Aviation Insurance Market Update

[thinwing]

Same with Travers....down by 20 bucks

[RobertGary1]

On 9/28/2019 at 7:31 AM, tgardnerh said:

Hell, I'm a negative net worth pilot (student loans...) and I carry an umbrella policy. I pay less for $1M in coverage than I do for netflix.  

I’ve not been able to find an umbrella that doesn’t exclude aviation 

-Robert

[HRM]

10 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

I’ve not been able to find an umbrella that doesn’t exclude aviation 

-Robert

Same here and my umbrella is with USAA.

On 9/28/2019 at 9:31 AM, tgardnerh said:

Hell, I'm a negative net worth pilot (student loans...) and I carry an umbrella policy. I pay less for $1M in coverage than I do for netflix.  

Who's your umbrella with that covers aviation?

[MikeOH]

7 hours ago, HRM said:

Same here and my umbrella is with USAA.

Who's your umbrella with that covers aviation?

Another interested shopper, here

I can't find one, either

[tgardnerh]

9 hours ago, HRM said:

Same here and my umbrella is with USAA.

Who's your umbrella with that covers aviation?

Huh.  My (geico) umbrella policy pre-dates my pilot's license, so I didn't think too much about aviation when it was written, and never checked.  Glad I have stand-alone liability insurance for the airplane!

[HRM]

11 hours ago, tgardnerh said:

Huh.  My (geico) umbrella policy pre-dates my pilot's license, so I didn't think too much about aviation when it was written, and never checked.  Glad I have stand-alone liability insurance for the airplane!

If you review your exclusions, I am betting () that your umbrella does not cover your flying.

[tgardnerh]

1 hour ago, HRM said:

If you review your exclusions, I am betting () that your umbrella does not cover your flying.

Yeah, seems likely :-( 

[HRM]

2 minutes ago, tgardnerh said:

Yeah, seems likely :-( 

If it's any consolation, a bunch of us were hoping otherwise!

[RobertGary1]

Its one of the reasons I haven't gotten the USAA umbrella. The other is that they require I maintain minimum liability on all my vehicles including seasonal ones. I usually lower my liability  on my boat when its out of the water. So that would be another added cost.

-Robert

[mike_elliott]

On 9/25/2019 at 1:57 PM, Parker_Woodruff said:

Unless the rates are so cheap that it makes sense to have hull coverage.  Rates on pro-flown  corporate jets over $4,000,000 in value have frequently been written for a ten cent rate (0.1% of hull value) with no deductibles.

When you've got a $5,000,000 jet capable of getting $90,000 bird strikes, it's well worth the $5000 in hull premium.

Even just the regular losses in the piston aircraft world have exceeded the premium taken in the past few years.

One other advantage is it's also nice to have a company that *must* take your airplane from you if it is a total loss.  You walk away with a check and no hassle.

2m smooth 800K hull non owned, up 18% this year..3900. Very few choices for these coverage limits.

[MikeOH]

Just got my renewal offer: up over 20% ($1300 up from $1050 last two years)

Global through Falcon.  I asked Falcon for an explanation but, so far, not even the courtesy of a response!

[Jerry 5TJ]

15 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

2m smooth 800K hull non owned, up 18% this year..3900.

What is “hull non owned” coverage?  

[mike_elliott]

6 hours ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

What is “hull non owned” coverage?  

It is a non owned policy. I could climb into your PT46 or Champ for that matter and be insured up to 800K on the hull, with 2 million limit, no sublimits. It still doesnt matter, I insist on being added as named additional insured pilot with a waiver of subrogation to keep all the barristers on the same side of the fence if something goes wrong. In fact, my policy asks I forward certs to them also now (new this year) 

[MIm20c]

17 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

It is a non owned policy. I could climb into your PT46 or Champ for that matter and be insured up to 800K on the hull, with 2 million limit, no sublimits. It still doesnt matter, I insist on being added as named additional insured pilot with a waiver of subrogation to keep all the barristers on the same side of the fence if something goes wrong. In fact, my policy asks I forward certs to them also now (new this year) 

Mike, is this something you do for biannuals or just transition training?  Just thinking normal flight training should have the owners coverage protecting everyone.  I wondering if there’s any liability exposure if I’m acting as a safety pilot. 

[MIm20c]

9 hours ago, MikeOH said:

I asked Falcon for an explanation but, so far, not even the courtesy of a response!

After over a decade with Falcon I’m changing over two policies to the OP this year.  He has already given us a level of customer service unheard of in the industry.

