Renter's Insurance?

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

How many of you guys carry renter's insurance? I never have in the past but I'm
older and wiser now and have been thinking about it. Specifically, that offered
through AOPA.

How much hull insurance is necessary? I'm pretty sure the FBO insures their
aircraft but surely there's a deductible I need to consider.

Your thoughts?




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Robert M. Gary]

You need to talk to the FBO and do a risk analysis of how much risk you
want to take vs. how much you are willing to pay for insurance. You
can't deligate all risks in life to insurance co's, you just need to
decide how much risk you are willing to take vs. how much you are
willing to pay to deligate. If the FBO is a business their insurance
may or may not cover you, the renter, for liability (in my experience
most policies do). If the FBO is a club it almost certainly will cover
you for liability. There are a lot of trolls in this news group that
believe you should continue to buy insurance until you run out of
money. Please don't listen to them and do your own risk analysis.
-Robert

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:51:32 GMT, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
> wrote in
>::

>
>Your thoughts?

The Non-owners Policy should probably cover the FBO's deductible
amount, and loss of service as a minimum. There is also the issue of
subrogation to address.

[[email protected]]

Mortimer,

Renter's insurance is not terribly expensive. Make sure you get enough
hull insurance to cover the value of the airplane you fly, not just the
FBO's deductible. Check with your FBO, because the odds are that you
are NOT covered under its insurance, so if you prang and it's your
fault, the FBO's insurance will pay the FBO, then come after you.

Interestingly, the hull portion of insurance is pretty cheap, however,
they package it with liability coverage, which is more expensive. I
carry a policy that covers the value of aircraft I rent and I just got
a policy for my daughter as she recently soloed. Cost wasn't bad and
it gives a lot of piece of mind. I've seen too many folks suddenly
facing a $50,000 bill from an insurance company after they lost it in a
crosswind and tore up an airplane. Being able to hand it over to your
insurance company to handle is a heck of a lot better than trying to
set up a payment program or processing through bankruptcy.

All the best,
Rick

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> How many of you guys carry renter's insurance? I never have in the past but I'm
> older and wiser now and have been thinking about it. Specifically, that offered
> through AOPA.
>
> How much hull insurance is necessary? I'm pretty sure the FBO insures their
> aircraft but surely there's a deductible I need to consider.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
>
>

[Jose]

I carry renters insurance. It's not expensive, and covers me when I
(gasp) rent an airplane. I also belong to a club, but when I'm away,
I'll rent from an FBO. The club insurance covers me as a named pilot on
their policy, but I don't have control of their policy, and one "oops"
can leave me uncovered.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Larry Dighera wrote:
> The Non-owners Policy should probably cover the FBO's deductible
> amount, and loss of service as a minimum. There is also the issue of
> subrogation to address.


The base policy (with AOPA's company) covers damage to others and property but
not the aircraft itself. Depending on how much hull insurance I add, the
premium goes up *very* rapidly and significantly. That's why I thought to only
cover the FBO's deductible.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[lardsoup]

I carry $50,000 hull damage coverage plus the $1,000,000 liability with
Avemco. I hate writing the check every year, but I would not fly without
it. I've also noticed FBOs react nicer to renters who show up with
insurance. I don't think it's because they are worried about getting their
money back in case of an accident, but maybe it shows a sense of
resposibliity.

On a side note, a friend of mine who is partners in a 172 discovered during
his insurance renewal that he was not covered for flying a non-owned
aircraft. Apparently the insurance covered the main insured party, which is
a corporation that owns the plane, for flying non-owned planes and he and
his son and partner, as named insured to fly their plane, were not covered
for flying non-owned planes.. Not sure if I'm getting the insurance terms
correct. So the few times he rented on vacation, and the four years his son
rented at college, they were not covered.

[John Galban]

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>
> The base policy (with AOPA's company) covers damage to others and property but
> not the aircraft itself. Depending on how much hull insurance I add, the
> premium goes up *very* rapidly and significantly. That's why I thought to only
> cover the FBO's deductible.
>

It may be expensive, just realize that you could be on the hook for
whole hull value if you were to blame for the damage. The way it
(normally) works is that the FBO's insurance covers the FBO. They will
pay the FBO for the loss of the hull, minus the deductible. The
insurance company can then go after you to recover their loss
(subrogation that Larry mentioned). That's why renters' insurance
exists. It protects you, the renter, from having to cough up for the
hull.

