Liability Release Form

[A64Pilot]

I used to have one years ago, but not anymore. I thought AOPA would have one but all I found had big red writing on top and bottom that said you can’t print and use it.

Does anyone have one they could share with me? This would be for just taking someone flying sightseeing, with them contributing zero towards expenses.

Went looking at Campers today and Salesperson wants to go on a flight, but I know nothing at all about this guy and think it prudent to get him to sign a liability release. Yes I know if negligent I’m still responsible, but still think a good one should afford some protection, better than nothing anyway.

[PT20J]

The AOPA form does not prevent downloading or printing. It is a pdf document and printing is not disabled. However, it does contain a legal notice that the laws vary by state and therefore it may not be valid and you need to consult with an attorney in your state. If you are certain that this release meets your needs, you can copy the text and paste it into a blank document in your favorite word processor and remove the warning.

[NOTICE: AOPA OCCASIONALLY RECEIVES REQUESTS FOR A SAMPLE LIABILITY RELEASE AGREEMENT. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU UNDERSTAND YOU MAY NOT SIMPLY COPY AND USE THIS FORM. THE LAWS CONCERNING RELEASES VARY WIDELY FROM STATE TO STATE. IN SOME STATES, RELEASES ARE GENERALLY ENFORCEABLE SO LONG AS THEY ARE CLEAR, SPECIFIC AND DO NOT ATTEMPT TO EXCUSE LIABILITY FOR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT. IN SOME OTHERS: (1) ANY “PRE-INJURY AGREEMENT” TO RELEASE SOMEONE FROM LIABILITY FOR HIS/HER NEGLIGENCE MAY BE VOID; AND/OR (2) NOT EVEN A PARENT MAY SIGN A RELEASE ON BEHALF OF HIS/HER CHILD. AOPA MAY NOT PROVIDE YOU WITH LEGAL ADVICE CONCERNING RELEASES. YOU MUST CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY IN YOUR STATE TO BE CERTAIN YOUR RELEASE CONFORMS TO THE LAWS OF YOUR STATE.]

[jetdriven]

Those waivers are marginal at best, because the passenger can’t sign away the rights of his heirs or his family to sue you. And they will.

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

Those waivers are marginal at best, because the passenger can’t sign away the rights of his heirs or his family to sue you. And they will.

It would seem some aviation attorneys disagree with a couple of stipulations, if the passenger pays even to contribute to expenses it weakens your position and if your negligent, like flying intoxicated your probably hosed as you should be.

https://www.generalaviationlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Legal-Zone-Vol-9-Liability-Waivers.pdf

I believe even Angel Flight pax sign one and there are other examples on the net, but tailored to say Angel Flight etc.

Using logic, then theses releases might just be worth the paper they are printed on or Angel Flight etc are wasting their time.

I had one prepared for my by my works aviation lawyer, but lost it, I’m sure there are some generic ones out there.

[midlifeflyer]

Although many people believe they are worthless, and some states are definitely more waiver friendly than others, most states honor and enforce liability waivers to one degree or another. 

I can understand why AOPA doesn't want you to copy their generic ones. State laws can vary significantly on what it can include, what it can say, what can be waived, how detailed, clear, and unambiguous they must be, and the type of language that may also be enforceable against family members and heirs. That's not a generic one size fits all document, but one tailored to the activity. Plus, waivers are not panaceas and AOPA probably realizes that if they made one for you to use, you might be expecting some guarantee it would work or prevent a suit from taking place. When you have a waiver specifically prepared for you by a professional, it includes a discussion of risks, and benefits, the limits of enforceability and that they are a defense to a lawsuit - hopefully paid for by your insurer - but can't prevent one,

[midlifeflyer]

BTW, I remember my all time favorite liability waiver. It was one used by many tandem parachute jumping organizations. It included a video of a lawyerly-looking fellow behind a desk going through it point by point. I saw it when a jump school was referred to me after an unfortunate death when a parachute failed and suit was being threatened,

[A64Pilot]

35 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

BTW, I remember my all time favorite liability waiver. It was one used by many tandem parachute jumping organizations. It included a video of a lawyerly-looking fellow behind a desk going through it point by point. I saw it when a jump school was referred to me after an unfortunate death when a parachute failed and suit was being threatened,

They are in a tougher position as the victim is paying a professional organization, apparently being being a paying customer or passenger means they expect a higher level of professionalism 

Other waivers like race track waivers have been overturned a long time ago in California at least as if the waiver wasn’t signed you couldn’t race, and your paying money to race, the paying money is what I think really changes things.

But Fl isn’t California 

But taking someone flying when they pay nothing is the same as driving someone to the store that asked for a ride, no one signs a liability waiver for that, but say airplane and some think your money bags.

