What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

De-Plane

dwschaefer

Active Member
So this is a very difficult post to write and I'm asking for constructive thoughts on what to do next...it's somewhat overwhelming.

I'm giving serious thought to no longer owning my plane. I'm torn how to proceed. I concerned about the potential future liability from selling it (I guess all experimental builders are), I'm wondering about parting it out maybe. Not sure what to do and how to proceed, but I'm sure I will get some good ideas from the group.

Additionally, I've got a hanger full of construction tools, rivets, fasteners, benches, tools, etc.etc. all the stuff required to build and take care of an RV-6A. That I need to liquidate.

What are some of your thoughts? I appreciate them.

Thanks...

DWS
N142DS RV6-A
www.n142ds.com
 
One thought for you - the EAA has studied the issue of liability to builders towards subsequent owners, and has yet to find a successful lawsuit filed against a builder by a subsequent owner (or their estate). So your thought that "All experimental owners are [worried about liability]" is not necessarily true. Your personal comfort will decide of course, but history is on the side of those that sell their airplanes and get the full value out of them as aircraft.
 
What Paul said!

AND if you do decide to "part it out", make sure the parts are to be used on other aircraft and not to "rebuild that aircraft".
The purchaser must understand that if that aircraft is "rebuilt", the original builder's name must remain on the data plate and registration.
 
Most law suits go where the money is. If you have enough money to be sue-worthy, then you can probably afford to just park the airplane in the corner and look at it periodically as a loving reminder of good times.

DEM
 
The problem isn't the person buying the airplane; it's their estate, their passenger, or the damage that they inflict on the ground. Also, while there has never been a successful lawsuit, I am pretty sure that the serious ones that were filed necessitated a legal budget that exceeded the value of the plane.

Some people try to sell theirs abroad (I've seen a lot of Brazil). Im not sure whether that diminishes the risk at all but I would be interested in hearing from someone who is knowledgeable on this approach.
 
I have seen a really bad 2 seat EAB wrongful death suit peripherally. Family of the deceased passenger sued the named builder, the second owner, the third/current owner at time of accident (another pilot was flying at the time of the crash), the local mx shop that probably did the last Cond Insp and the person that did the fabric recovering for the last owner.

It was dismissed within 14 months within the last 10 years. It was a simple pilot error of the deceased pilot to the NTSB.
 
I am no lawyer for sure. Given that, if you are really overly concerned about law suits, I think you should give some serious thought to 6gun's comment. I know he was making his statement in jest in hopes you would gladly donate your plane to him. However, on a serious note, if you feel strongly about the fear of law suits, perhaps you should give it to someone. I would bet whoever received it would take great care of it. I also bet their heirs would not even consider suing someone after they had spent many blissful years flying it. To be honest, since you have successfully cheated death for many years in the machine, what really makes you think there would be some catastrophic failure of machine or labor after you sell it?

I am sure many out here have sold airplanes, perhaps more than one. Perhaps one of them may chime in with their experience. My experience, I have sold one experimental aircraft that I built. It has been 11 years now since I sold it. The amount of sleep I have lost worrying about someone suing me over it - 0 seconds. The last time I checked it is still registered with the FAA and flying.

True that you will have to decide what you are willing to deal with but for me, I don't consider this issue even a blip on the radar screen in my life. Perhaps it is because I do NOT have deep pockets to come after. Even if I did, I am not sure I would really feel any differently about it though.

Hope you are able to resolve your issue without having to murder a good machine. They really do have a sole of their own you know!

Live Long and Prosper!

That goes for our beloved machines too!
 
There was a video a few years ago of a guy who took his home-built aircraft, I think it was an RV, to a junk yard and had it demolished to avoid any liability. I can't find it know, but it was pretty depressing watching the crane with a claw tear the thing to pieces. :eek:
 
No.

I am no lawyer for sure. Given that, if you are really overly concerned about law suits, I think you should give some serious thought to 6gun's comment.

