What in the world are you trying to say? I'm not discouraging anybody. I'm encouraging due diligence. The last thing I would want to see for this guy is a destroyed career brought on by an inspector catching something important missing during a ramp check. It takes about 5 minutes to print that list off, and maybe 20 to go through the logbooks. Including the owner in that process would be a great chance to actually instruct.

Comparing 121 to the GA world is the wrong way to go. As PIC, YOU are ultimately responsible to make sure that your aircraft is airworthy. Despite the owner being appropriately rated for the make and model the fact that you hold a higher rating automatically puts you in that position. Part of an aircraft being airworthy is compliance with ADs. Therefore it's YOUR responsibility as PIC to do everything you can to ensure their compliance. In this case the OP doesn't have a mx department, or any other resources outside of his/her own investigation to make sure this aircraft is safe.

So what you're telling me is that you would jump in anybody's aircraft who offered to let you build time without covering your hide?

Stop making assumptions far outside of what I've posted. Two others have agreed with me. The CFI is as much about self preservation and improvement as it is building hours.