Having watched others go through the personal Lawyer threatened suit, they generally walk if it’s not a slam dunk thing, they don’t really go to court and spend hours and hours on a case unless someone is paying. It’s my opinion that if me or my estate had a clear well written signed release of liability that the ambulance chasers are a whole lot less likely to try, but without one, more likely.

I’m not so much concerned about killing someone as I am them falling off the wing or maybe claiming a hard landing and back injury or who knows what.

Its that I’m at a stage in my life that the earnings are no longer, what I have is all I have, have some crook take a big chunk of it and it can’t be replaced and the rest of my life won’t be as nice.

I’ve already lost enough this year to buy a house, that was bad enough

But some kid who’s real interested in flying, I’ll take for a ride.

[jetdriven]

2 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

It would seem some aviation attorneys disagree with a couple of stipulations, if the passenger pays even to contribute to expenses it weakens your position and if your negligent, like flying intoxicated your probably hosed as you should be.

https://www.generalaviationlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Legal-Zone-Vol-9-Liability-Waivers.pdf

I believe even Angel Flight pax sign one and there are other examples on the net, but tailored to say Angel Flight etc.

Using logic, then theses releases might just be worth the paper they are printed on or Angel Flight etc are wasting their time.

I had one prepared for my by my works aviation lawyer, but lost it, I’m sure there are some generic ones out there.

I used to fly for angel flight. The waiver protects them from lawsuits from the passengers. But it doesn’t protect you one bit. I don’t fly for them anymore after finding this out.

  Again it’s not the passenger who is the only threat. The bereaved spouse who was counting on that 300k income for ten more years now wants 3m. Your policy pays 100k a seat.  You pay the rest. If you have assets they are at risk.   The ins company does have a duty to defend, but it’s you or your estate who pays over the 100k. I’m not saying don’t take people flying.  But evaluate your relationship and the risk. 

[MikeOH]

Actually, I'll say it, "I don't take people flying" for all the reasons jetdriven just covered.  Sorry, no way I'm risking what my wife and I have worked all our lives to save up just to give a kid a ride.  Sad, but that's today's litigious society we live in; especially here in Kalifornia.

Back when I was 18 and got my PPL I didn't give it a second thought and gave rides all the time. . Not only did I not know any better, but I had ZERO net worth at the time; any ambulance-chasing attorney wouldn't have spent 5 minutes telling a prospective plaintiff to get lost

@A64Pilot Just be honest with yourself: what you are really counting on is the very low risk of anything happening on ONE particular flight.  How much the waiver "will help" is subject to debate, but don't think for a second that your assets are going to be substantially protected.  Bottom line argument:  Why do you think aviation insurance policies have such a low per seat limit?

[hammdo]

Ditto, I’ve told friends liability is too risky for the same reasons given. I’ll fly my wife and immediate family (CFIs and Safety Pilots too) but that is it.

Hate doing that but what choice do we have- it only takes one…

-Don 
 

 

[midlifeflyer]

6 hours ago, hammdo said:

Ditto, I’ve told friends liability is too risky for the same reasons given. I’ll fly my wife and immediate family (CFIs and Safety Pilots too) but that is it.

Hate doing that but what choice do we have- it only takes one…

-Don 
 

 

It's a personal choice, not no choice. I've never* worried about it. My personal choice.

And, no. While I have written liability waivers for others, I never* used one myself. 

*One exception to "never. "I wrote one for myself for giving instruction in owner aircraft. But I've never used it.

[hammdo]

Agree personal choice. I’m older and I am more risk adverse after seeing friends impacted my litigation. Appreciate the clarification…

-Don

[midlifeflyer]

19 minutes ago, hammdo said:

Agree personal choice. I’m older and I am more risk adverse after seeing friends impacted my litigation. Appreciate the clarification…

-Don

Yeah, at 71 I'm probably too young to appreciate the risk fully 

[hammdo]

Lol, yep…

[0TreeLemur]

We had a great discussion on this issue at the legal table during the Mooney Summit, hosted by Edward Page.  Mr. Page is an aviation attorney with much experience, and a great discussion leader.   Aside from lots of insurance, a waiver is your first and only protection if you ever want to take anyone else in  your aircraft who is not part of your immediate family circle.  He offered up the waiver used by the AOPA Young Eagles program as an example. 

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, 0TreeLemur said:

We had a great discussion on this issue at the legal table during the Mooney Summit, hosted by Edward Page.  Mr. Page is an aviation attorney with much experience, and a great discussion leader.   Aside from lots of insurance, a waiver is your first and only protection if you ever want to take anyone else in  your aircraft who is not part of your immediate family circle.  He offered up the waiver used by the AOPA Young Eagles program as an example. 