I also bet their heirs would not even consider suing someone after they had spent many blissful years flying it. To be honest, since you have successfully cheated death for many years in the machine, what really makes you think there would be some catastrophic failure of machine or labor after you sell it?

1. While the new owner might waive his right to a future lawsuit, he cannot, in most (all?) states, waive the rights of others (spouse, children. others) to sue.
2. Take a look at the John Denver accident. Proximate cause: he ran a tank dry while flying low over the ocean, failed to maintain control. His multimillionaire heirs sued everyone in sight: builder, subsequent owner, Aircraft Spruce for parts, etc.. While I believe they settled with some money from ACS or its suppliers, that does not mean the original builder did not suffer a lot of lost sleep or legal expenses.

My advice to the OP: If you have sufficient assets to be a target in a lawsuit, give serious consideration to trashing the airplane. At least you'll sleep at night. OR selling your avionics ("AS IS"), or your engine and prop ("AS IS"), and take a chain saw to the airframe, if that works for you. Talk to a lawyer about how you can "distance" yourself from the airplane, if you do decide to sell it.
 
Then he got ripped off by the recycle company.

He could have removed the data plate and removed the plane from the FAA records and local county and donated the structure only to a school for students to practice on.

The motor and prop could be sold without logbooks. The panel, brakes, motor mount and fiberglass could be sold and you could recover at least 1/3rd of what a 6A is worth in today's (want only a 7) market.
 
He could have removed the data plate and removed the plane from the FAA records and local county and donated the structure only to a school for students to practice on.

But he didn't...and that is entirely his prerogative. I won't second-guess his decision because I don't know the personal reasons he had for scrapping his plane. I do sympathize with him and may do something similar when I decide to retire from flying my RV-6. Taking an experimental aircraft out of service instead of selling it isn't unheard of in our corner of aviation--the stripped airframe parts usually ends up in the rafters or corner of a dusty hangar instead of featured in a YouTube video. When the resale value of the plane is insignificant in comparison to financial/legal risk the decision to scrap can be justified.
 
Last edited:
Advertise your airplane, meet a good soul, sell them your plane. Your building effort deserves that.

Disclaimer: I am a good soul (but have a RV-6A already, sorry).
 
Advertise your airplane, meet a good soul, sell them your plane. Your building effort deserves that.

Disclaimer: I am a good soul (but have a RV-6A already, sorry).

Thank you. :)

However, I know many good souls, some of whom might like to have my plane. But if I have similar reasons for scrapping the plane as the builder in the video, the goodness of a buyer's soul will be immaterial.

One of my homebuilts was involved in a crash that demolished the plane but amazingly the pilot (a close friend of mine) survived nearly unscathed. But that was a very sobering experience that lead me down the path of serious reflection on whether or not I ever want to potentially be in that (or worse...) position again. The $$ value of the plane is really diminished under those circumstances.
 
Last edited:
I very much respect your position, Sam.

But, as the kids say: "Wrongful Death Lawyers always be Lawyering!" Planes, trains, automobiles, it just does not matter. MY life is too short, and my fortune too small, to worry about such things.

Nearer and dearer to my heart is the maintenance and owner assisted condition inspections I perform on my bought flying experimental. Especially where family occupants are concerned. So I guess we are somewhat in the same boat, just different seas?
 
DONATE THE AIRPLANE

Why doesn't the OP donate the airplane to a museum or charity and get a tax receipt in the process...This way everybody wins...or

Sell or give it to a Canadian up north...we don't have these stupid laws in Canada...

This is getting overboard when someone has to destroy something of value like an airplane just because of potential lawsuits..:rolleyes:
 
Donation

I have a good friend who did donate his EAB to an aviation museum. He told me he removed the electronic ignition and disabled the spark plug wires just in case somebody tried to start it. I think the museum was a 501C3 and he got a receipt for a contribution to charity. I’m not sure I could do that but he remains comfortable with his decision. (It’s not an RV.)
 