From a marketing standpoint, I think the insurance companies'
motivations to offer renters' insurance was a stroke of genius.
Liability and hull for renters costs nearly as much as if you owned.
In the old days before renters insurance, the companies could only make
money from one policy on each aircraft. Now you have what amounts to
multiple people, paying multiple premiums to insure the same aircraft
for the same risk.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Jose]

> From a marketing standpoint, I think the insurance companies'
> motivations to offer renters' insurance was a stroke of genius.
> Liability and hull for renters costs nearly as much as if you owned.
> In the old days before renters insurance, the companies could only make
> money from one policy on each aircraft. Now you have what amounts to
> multiple people, paying multiple premiums to insure the same aircraft
> for the same risk.

To be fair to the companies, the risk (for any given aircraft) goes up
(or at least is less controlled) if there are multiple pilots flying it.
If I own a plane and fly it myself, I can get one rate based on my
experience. But if I let all comers fly it, then the special deal I got
because of my incredibly perfect flying ability shouldn't be expected to
hold. I have no control over what the next dolt will do to my plane,
and neither does the insurance company.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Jose > posted:
>
> To be fair to the companies, the risk (for any given aircraft) goes up
> (or at least is less controlled) if there are multiple pilots flying
> it. If I own a plane and fly it myself, I can get one rate based on
> my experience. But if I let all comers fly it, then the special deal
> I got because of my incredibly perfect flying ability shouldn't be
> expected to hold. I have no control over what the next dolt will do
> to my plane, and neither does the insurance company.
>
Yes, but the insurance company has only one aircraft to repair or replace,
regardless of how many people are flying it. Their total hull loss costs
are fixed. Unlike the income from renter pilots who buy insurance, their
liability doesn't increase in a multiplicative relationship. For example,
if 100 renters' premiums were $1k/year for a $100k hull coverage, there is
no risk. 110 renters' premiums = $10k pure profit, and *each year* that
the plane isn't totalled, the whole amount is pure profit (the numbers
used are just for convenient math).

Neil

[Robert M. Gary]

He is only covered in rental aircraft when operating as the company.
For most of us that means when you rent a plane to go retrieve your
plane after annual since the only business of the company is to own the
aircraft

[Robert M. Gary]

I"m not sure what "normal" is. Of the 3 FBOs I've bothered to check
with 2 of them have policies that cover the renters for liability (as
if they were named) and hull (minus deductable). The FBOs say it
doesn't cost much more and if the renter gets sued odds are the FBO
will be sued anyway. Its easier to keep friends and cover your renters
on your policy.

-Robert

[BTIZ]

I read an article this spring.. I do not remember if it was in AOPA, Private
Pilot.. or Flying.. about renters insurance..

One thing that stuck in my head on this one.. the renters insurance only
kicks in if you the renter pilot is found to be at fault.. if it's a
mechanical.. you may not be covered... if you land sideways in the cross
wind and loose control... that's what the insurance is for..

BT

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" > wrote in message
...
> How many of you guys carry renter's insurance? I never have in the past
> but I'm older and wiser now and have been thinking about it.
> Specifically, that offered through AOPA.
>
> How much hull insurance is necessary? I'm pretty sure the FBO insures
> their aircraft but surely there's a deductible I need to consider.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
>
>
>
>

[Wizard of Draws]

On 5/27/05 6:51 AM, in article
, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
> spewed:

> How many of you guys carry renter's insurance? I never have in the past but
> I'm
> older and wiser now and have been thinking about it. Specifically, that
> offered
> through AOPA.
>
> How much hull insurance is necessary? I'm pretty sure the FBO insures their
> aircraft but surely there's a deductible I need to consider.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
>
>
I carry enough to cover the plane that I regularly fly. Funny that I feel a
larger motivation to fly more since I have it and don't want to let that
check go to waste.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

[Jose]

> Yes, but the insurance company has only one aircraft to repair or replace,
> regardless of how many people are flying it.

(I presume) they don't, and shouldn't, think that way. They think of
the =likelyhood= that the airplane will need to be replaced. Further,
once it =is= replaced, it's with a new one that will be equally vulnerable.

> For example,
> if 100 renters' premiums were $1k/year for a $100k hull coverage, there is
> no risk.

How is there no risk? 100 renters could total 100 aircraft in one day.
AT $100K apiece they have an exposure of ten million dollars.

It's not =likely= that those 100 renters would crash the same day, but
that's what they base their premiums on - likelyhood.

