Insurance over 70

[JohnB]

Hi all. I have a good friend who flies a twin who said that his insurance went from around $5,000 yearly to over $35,000 yearly when he hit his 70th birthday with no medical changes. And with no guarantees or probabilities of a renewal. Has anyone of us Mooney drivers ever got that kind of insurance shock? 
 

im hoping that’s only for his airplane a complex pressurized twin and not for our Mooneys!

[DonMuncy]

I'm over 80 and when my policy expired, they would not renew. In spite of Parker's best efforts, no one would give me a quote quote unless I went to a non-retractable plane.

[JohnB]

So it is true, there is some age determined by insurance companies alone where this happens. Yikes! I once saw a 95+ year old pilot flying the heck out of a super cub. (Retired airline pilot) good to know for planning purposes, not that I’m 70 yet, but hey I’d like to fly well after then if I can, better get lots of flying in while I’m still young-ish. Thanks Don, Blue. 

Edited March 1, 2022 by JohnB

[carusoam]

John,

The oldest Mooney pilot hit 100 this year…

Flying octogenarians are my favorite!  We have a few…  An MSer mentioned yesterday…  his 80th is coming up this year.

70 is still kind of young for the insurance shock….

Especially since many MSers have waited for retirement to learn how to fly…. 

 

So…. Let’s start with inviting @Parker_Woodruff our best man in the insurance business…

To help get to the bottom of why a 70year old gets the shocking treatment…

 

Let’s get this figured out… before I get there….  
 

PP thoughts only, stay healthy!

-a-

[MikeOH]

@Parker_Woodruff

I'd be very interested to learn if there is any actuarial data to support such a draconian policy implemented at an arbitrary age (e.g. 70 or 80).

Without such data, it seems like pretty blatant age discrimination...

[201er]

9 hours ago, DonMuncy said:

I'm over 80 and when my policy expired, they would not renew. In spite of Parker's best efforts, no one would give me a quote quote unless I went to a non-retractable plane.

That's what the M20D is for!

[PT20J]

8 hours ago, MikeOH said:

@Parker_Woodruff

I'd be very interested to learn if there is any actuarial data to support such a draconian policy implemented at an arbitrary age (e.g. 70 or 80).

Without such data, it seems like pretty blatant age discrimination...

 Check with AOPA. It has analyzed the data extensively. I believe it found no statistically significant correlation between age and fatal accidents, but there was a correlation between age and gear up landings which seems to be a perennial problem. 

Skip

[DonMuncy]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

 Check with AOPA. It has analyzed the data extensively. I believe it found no statistically significant correlation between age and fatal accidents, but there was a correlation between age and gear up landings which seems to be a perennial problem. 

Skip

That seems to fit with my experience. I asked Parker offer to get me a policy with a "gear up" exclusion, but there were no takers.

[brad]

Global had underwritten me for the last 12 years.  Upon turning 72 it doubled.  Went with AVEMCO.  I flew F4s.  Still fly with CAP.  IPC / BFR annually.  Over 1500 Mooney hours.  No items on my Class 3.  Advanced Wings.

Appalled that age has become the determining factor.

 

[MooneyMitch]

On 2/28/2022 at 9:31 PM, carusoam said:

The oldest Mooney pilot hit 100 this year

Irrelevant to this thread topic, but Captain Moyer is now 101 1/2 years young.

Harry is having some vision issues these days and stopped flying his beautiful Mooney. The Mooney ownership has been transferred to Harry’s son in Northern California.

Harry was able to become the oldest solo pilot per Guinness Book.  Congratulations Harry..... you are quite an American treasure indeed!! 

[MikeOH]

10 hours ago, DonMuncy said:

That seems to fit with my experience. I asked Parker offer to get me a policy with a "gear up" exclusion, but there were no takers.

Which is pretty disappointing, really.  If the data really supports old age/gear ups, then why wouldn't any insurers accept your rather reasonable proposal?

It truly seems an arbitrary policy based only on age!

[PT20J]

Well, we all like a free market when it works to our advantage, but sometimes it's a double-edged sword 

According to a recent talk by Mark Baker, the entire aviation insurance industry takes in about $1.5 billion in premiums and paid out about $3 billion last year. 

 

 

[DonMuncy]

44 minutes ago, nosky2high said:

Can you at least get liability only at any age?

That was my experience. They were OK with selling me liability. I am self insuring for my hull value.

[JohnB]

22 hours ago, DonMuncy said:

I'm over 80 and when my policy expired, they would not renew. In spite of Parker's best efforts, no one would give me a quote quote unless I went to a non-retractable plane.

Yikes. I wonder if you locked your Mooney's gear in an always down position , would insurers go for that? (just kidding I know they won't)  Well thanks for sharing Don.  It is somewhat encouraging that if gear is their only concern, but it is a possibility of being insured after 80 in a non retract.  The only fixed gear I see close to our Mooney's speeds is a Cessna TTX which is very costly even compared to an Acclaim, but close in speed. Something to think about as the years go by, and making me appreciate my Mooney flying time even more.

[MikeOH]

58 minutes ago, PT20J said:

Well, we all like a free market when it works to our advantage, but sometimes it's a double-edged sword 

According to a recent talk by Mark Baker, the entire aviation insurance industry takes in about $1.5 billion in premiums and paid out about $3 billion last year. 

 

 

LOL! True that!

My issue is when 'market' prices go through the ceiling over a short period of time; like we've seen for GA insurance!  And, I don't see any loss data, from GA, that explains it.  I think we are paying for 737MAX type payouts, NOT GA payouts.