Last edited:
International sales

Selling the aircraft internationally does not solve the problem - it could one day be sold back in the USA and then the risk returns.

If your estate is such that $70k is a lot of money, you most likely will not be the target of a lawsuit. If $70k is not a lot of money for you, part it out and scrap the airframe.
 
I bought my engine from a guy that was parting out his One Design for this very reason. He sent me a picture of his nice looking plane disassembled to the component level on the floor of his hangar. It?s sad to see, but I can understand why high net worth individuals wouldn?t want to deal with the risk. In a way it?s like buying insurance.
 
I am not a lawyer but I know there are some here on the forum that could give a good opinion. What is the value, liability wise, if you register the plane in an LLC? I see this on a few builders sites.
 
I am not a lawyer, but provide technical support in defense of lawsuits at a major car company. Just a few observations:

Plaintiffs can file a law suit for any reason at all against anybody they wish to target. It is up to the court to judge if the lawsuit goes forward with merit. You will however pay your lawyer even if only to get the case dismissed. My guess is that even parting out will not insulate you entirely from an enterprising plaintiff attorney if he is able to trace the source of the parts. (Particularly if the part was somehow involved in the event.)

The first thing "contingency plaintiff attorneys" look for is an economic loss or egregious negligence. No loss, no money to recover (Loss of life is an economic loss in the eyes of the law. Doctors are worth more than construction workers etc..)
For egregious negligence on the sale of a homebuilt, you would likely have to represent an un-airworthy aircraft as airworthy, likely in writing for that to stick. Successful years of flying and a high level of documented maintenance (i.e. good thorough logs) would be a good defense against an allegation of poor workmanship.


Second is a "sad story". Most lawsuits against my employer involve no more than a sad outcome riding in a vehicle we built. Sorry to say, but most people will not walk away from a vehicle crash uninjured in spite of the airbags, well designed structure or Hollywood movies. Sad stories bring sympathy from juries with potential "sympathy" awards.

Third, contingency lawyers want deep pockets to go after. They prefer targets that would typically rather settle than fight (like insurance companies) since long drawn out fights cost money and time. Since they have to invest their own time and money in the hope of a settlement, I always like to see how much I can help them to run up a big cost.


Contingency lawyers are good at throwing every conceivable allegation against every conceivable wall in the hope that something sticks. And yes, they do favor walls with money behind them since they have to invest time and money to file and support the lawsuit. Insurance coverage is one of their favorite targets.

My own philosophy after years of work in this field is to just live my life. Do things right (i.e. fix the cracks in my front walk, document my build and maintenance, etc) and not spend my time, or make my decisions based on lawsuit concerns. And yes, at some point in the future I will sell my project as an airworthy aircraft.
 
I am not a lawyer but I know there are some here on the forum that could give a good opinion. What is the value, liability wise, if you register the plane in an LLC? I see this on a few builders sites.

Corporate registration cannot shield you from your own tortious actions. Registering the airplane in an LLC may provide some shielding where somebody else is flying, or where the accident isn't your fault (though failure to perform maintenance, etc. will be held as your fault), but if the crash is in any way traceable to your actions--whether as pilot, builder, or maintainer--you are still personally liable for your actions (subject to applicable statutes of limitations and the usual defenses).

Prior registration in an LLC won't help you at all down the road, after it's sold, if somebody claims you were at fault as the builder. Cessna, Piper, etc. get sued because A) it would be hard to trace a problem to a single person on the assembly line, and B) they have much deeper pockets than the guy on the line (this being the important reason). If the problem could be traced to a guy on the line who took a hacksaw to the wing spar before it left the factory, he could absolutely named as a defendant--but he may still be "judgment proof," i.e. too broke to get anything from. I previously worked for a bankruptcy attorney, and we had a canned letter we'd send to creditors in cases of an insolvent debtor--we called it the "Turnip Letter, as in "you can't get blood from a turnip.

