Narrative:

Aircraft unairworthy. A list of discrepancies was given to owner, including engine overhaul. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter stated that with regard to both reports he had made to provide ASRS information on the number of instances in which aircraft he inspects under his 'ia' authorization are not in airworthy condition and are not signed off by him to be. He was advised that there would be no violation of the regulations by him if he does not sign off an aircraft as airworthy if it is not. Therefore, none of the aircraft inspected owners would have reason, or the FAA, to register a formal complaint or proposed violation action against him. In addition, it would have to be proven that the aircraft operated in an unairworthy condition to cause violation action against the pilot owner.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 'IA' INSPECTOR RPTED AN SMA SEL PVT ACFT AS UNAIRWORTHY DURING ACFT ANNUAL INSPECTION.

Narrative: ACFT UNAIRWORTHY. A LIST OF DISCREPANCIES WAS GIVEN TO OWNER, INCLUDING ENG OVERHAUL. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH REPORTER REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATED THAT WITH REGARD TO BOTH RPTS HE HAD MADE TO PROVIDE ASRS INFO ON THE NUMBER OF INSTANCES IN WHICH ACFT HE INSPECTS UNDER HIS 'IA' AUTHORIZATION ARE NOT IN AIRWORTHY CONDITION AND ARE NOT SIGNED OFF BY HIM TO BE. HE WAS ADVISED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO VIOLATION OF THE REGS BY HIM IF HE DOES NOT SIGN OFF AN ACFT AS AIRWORTHY IF IT IS NOT. THEREFORE, NONE OF THE ACFT INSPECTED OWNERS WOULD HAVE REASON, OR THE FAA, TO REGISTER A FORMAL COMPLAINT OR PROPOSED VIOLATION ACTION AGAINST HIM. IN ADDITION, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PROVEN THAT THE ACFT OPERATED IN AN UNAIRWORTHY CONDITION TO CAUSE VIOLATION ACTION AGAINST THE PLT OWNER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.