Your second sentence is precisely the problem: what industry can survive losing $1.5 billion a year!  You can bet that wan't their plan.  But, regardless of GA helping cover losses from other risks, it doesn't explain the age discrimination.

[PT20J]

Just now, MikeOH said:

LOL! True that!

My issue is when 'market' prices go through the ceiling over a short period of time; like we've seen for GA insurance!  And, I don't see any loss data, from GA, that explains it.  I think we are paying for 737MAX type payouts, NOT GA payouts.

Your second sentence is precisely the problem: what industry can survive losing $1.5 billion a year!  You can bet that wan't their plan.  But, regardless of GA helping cover losses from other risks, it doesn't explain the age discrimination.

Absolutely we are paying for Boeing’s screw up. Much of those payouts were to airlines for  liability, hull loss and business interruption while the MAX was grounded. 

Usually, I think it is good to be lumped in with the airlines because their safety record is so much better than GA and their exposure (and hence aggregated premiums) are higher so it buffers us a bit. I would prefer my rates to be somewhat detached from the actual number of GA gear ups. 

Skip

[MikeOH]

Just now, PT20J said:

Absolutely we are paying for Boeing’s screw up. Much of those payouts were to airlines for  liability, hull loss and business interruption while the MAX was grounded. 

Usually, I think it is good to be lumped in with the airlines because their safety record is so much better than GA and their exposure (and hence aggregated premiums) are higher so it buffers us a bit. I would prefer my rates to be somewhat detached from the actual number of GA gear ups. 

Skip

Hmm, seems like we were going along just fine paying for the "other idiot that gear ups" without any extreme increases in premiums.  In hindsight, I rather wish we were NOT grouped in with the airlines. $1.5 Billion will pay for quite a few gear ups, don't ya know!

[PT20J]

4 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Hmm, seems like we were going along just fine paying for the "other idiot that gear ups" without any extreme increases in premiums.  In hindsight, I rather wish we were NOT grouped in with the airlines. $1.5 Billion will pay for quite a few gear ups, don't ya know!

But, you are ignoring all the years that the airlines had no significant claims yet paid substantial premiums thereby subsidizing our gear ups and other mishaps. If Boeing hadn’t drained the punch bowl, we’d still be enjoying the party. 

[jetdriven]

11 hours ago, PT20J said:

Well, we all like a free market when it works to our advantage, but sometimes it's a double-edged sword 

According to a recent talk by Mark Baker, the entire aviation insurance industry takes in about $1.5 billion in premiums and paid out about $3 billion last year. 

 

 

It was probably a split between vastly decreased airline revenue passenger mile income, and the 737 max liability and payouts. 

Plus that Nashville tornado.
None of which have to do with Mooney’s or age

[icurnmedic]

Not sure it applies to the topic, but informative to some maybe, literally just hung up the phone with Assured Partners, AOPA insurance, and my policy for a 1967F, at 100K was $3800.

Dang, that hurt. But per the insurance man, is the same as last year. He said it increased the year before by $1100. Did not ask me anything about upgrades or flight time this past year.  ?

Thomas

[DXB]

11 hours ago, DonMuncy said:

That was my experience. They were OK with selling me liability. I am self insuring for my hull value.

That's encouraging at least.  I wonder if they would also sell ground-only hull coverage or even no motion accident coverage.  Age has no impact on risk of tornado hitting your hangar or someone else taxiing into your plane. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by DXB

[Parker_Woodruff]

In short, I'll say we try to strategize insurance around the following age ranges (depending on the type of aircraft insured):

64/65

68/69

74/75

79

While I can't perfectly predict the insurance market for the next decade or two, there are some cases where I can reasonably expect to have an insurance avenue for someone well into their 80s (or even 90s!) with reasonable planning.  However, that could require choosing a more expensive option at 68/69 and sticking with it for the long run.  Too many times it seems brokers have sold someone a carrier change due to price around age 70 or 75 and it has been to the client's long term detriment.

[Danb]

My insurance broker advised me to not change companies once I was 65, now mid 70’s I’m still with same company. Which luckily agrees with Parker 

[A64Pilot]

Age has always been a determining factor, At what age must an ATP hang it up? Remember Bob Hoover losing his ability to fly in air shows?

LSA was sold as a way to get younger people into aviation, but that’s not at all what’s happened, what happened is when you get to an age where you can’t be insured or medical is the issue and can’t fly your Bonanza or Mooney, you sell it and go LSA, and one assumes self insure.

I’ve always self insured at least the Maule and would the Mooney if it weren’t for the retracts and my overdue no-back spring. But then I don’t carry full coverage in an Auto thsts paid off either, but do carry a rather large liability policy.

This guy is 100, and sadly recently passed but he flew an LSA until pretty close to the end, I have a neighbor with two Carbon Cubs, he’s 84 and keeps one in Maine and one here in Fl.

It’s all genetics by that I mean I don’t expect to see 80, none of my family has made it that far, and some are senile at 70, while others are in great shape at 85.

I would have thought that upon reaching some age an insurence company may require some kind of competency ride, but I guess there aren’t enough old pilots to make it worthwhile to them.

 

 

Edited March 3, 2022 by A64Pilot

[PT20J]

I recall reading an article awhile back where the insurance company was explaining that they may require yearly physicals and yearly recurrent training for pilots of a certain age depending on the complexity and performance of the airplane and the coverage limits. The rationale was that the insurance company bears the cost of defending against any lawsuits in case of an accident, and the plaintiff will likely claim that the pilot was too old and shouldn't have been flying. It helps the defense if they can document that the pilot had a recent physical exam and recent proficiency training.