Even in cases where the LLC can provide you some shielding, you can still make mistakes that will destroy the shield. Any corporate form requires certain formalities to be followed, including an annual meeting, named officers, certain bookkeeping and reports, etc. Money also has to be kept separated between you, the individual and you, the LLC member/officer. Miss the formalities, or commingle funds, and it will be easy for opposing counsel to "pierce the corporate veil," allowing him to go after you personally instead of being limited to corporate assets.

Airplanes are often registered in an LLC for tax reasons, particularly when used for business purposes. That's another matter entirely, and one you should discuss with an accountant or tax lawyer if you think it might apply to you.

So...no, you likely won't be doing yourself any favors with regard to liability by registering it in an LLC.
 
Where does an umbrella policy fit into this? Couldn't you buy a personal umbrella policy, which would take care of a low 7 figure settlement?
 
Where does an umbrella policy fit into this? Couldn't you buy a personal umbrella policy, which would take care of a low 7 figure settlement?

In principle, absolutely. In practice, be very careful to check the fine print on the policy; a lot of insurance companies run like **** from anything involving GA, leaving you completely on the hook.

(Use of defensive force is another matter that often gets excluded in the fine print, BTW. Just a point of interest.)
 
Big Targets for Lawyers

I?m wondering if carrying a big insurance policy only makes you a bigger target? If you do have a $2m umbrella policy plus say a half mil liability policy and get sued for $10m, you?re still on the hook, right? Maybe carrying only a small policy so the insurance co would pay the defense would be a way to go for some. You would be a small target and the defense would be paid and that can be a very major cost even if the case is dismissed.
 
I?m wondering if carrying a big insurance policy only makes you a bigger target? If you do have a $2m umbrella policy plus say a half mil liability policy and get sued for $10m, you?re still on the hook, right? Maybe carrying only a small policy so the insurance co would pay the defense would be a way to go for some. You would be a small target and the defense would be paid and that can be a very major cost even if the case is dismissed.

Whoever is suing you has no idea what insurance you carry when they file the suit.
 
Whoever is suing you has no idea what insurance you carry when they file the suit.

Which is the whole point of filing the suit. They are looking to see how deep your pockets are, and whether or not it's worth proceeding on their end.
 
Unless the laws in Texas are different then the other states I have had the please of dealing with attorneys and company liability coverage, the plaintiff has no idea of your limits unless you expose it or somehow give it away in the negotiations for an out of court settlement.

AIG, Loyds and a few others had briefing documents I head to read and acknowledge which explained a fair amount of it. They had plenty of points on what to do, or more specifically what not to do when faced with a liability claim...

Tim
 
Insurance and lawsuits

One if the first filings from a plaintiff attorney after a lawsuit is filed are interrogatories which in my experience always include a question directed at financial responsibility to satisfy any judgment. You don't give the amount of coverage, but are required to disclose "financial responsibility" for any judgment such as insurance. The plaintiff doesn't know going in, but uses the court force the disclosure of liability insurance.
 
The upshot, though, is that while the plaintiff may find out, the Federal Rules of Evidence (specifically, Rule 411) generally keeps knowledge of the existence, let alone the limits, of any insurance policy away from the jury. See the rule, and the Notes from the Advisory Committee (which wrote the rules), at https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_411. Keeping that knowledge away from the jury avoids the temptation for them to rule against the defendant on the (impermissible) grounds that "well, he can afford it--he has insurance."
 
Thanks for your thoughts Paul. I appreciate your input and have always respected your opinions... Sorry for the delay replying .. got hit with the flu immediately after posting earlier in the week ..wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Regards,

DWS
 
Don .. thanks for your idea .. I've thought of donating it. Since I'm obviously not rich .. wouldn't have built if I was .. I want to get something out of it.. tax value or parting it out if I don't just sell it.

Regards,

DWS
 
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. I certainly didn't want to trigger such a legal discussion. I continue to contemplate what to do. SInce it's 4 degrees here .. I'll be waiting a while! :)

Will work on a plan to sell all the tools, parts, fasteners etc.

Regards,

DWS
 
Back
Top