Legal question

[fcairmotive]

I have a legal question. I am renting hanger space to a fellow for the assembly of his light sport aircraft. The agreement is that he pay me a small amount for the use of the building and my normal shop rate for my services. Turns out he has no experience with airplanes, fuel systems, electrical systems, brakes, engines or anything about mechanical "stuff". I agreed to make his fuel tank and plumb it for him but now am getting in, with feet dragging, way over what I thought I was going to do. My question is, even though he is doing "all" of the work am I going to be liable sooner or later, at his demise, for the advice, help and fabrication on this aircraft. I am the sole proprietor and don't want to risk anything that I have. Thanks.

[martymayes]

only if someone wants to blame you for his demise.

[Dana]

Sounds like you need to document very specifically what you do for him (and bill for).

[WLIU]

I suggest that you tell the "builder" that the "education" part of homebuilding begins now. You can point the individual at the EAA resources on the web that describe the topics that must be learned. You could even make working on a part conditional on the owner's completion of the applicable reading/viewing material. That approach will likely be much more rewarding for both of you if the individual in question buys into it.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Frank Giger]

No, you can't be held liable.*

Even if one is listed as being a part of the build, the builder himself, as represented by the documents submitted to the FAA, is solely responsible for the aircraft.

Similarly, Experimental Aircraft are not given any judgement as to their airworthiness by the FAA. Again, it is the builder that does that. The FAA only states that they saw the aircraft complete, with no statement of it's safety.

* That said, anyone can drag anyone into civil court for just about any reason.

[DaleB]

You might also point out that anything he pays you to do for him doesn't count toward the 51% or more of the airplane that has to be amateur built (unless it's an E-LSA kit)

[CarlOrton]

continuing from Dale, he also has to be able to convince the DAR/FSDO that he knows every inch of the plane in order to obtain the repairman's certificate. If you did the work without him really knowing what went into it, he may not be able to demonstrate mastery.

[fcairmotive]

Thank you all. I am not too worried about him, it's his heir that concerns me. I am very sure that he will not be able to get his repairmans cert. He has not been able to grasp the most basic concepts. By the way who normally does the initial flight for these aircraft. With no experience in flying except in the back seat he is convinced and cannot be convinced otherwise that with a Light Sport Certificate after learning to fly in a 7-AC Champ he can handle this "Kite" ,my word not his, for its initial flight and subsequent 40 hours. Tell me I'm not crazy, please.

[cub builder]

Reference him to an EAA Flight Advisor, who will help him to evaluate his skills, advise the correct training to be able to do the first flight and test flying, and can help plan a proper first flight. Or, the flight advisor can help him find someone qualified to do the first flight and test flying.

[Sam Buchanan]

I have to ask.......why in the world did you get yourself into this predicament? Was it that important to rent part of your hangar?

You need to extricate yourself from this arrangement as soon as possible....if continued, this will not end well.

[Bill Berson]

A future jury might expect and find the more experienced professional mechanic, to be held responsible for a bad outcome. Regardless of actual facts.

[CarlOrton]

Similarly, Experimental Aircraft are not given any judgement as to their airworthiness by the FAA. Again, it is the builder that does that. The FAA only states that they saw the aircraft complete, with no statement of it's safety.

When I received my special airworthiness cert for my Sonex, the DAR told me flat out that the FAA doesn't care if I kill myself in it. They just wanted to make sure that I didn't hurt anyone on the ground in doing so.

[CarlOrton]

<snip> Turns out he has no experience with airplanes, fuel systems, electrical systems, brakes, engines or anything about mechanical "stuff". <snip> My question is, even though he is doing "all" of the work am I going to be liable sooner or later, at his demise, for the advice, help and fabrication on this aircraft.
There's some detail missing (can't blame you) so we're left to speculate. He knows nothing, yet he's doing ALL the work (your emphasis). Are you looking over his shoulder advising, or actually doing it (you mentioned fab of the tank)? Is he intending to fraudulently represent that he built the plane? Are you documenting everything you do, with copies to him, such that he might be denied amateur-built status (potentially saving his life?)?

