Probably because there are not many competent firms doing repairs.
Some damage you need accurate jigs to carry out the repairs correctly, not sure many/any repair shops in the UK would be qualified to repair some types. Here is where the USA has well known type specialists with the correct body of knowledge/skills and the correct jigs.
My experience is that most times the sellers have no idea what the have, and have not studied the logs in enough detail to understand decades of history before they owned the plane. The ‘relationship’ if you will is between you and the plane, the only role the seller plays is in how much you will have to pay to own what the plane has to offer.
gallois wrote:
Why put it at all it is unnecessary unless you are trying to con someone.
In recent year it is just “done” like that. Like in cars, where they will indicate if the car has a valid inspection done or not. In most cases, NDH means just that, the airplane never has had any reportable damage. It’s basically a statement by which the seller hopes to get his add through the initial scrutiny of very basic stuff like total hours, hours since OH of the engine and props e.t.c.
If NDH is indicated and prior damage found in the logs, that is a good sign to walk away or at the very least get a very thorough PPI done, as well as slash a significant amount of the offer. Airplanes can fall into the hands of shady individuals, which does not always mean the airplane is bad but that extra caution needs to be exercised.
I helped a friend a few years ago getting a plane from someone like that. It is doable but requires assistance of a good maintenance shop to find out what really happened. In that case, his add was a total scam, the price sky high but the airplane sound and healthy. In the end my friend managed to purchase the airplane at a very attractive price. He never had any problem with it related to the previous owner.
One of my former aircraft did pop up for sale with a very detailed advert listing and a crazy price:
https://www.aviationsalesinternational.com/piper-pa46-350p-malibu-mirage
document_pdf
But somehow the professional aircraft seller forgot about the non trivial damage history of that plane. I know there are no laws on aircraft sales but should this not be expected from a professional seller producting such a detailed advert? Also some more at least “misleading” details in there.
I don’t think ‘professional seller’ means anything in this context, or at least you shouldn’t expect any particular scruples just because they’re a ‘professional seller’.
As with cars, people buy and sell aeroplanes to make a buck – that’s all there is to it. Some are dead straight and would never even slightly mislead you, let alone lie to you. Some are outright crooks. Most are somewhere in between, and most are not going to actively draw your attention towards something that might lower a buyer’s valuation.
On the other hand the advertisment doesn’t try to claim “no damage history”.
I would assume any old aircraft has damage history, and the prebuy should pay attention in particular to whether the repairs are done correctly.
“almost everything overhauled Firewall forward” makes sense after seeing the photo 
If the damage has been properly repaired it shouldn’t be a problem. Personally I wouldn’t draw attention to it at the advertisement stage, and only tell the (serious) buyer when they’ve requested more information e.g. logbooks, and make sure to put a positive spin on it: all these brand-new parts they’re getting for free and won’t have to replace in the future.
Some aircraft types are likely to have damage history, and depending on design, relatively straightforward to repair correctly. Fifty year old tail wheel aircraft rarely have not had damage history, and the tube/fabric variety are relatively straightforward t repair garden variety damage.
Conversely a Cessna 190/195, perhaps the Elvis of tailwheel ground-loops, requires special rigging at possibly only two shops which have the correct jigs, to repair correctly.
Depending on the quality of the repair information in the logbook, damage history is either a minor discount, or in some cases, a deal breaker.
I looked at an “airline pilot” Debonair which reportedly had no damage history. Some casual searching revealed several accidents, and when someone took a look at the airframe, the repairs were the sort an amateur might carry out using Halfords best bodge-repair fibreglass!
Yes this advert is a masterpiece in missing things while going on and on reagrding other aspects. Why is the year of the last engine overhaul not mentioned? Because it was 2008. Damage history? Better not mention.
“almost everything overhauled Firewall forward”
Well kind of but the engine was not overhauled but just inspected. All work mentioned and done later to it like new turbos etc. on can be completely worthless. At some point it will have to be overhauled and all this is done again no matter if it is just 1 flight hour old.
Maybe I am just too honest or I did not want to wast the time of others and myself. So back in 2016 my advert contained this"
Damage history: The aircraft has got damage history. In 2015 the nose
gear collapsed due to pilot error on landing and the right
wingtip sustained minor damage. The aircraft has been
completely rebuild firewall forward with engine mount,
new nose gear, new propeller, shock load inspected
engine, cowling etc. The right wingtip section was
removed and replaced.
According to the paperwork the aircraft experienced
previously in 1995 nose gear damage. The inspection of
the aircraft during the 2015 firewall forward rebuild did not
reveal any old or hidden damage.
"
I’d expect the obligation to document damage history an issue for the law of that country the legal contract is based on. Systems are very different with respect to transparency of such things. There are countries to beware off and countries you’d want, but no international standard at all.
