I have asked this question before with no answer: why are all these part failures happening in the field, but not on the original Vans RV-12? Leads me to believe pilot technique is causing many of these failures leading to fleet replacements. Case in point: I have 1040 hours and over 8 years on my 12 with the same nose tire that still looks like new tread. Why would I expect a nose gear leg failure. I never found loose rivets on the engine mount, I never had wing skin cracks, my prop hub never cracked, my trim servo isn’t bent and I have never seen cracks on my stabilator spar. Seems like some of this stuff is overkill.
A S-LSA in a flight school, sitting on the tarmac, day and night, without the seat belts latched around the joy stick, in high winds, slamming the stabilator or rudders end to end, is a different environment from most E-LSA owner/ builder or 2nd or 3rd owner,where the owner or builder hangars their plane, when not flying.
Add in students learning to fly, and learning to land, not always being the most gentle, having landings that might stretch the definition of a "firm" landing with slightly too low an airspeed approach, due to inexperience with very minor throttle adjustments, and it's a rough environment for the equipment and could induce failures.
It's a rental, and like a rental car, there's no pride in ownership, nor treating the equipment like they would their own. There could be a tendency towards borderline abuse, due to lack of experience of student pilots.
Myself, personally, I don't think I would ever buy a Legacy RV-12 S-LSA used, from a flight school, much like I would never buy a used car from a Rental agency or off of lease. It was a business asset and a tool, used to make money. As a general contractor, I sold my used tools because it was time for newer, more productive tools. Too much time lost taking it into the shop for repairs and down time, no longer made it as profitable as a new tool. Craigslist time!