All I see at this point is the robot wheeling around bleeting, "Warning! Warning, Will Robinson!!" As others have noted, it really doesn't matter how "in the right" you are. You didn't elaborate, but the way you stated it, the heir (making it sound like one person in particular) may not be pleased the builder is doing this in the first place.

Renting a corner of the hangar is one thing. Doing all the work is a whole 'nuther thing.

[Frank Giger]

LOL, it's absolutely true, Carl! The FAA mandates that builders place an Emergency Locator Transmitter in an aircraft so that in the event of a crash they can locate it. Unless it's a one seater with just the pilot. Then they couldn't give a rip and so an ELT is not required. :)


By the way who normally does the initial flight for these aircraft. With no experience in flying except in the back seat he is convinced and cannot be convinced otherwise that with a Light Sport Certificate after learning to fly in a 7-AC Champ he can handle this "Kite" ,my word not his, for its initial flight and subsequent 40 hours. Tell me I'm not crazy, please.

Typically the builder performs the first flight.

You probably aren't crazy, but most builders are a tad touched in the head, to be honest.

I did about half of my Sport Pilot training in a Champ, and was really low hour when I started flying my own aircraft from first flight; consensus in the community for my sort of aircraft is that a Champ is a good analogy for it. It may not be prudent or wise, but it's not uncommon or unusual. Certainly it makes the NTSB investigator's job a little easier in the event of a major event.

[1600vw]

I have to ask.......why in the world did you get yourself into this predicament? Was it that important to rent part of your hangar?

You need to extricate yourself from this arrangement as soon as possible....if continued, this will not end well.

The best advice ever given to anyone.

[Bill Greenwood]

Many people build an airplane for the first time, especially a simple one, without having experience or formal training, and it works fine, thats a part of EAA. Others build under some supervision or even fast build programs at the factory that gets them started. and it can and should work out fine.
And many people who have experience would be glad and even enjoy helping a first time builder. But that doesnt seem to be what is going on here. You resent the fact that this builder is not an experienced A an P, and/or you dont have confidence in your willingness or ability to teach him, maybe even inspire him. Kind of like Young Eagles, many pilots welcome a chance to introduce kids to flying in a positive way, but there are always a few, maybe for a good reason, who dont want to share. I hope he can rent space from someone who welcomes the chance, maybe there is an EAA chapter near, and not get into what is going to be a long term unending conflict with you, and I dont think the legal aspect is the real factor here since it hasn't been a problem for others.
By the way, you may be expert in building, but maybe this person knows some things you dont. he may be a teacher or lawyer,nurse or computer expert in his own right.
And you seem to already conclude he will crash one day.It will take some time to build so he can learn to fly as needed. If the plane is dual he can get some CFI time in it or a similar one, if not a Champ is a good basic trainer tho the LSA may be a lot quicker on pitch controls. I did the first flight in the Starlite we built because it was single seat.It handled fine in the air, side control notwithstanding.

[Frank Giger]

As Bill wrote, it's about comfort level.

There are folks in my EAA chapter that look at my plane and have said flat referred to it as a "death trap," as the notion of tube-and-gusset construction just strikes them as improper from the start. I never ask them for help, as I know they would be very uncomfortable with it.

I do troll them a bit by pointing out all the non-aviation hardware I used in the construction, to be honest.

OTOH, I knew when my ignorance of all things airplane related could get me into serious trouble and begged for help. My electrical system was designed and the installation overseen by our technical counselor, for example. And when I had to rebuild my VW engine, one of my EAA brothers spent a good couple of weeks combined time standing over my shoulder, not only guiding me but explaining it to me....the books were good, but nothing beats someone there to make things clear.

As an A&P you may have to avert your eyes more than once when watching an amateur aircraft built. There are "best practices" and there are "gooder enough" practices, some of which may make someone used to following a manual and set procedures blanch. For certified aircraft, there are no "best practices," there are only "practices" with how to install stuff set forth.