But did he offer up how effective the waiver is? And, how any waiver can waive other people’s right to sue?

[0TreeLemur]

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

But did he offer up how effective the waiver is? And, how any waiver can waive other people’s right to sue?

You'd have to ask an attorney that question.  The AOPA Young Eagles waiver basically says that someone wants to ride with you have a  "flight experience".  The person signing it or their legal guardian acknowledges that they understand that there are risks involved, including risk of severe injury or death, and that they are willing to accept those risks to have a "flight experience".   

Written and agreed to in an attempt to minimize the risk to us pilots associated with giving others a "flight experience", it seems that such a waiver would carry some weight in most jurisdictions except in cases where gross incompetence or negligence were proven.  Of course that would be the challenging attorney's legal tack, wouldn't it?

IANAL, PPSEL only.

 

[donkaye]

I'm curious how many flight instructors on this list have and use a Waiver and Indemnification Agreement either in conjunction with being added on to a policy or separately?

[Schllc]

More often than not, the cost of litigation ends up the biggest expense.
Giant paydays for things like this are not as frequent as one would think.

Even an ironclad agreement will never prevent that.   

I’m not suggesting a waiver is a bad idea, or that it wouldn’t protect you from paying out an award.  But it most certainly will offer no protection from litigation and the costs associated. 
 

The only guaranteed winner in any legal incursion is an attorney. 

[midlifeflyer]

12 minutes ago, Schllc said:

More often than not, the cost of litigation ends up the biggest expense.
Giant paydays for things like this are not as frequent as one would think

Those two statements go hand in hand. Given the low liability coverage of many policies, I think of them as mostly to provide a defense and something to offer up to make the case go away. A waiver can help your insurer do those tasks. I wrote a waiver for our tennis club when the insurer told us it would reduce our premium by 10-20%. We often forget that cost of litigation cuts both ways. These are not simple car accidents. Not too many lawyers (even those who do aviation claims to begin with) want to advance thousands for experts without a good chance of collecting if they win.

But risk tolerance is still a very personal thing. At most basic, since most of us are not actuaries, it's an internal calculation of perceived exposure. 

What do I think is the risk of doing something wrong? How much damage will be caused if I do? Mix that with a healthy dose of litigation fear and how much we want a guaranteed answer.

I'm curious how many have looked at their policies to check the breakdown of the premium between liability and hull? Which are you paying more for? Which do the underwriters think is the more likely? The bigger exposure? @Parker_Woodruff?

[midlifeflyer]

7 hours ago, donkaye said:

I'm curious how many flight instructors on this list have and use a Waiver and Indemnification Agreement either in conjunction with being added on to a policy or separately?

I know some who do. And I think it's standard in Bonanza's pilot proficiency program.

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, MikeOH said:

But did he offer up how effective the waiver is? And, how any waiver can waive other people’s right to sue?

Nothing can remove anyone's right to sue, even the person who signed the waiver. They can only limit their ability to win. And in many states, waivers, written properly, can restrict third-party claims that are based on an injury to the person who signed.

No lawyer giving a general presentation on the subject is going to be able to tell you how effective it will be in any specific  accident. It's the unknown that gets people worried. Waivers are about risk mitigation, not risk removal.
 

[Parker_Woodruff]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

 

I'm curious how many have looked at their policies to check the breakdown of the premium between liability and hull? Which are you paying more for? Which do the underwriters think is the more likely? The bigger exposure? @Parker_Woodruff?

One underwriter noted they have historically not been profitable on hull and made up for it on liability premium, but felt like anticipated gains on the liability side were starting to slip away as time goes on.  Anecdotally, this seems accurate to me.

[jetdriven]

7 hours ago, Schllc said:

More often than not, the cost of litigation ends up the biggest expense.
Giant paydays for things like this are not as frequent as one would think.

Even an ironclad agreement will never prevent that.   

I’m not suggesting a waiver is a bad idea, or that it wouldn’t protect you from paying out an award.  But it most certainly will offer no protection from litigation and the costs associated. 
 

The only guaranteed winner in any legal incursion is an attorney. 

Your policy includes a duty to defend. It’s just that anything over 100k a seat is on you. 
If you have an Avemco policy it’s anything over 100k per person. Which is total bullshit 

[Canadian Gal]

Interesting topic, I would be more concerned about the people and expensive things on the ground, that I could crash into.

Hit a playground, school bus, park, 10 million dollar houses that burn, a hotel, office building, or busy hwy.

Suddenly that 1 guy you took up for a ride, will be the least of your problems if you crash.