Edited October 22, 2019 by MIm20c

[mike_elliott]

11 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

Mike, is this something you do for biannuals or just transition training?  Just thinking normal flight training should have the owners coverage protecting everyone.  I wondering if there’s any liability exposure if I’m acting as a safety pilot. 

It is what I do for any training, and actually, prefer it if I am just a pax, as the finger pointing is taken out of the process if things go pear shaped. On one occasion my client had to pay $200 to have me added to his E model. He had 0 time in type and is on this forum. It was basically a cash grab by avemco.  I now steer clients away from avemco because of this "onerous" internal policy, and steer them to  Parker and Wings. Of well over 1000 clients, this is the only time anyone was charged. 

There is what I consider a lot of misinformation is out there that this addition dilutes the policy, but I have yet to hear where a policy limits are diluted when adding a named insured pilot with a waiver of subrogation.

[chriscalandro]

So every time you do training you ask to be added to the policy but you still have all this coverage?  Plus there are CFI specific policies?

Also, I've had good luck with avemco. My rates decreased this year, and I've never had a problem with adding anyone or my choice for transition training. 

I have never heard of a pilot adding a CFI to their policy instead of the CFI just being under his or her CFI policy. Not something I'd ever do. 

[mike_elliott]

31 minutes ago, chriscalandro said:

So every time you do training you ask to be added to the policy but you still have all this coverage? 

Yes

Plus there are CFI specific policies?

Are you asking a question or telling me there are CFI specific policies?

 

Also, I've had good luck with avemco. My rates decreased this year, and I've never had a problem with adding anyone or my choice for transition training. 

Thats great news they stopped the onerous policy of charging their clients for this. Since they are company direct, this wasnt a fee added by an agency and it was told to my client (Alex, got your ears on?) they are doing this for every one they add onto a policy.

I have never heard of a pilot adding a CFI to their policy instead of the CFI just being under his or her CFI policy. Not something I'd ever do. 

Unfortunately then, we will never fly together. This is the normal now days. I guess I could pass on the cost of my policy to you and then we could fly. I personally have an additional policy to the primary policy of the plane owner to cover my assets anyway. The planes policy will always be primary.

 

 

 

[jetdriven]

Those Cfi policies are worthless.  They pay if you are sitting in the plane with the student. However, what about a student on a solo? Or a solo XC? Or when he later has an incident as a licensed pilot?  There is no coverage for that. 
The worst nightmare is when a solo student has an accident and the FAA hauls you up.  Or you sign off a BFR then the guy crashes a week later. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by jetdriven

[Jerry 5TJ]

All the PA46 specialist CFII that I have trained with since 2011 have required they be added to my policy.   That’s not a new trend. 

[chriscalandro]

Interesting. 

[chriscalandro]

31 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

 

My policy blankets any Cfi with appropriate experience in make and model. I assume most other policies have similar clauses, but maybe I’m wrong. 
 

but with that clause I don’t see why I should specifically add someone as a named insured. 

[Jerry 5TJ]

2 minutes ago, chriscalandro said:

I don’t see why I should specifically add someone as a named insured.

The CFI wants to avoid subrogation. 

[kortopates]

1 minute ago, chriscalandro said:

My policy blankets any Cfi with appropriate experience in make and model. I assume most other policies have similar clauses, but maybe I’m wrong. 
 

but with that clause I don’t see why I should specifically add someone as a named insured. 

I think you misunderstand, your policy only covers "you" as long as your CFI has appropriate experience in make and model - under the open pilot. But without being a named insured the CFI is not protected from your insurance company should they chose to subrogate against your CFI.  

[chriscalandro]

19 minutes ago, kortopates said:

I think you misunderstand, your policy only covers "you" as long as your CFI has appropriate experience in make and model - under the open pilot. But without being a named insured the CFI is not protected from your insurance company should they chose to subrogate against your CFI.  

...which is what CFI insurance is for...

if I pay a Cfi to do training, and that Cfi puts me into a spin 3000 ft above the ground while demonstrating maneuvers, you want me to pay the insurance for you on my airplane so you can make sure you’re protected?

 

no. 
 

it’s the CFIs responsibility to rote the himself and that insurance cost is built into the hourly cost. 
 

it sounds a lot like I’d be increasing my liability for you to reduce yours limiting any recourse I or insurance would have for a CFI doing something stupid. 
 

id like to hear what the insurance guy has to say about it. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by chriscalandro