but a big engine, wobbly wheels, and rubber prop, cowl flaps, etc.

Pointed out to him that it's not an easy aircraft to fly, and that we'd sell it to him only if he undertook in writing to have conversion training with a CFI before flying it solo. He did, then flew it solo anyway and scared himself rigid while doing so (no surprise) and sold it again quickly.

[Ludwig]

B but fall back on C if advice ignored.:p

[High Wing Drifter]

I think 'B' in the style of Keef's experience. You have done your duty by giving someone the facts IMHO. Keef went beyond the call of duty, very admirable.

Is there any guidance from the CAA on this?

[Flyin'Dutch']

Would be good to get the point of view of one of the legal eagles on this one.

I think it differs whether you are a private seller or a broker.

If you buy a car of a private vendor you have no recourse even if you buy a mini when you initially stated you need to have something in which you can haul your 5 strong off spring.

I would have thought something similar goes for buying aircraft.

My gut feeling says that C should be the right answer but in the nanny society we live it may well be B and that what Keef did may well have further exposed himself as it could be explained of an admission that he knew really that the guy was not suitable to fly it at the point of sale.

Who knows.

May have to go for judiciary review to get an answer. These things never have anything to do with common sense.

FD

[FNG]

On the contrary, common sense is the basis for much of the law governing the liability of people for harm done to others. Generally speaking, in a private sale, the seller has no obligation other than not to be dishonest about what he is selling. Anyone with the requisite cash can buy a Ferrari the day after they pass their driving test, or a frisky hunter or racehorse the day after their first ride on a donkey. It is possible for a person to assume a duty of care to another, but simply offering some words of advice about the item purchased are unlikely to result in liability if the purchaser uses it to kill himself. Indeed, saying something like "this must be only be used with proper training and in accordance with recognised procedures" emphasises to the purchaser that he proceeds at his own risk.

Even a commercial seller's obligations are in general concerned with the quality of the item sold: he promises that it will do what it is supposed to do, if used properly. Otherwise, you would not find many shops selling, for example, scuba gear or rock climbing kit (although anyone who has ever bought stuff in these shops will be familiar with the irritating "have you used one of these before?" approach of the 19 year old sun-tanned dudes behind the counter).

[FixedWing]

This all sounds like good advice.

The only thing I would add is that for me the "homebuilt" would ring bells. In the USA, the builder of a homebuilt aircraft faces potential product liability issues. If the purchaser (or a subsequent purchaser) were to crash the aircraft then their estate might claim that the aircraft was defective in its manufacture in some way.

In the USA, the seller of a homebuilt aircraft would be very wise to sell only to a competent pilot.

I should know what the situation is under English law but I don't.

Stephen