X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:35:49 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from snt0-omc3-s36.snt0.hotmail.com ([65.55.90.175] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4396878 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 21:19:34 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.90.175; envelope-from=gary21sn@hotmail.com Received: from SNT112-DS7 ([65.55.90.136]) by snt0-omc3-s36.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:18:59 -0700 X-Originating-IP: [24.216.229.86] X-Originating-Email: [gary21sn@hotmail.com] X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: gary21sn@hotmail.com From: "Gary Edwards" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: Resale Agreement X-Original-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:18:50 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01CB25DC.836C0B40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 Seal-Send-Time: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:18:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V10.00.0070.1500 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2010 01:18:59.0532 (UTC) FILETIME=[3333B0C0:01CB2617] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01CB25DC.836C0B40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I concur with Dennis. The $300 portion of the agreement is good, but = the insurance inspection and training portion of the agreement could = pose some real stress to some builders/buyers/flyers. A second owner of a partially completed kit or a flying airplane may not = want to have insurance and may choose to have it self- insured. I would = suspect there are a lot of Lancairs without traditional insurance on = them. The inspection is to insure that the airplane is airworthy, = insurance or not?, so maybe that portion of the agreement could be = re-worded. Also, if a transfer of ownership of a kit or completed airplane is a (as = Tim J. identified it: "the old 235") then what about training as = required in the agreement? Who at Lancair is qualified to administer = the training for that airframe? Or where are the qualified training = pilots and airplane in relation to the location of the subject airplane; = maybe one on the east coast and the plane is on the west coast, or vice = versa. Gary Edwards LNC2 =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Dennis Johnson=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 4:44 PM Subject: [LML] LII Resale Agreement I agree with Mark that Lancair's decision to apply the $300 transfer = fee to a credit for parts purchases is a good move. I thank the new = owner for that! However, in my opinion the $300 was never an issue. = The following is a quote from their resale agreement: Further, the new purchaser of a flying Lancair aircraft or an = uncompleted kit, and prior to the aircraft being transferred, must agree to have either flying Lancair = aircraft or upon first flight of an uncompleted kit inspected by our insurance inspection team. The new = purchaser must also agree to participate in any Lancair endorsed training program. These two requirements are, it seems to me, potentially very = expensive. An inspection by Lancair's "insurance inspection team" could = be thousands of dollars. The paragraph is awkwardly worded. It says = the buyer must agree to have the inspection, but it doesn't say the = inspection has to be completed and it doesn't say the airplane has to = pass the inspection. =20 One of the benefits of building my own experimental airplane is the = privilege of using materials and techniques of my own choosing, with = nobody (except the FAA, sort of) looking over my shoulder. Although I'm = confident my relatively small modifications from the official plans = would be acceptable to Lancair, there's always the possibility that some = future Lancair owner (we're now on the third since I've been building) = could decide any changes from the plans, no matter how insignificant, = must be "corrected" before allowing the new purchaser to register the = airplane. I'm not comfortable giving up that much power to Lancair. = It's my airplane, not theirs. =20 The resale agreement also says that the purchaser "must also agree to = participate in any Lancair endorsed training program." Holy moly, = that's a requirement limited only by the imagination of Lancair. A new = owner could also decide, for some insurance purpose perhaps, that the = "Lancair endorsed training program" would require who knows how many = hours in a Lancair, completed at Redmond. =20 The inspection requirement, particularly if it includes a requirement = that the inspection must be "passed," and the unbounded training = requirement, could cost a seller thousands of dollars, and possibly tens = of thousands. And I think the cost will fall on the seller, even if the = purchaser is the one who writes the check. Dennis ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01CB25DC.836C0B40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I concur with Dennis.  The $300 portion of the agreement is = good, but=20 the insurance inspection and training portion of the agreement = could=20 pose some real stress to some builders/buyers/flyers.
 
A second owner of a partially completed kit or a flying airplane = may not=20 want to have insurance and may choose to have it self- = insured. =20 I would suspect there are a lot of Lancairs without traditional = insurance=20 on them.  The inspection is to insure that the airplane = is=20 airworthy, insurance or not?, so maybe that portion of the agreement = could be=20 re-worded.
 
Also, if a transfer of ownership of a kit or completed = airplane is a=20 (as Tim J. identified it: "the old 235") then what about training as = required in=20 the agreement?  Who at Lancair is qualified to administer the = training for=20 that airframe?  Or where are the qualified training pilots and = airplane in=20 relation to the location of the subject airplane; maybe one on the east = coast=20 and the plane is on the west coast, or vice versa.
 
Gary Edwards
LNC2
 
  
----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis=20 Johnson
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 = 4:44=20 PM
Subject: [LML] LII Resale = Agreement

I agree with Mark that Lancair's decision to apply the $300 = transfer fee=20 to a credit for parts purchases is a good move.  I thank the new = owner=20 for that!  However, in my opinion the $300 was never an = issue.  The=20 following is a quote from their resale agreement:
 
Further, the new purchaser of a flying = Lancair=20 aircraft or an uncompleted kit, and prior to the
aircraft being=20 transferred, must agree to have either flying Lancair aircraft or upon = first=20 flight of an
uncompleted kit inspected by our insurance inspection = team.=20 The new purchaser must also agree to
participate in any Lancair = endorsed=20 training program.
 
These two requirements are, it seems to me, potentially very=20 expensive.  An inspection by Lancair's "insurance inspection = team" could=20 be thousands of dollars.  The paragraph is awkwardly = worded.  It=20 says the buyer must agree to have the inspection, but it doesn't say = the=20 inspection has to be completed and it doesn't say the airplane has to = pass the=20 inspection. 
 
One of the benefits of building my own experimental airplane is = the=20 privilege of using materials and techniques of my own choosing, with = nobody=20 (except the FAA, sort of) looking over my shoulder.  Although I'm = confident my relatively small modifications from the official = plans would=20 be acceptable to Lancair, there's always the possibility that some = future=20 Lancair owner (we're now on the third since I've been building) could = decide=20 any changes from the plans, no matter how insignificant, must be = "corrected"=20 before allowing the new purchaser to register the airplane.  I'm = not=20 comfortable giving up that much power to Lancair.  It's my = airplane,=20 not theirs. 
 
The resale agreement also says that the purchaser "must also = agree to=20 participate in any Lancair endorsed training program."  Holy = moly, that's=20 a requirement limited only by the imagination of Lancair. A new = owner=20 could also decide, for some insurance purpose perhaps, that = the=20 "Lancair endorsed training program" would require who knows how=20 many hours in a Lancair, completed at Redmond. 
 
The inspection requirement, particularly if it includes a=20 requirement that the inspection must be "passed," and = the unbounded=20 training requirement, could cost a seller thousands of dollars, = and=20 possibly tens of thousands.  And I think the cost will fall on = the=20 seller, even if the purchaser is the one who writes the = check.
 
Dennis   
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01CB25DC.836C0B40--