[Yooper Rocketman]

The rules on 51% are pretty clear. But the DAR that inspected my project told me he was told in his “FAA DAR Classes” down in Oklahoma it was not his job to determine if the applicant actually built the plane. There’s a bunch of builder assist shops doing 90% of the builds, and as a builder who poured 9,000 hours into a very complex plane, I don’t agree with the system. But, this will NOT be an issue at airworthiness inspection time.

Tom Sullivan
Lancair IVPT N994PT

[Tralika]

I don't know why the builder you are "helping" would not be able to obtain a Repairman's Certificate. The DAR that does the final inspection and issues the airworthiness certificate will have nothing to do with the process to obtain the Repairman's Certificate. The "builder" takes the AW certificate, build log and a Form 8610-2 to the local FSDO. In my case, it was obvious that the folks at the FSDO had no experience with Experimental Amateur Built aircraft. They thumbed through my build log and asked me a few questions about the build process. The questions were very similar to questions I've gotten from non-pilots. They asked no questions about maintenance or inspection requirements on my plane. After making sure the form was filled out properly they issued my Repairman's Certificate.

If you don't want the builder you are helping to obtain a Repairman's Certificate I think the only way to do it is to apply for the Repairman's Certificate yourself. Since only one certificate is issued for each aircraft he will not be eligible if you get there first. Also keep in mind that there is no time limit on when the to apply for the Repairman's Certificate. If your builder says he does not want a Repairman's Certificate, he can change his mind and apply a year or two later.

[Frank Giger]

Well, he's not building the plane for the guy, just some subsystems like the fuel tank and plumbing for it.

[cub builder]

The legal question is whether you have any responsibility for the builder. The answer is "probably not". However, as has been pointed out, the heirs can drag you into court and you can be in the right, but it is still very costly to defend yourself. So, if you are uncomfortable with the situation, you should put an end to it. It's that simple. Dont' be a wimp about it. Tell they guy you are uncomfortable with the situation and give him a date when you expect him to be out of your hangar.

It's not an unusual situation for a builder to think they have found a home in someone's hangar, but the hangar owner figures out the builder does poor quality work, or may have had intentions of knocking out a lot of work, but accomplishes very little other than to take up your time and hangar space. I've had that situation, and as much as I like helping builders, I have had to give them a drop dead date to find another storage facility and throw them out of my hangar.

[HAPPYDAN]

Having been on the receiving end of said "vacate notice", I can say I agree with Cub Builder. My case was a customized Harley Davidson chopper, and the gracious garage owner put up with me longer than he should have. I had no experience in building a motorcycle from the frame up, and the 30 day build dragged on for months. While I did not welcome the news, I understood his position and respected his wishes. You might offer to assist him in finding alternative housing.

[jarheadpilot82]

I am renting hanger space to a fellow for the assembly of his light sport aircraft. The agreement is that he pay me a small amount for the use of the building and my normal shop rate for my services.




I have just a couple of questions as I put my REALTOR hat on -


1. Do you own the hangar or are you leasing it? If you are leasing, many leases do not allow sub-leasing without the owner's permission. And whether or not you two signed a lease, you are sub-leasing if you are taking money. Why do I bring it up? Because it gives you an out. "Sorry, Dude. I can't sub-lease and I can't let you stay for free. So you gotta go. Sorry..."


2. If you own it or can sublease, do you have a lease written with him? If not, you had better get one signed - and fast. I would be more worried about him (or his heir) slipping on an oil spot on the floor and claiming injuries and suing you for that. He doesn't even have to die for you to be sued. Just tell him that you need a lease, and if he won't sign one that absolves you of any responsibility for when he slips, then you just say, "Sorry, Dude. You gotta go..."


Just trying to give you some practical knowledge that has nothing to do aviation, and I, to be clear, am not providing legal advice. I am just telling you that you might want to see an attorney and protect yourself if you are going to allow him to stay in your hangar. You have more to worry about in this arrangement than him dying on a test flight.