Each year the insurance company has no losses, they have pure profit
(and can invest the money to make more profit). But each year they have
a loss, they have to pay the whole thing, plus their lawyers.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Cub Driver]

The airport where I rent requires us to carry $40,000 hull insurance.
To that I add $1 million liability, for a cost of about $600 a year. I
would have the liability even if I wasn't obliged to carry the hull
insurance in order to rent.

(Prior to the new requirement, I carried only $15K, figuring that a
lot of what made the Cub valuable would survive a crash, and that I
didn't mind a bit of self-insurance in there. But the most recent
addition to the fleet cost $40,000 to rebuild, and the owner got anal
about being able to recover his investment.)

(Can you imagine a $40,000 L-4? I wonder what the army paid for that
bird, about $1,800?)


On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:51:32 GMT, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
> wrote:

>How many of you guys carry renter's insurance? I never have in the past but I'm
>older and wiser now and have been thinking about it. Specifically, that offered
>through AOPA.
>
>How much hull insurance is necessary? I'm pretty sure the FBO insures their
>aircraft but surely there's a deductible I need to consider.
>
>Your thoughts?


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Cub Driver]

On 27 May 2005 15:22:36 -0700, "John Galban" >
wrote:

>The way it
>(normally) works is that the FBO's insurance covers the FBO. They will
>pay the FBO for the loss of the hull, minus the deductible. The
>insurance company can then go after you to recover their loss

I know that this does happen. When I was in training, I dinged a prop.
The instructor's insurance company thought it should pay only the
deductible, but the airport's insurance company demanded and got
repayment of the whole amount of a new prop and the engine tear-down
and inspection. I felt very badly about it.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Cub Driver]

On Fri, 27 May 2005 21:57:21 GMT, "lardsoup" > wrote:

> I've also noticed FBOs react nicer to renters who show up with
>insurance.

Just so. I was being cross-examined by an FBO and scheduled for a
check flight to fly their Taylorcraft, but when I pulled out the
insurance policy they just melted. The examination ended, and I got
the impression that I could have just stepped into the airplane and
flown it without a check flight, but I wanted the instruction.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Jose > posted:

>> For example,
>> if 100 renters' premiums were $1k/year for a $100k hull coverage,
>> there is no risk.
>
> How is there no risk? 100 renters could total 100 aircraft in one
> day. AT $100K apiece they have an exposure of ten million dollars.
>
> It's not =likely= that those 100 renters would crash the same day, but
> that's what they base their premiums on - likelyhood.
>
I'd take those kinds of odds to Las Vegas any and every day of the week.
Such "risk" is negligible, given that those results would represent the
sum total of all complete hull losses for GA over a very long period of
time.

Regards,

Neil

[Jose]

>> It's not =likely= that those 100 renters would crash the same day, but
>> that's what they base their premiums on - likelyhood.
>>
>
> I'd take those kinds of odds to Las Vegas any and every day of the week.

.... and that's what insurance is all about.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Gary Drescher]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:zPPle.1202$fp.1186@fed1read05...
>I read an article this spring.. I do not remember if it was in AOPA,
>Private Pilot.. or Flying.. about renters insurance..
>
> One thing that stuck in my head on this one.. the renters insurance only
> kicks in if you the renter pilot is found to be at fault.. if it's a
> mechanical.. you may not be covered...

My renter's insurance covers me for damages for which I am "legally liable",
not just when I'm "at fault" in the sense of committing a pilot error.

--Gary

[Chris]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> The airport where I rent requires us to carry $40,000 hull insurance.
> To that I add $1 million liability, for a cost of about $600 a year. I
> would have the liability even if I wasn't obliged to carry the hull
> insurance in order to rent.
>
> (Prior to the new requirement, I carried only $15K, figuring that a
> lot of what made the Cub valuable would survive a crash, and that I
> didn't mind a bit of self-insurance in there. But the most recent
> addition to the fleet cost $40,000 to rebuild, and the owner got anal
> about being able to recover his investment.)
>
> (Can you imagine a $40,000 L-4? I wonder what the army paid for that
> bird, about $1,800?)

More like $200k bearing in mind the way the system works

[Cub Driver]

On Sat, 28 May 2005 17:36:28 +0100, "Chris" >
wrote:

>> (Can you imagine a $40,000 L-4? I wonder what the army paid for that
>> bird, about $1,800?)
>
>More like $200k bearing in mind the way the system works

A P-40 cost less than $200,000 in 1943. The airframe cost as I recall
was $89,000 (less engine, guns, radios).

The first Cubs used by the U.S. Army were provided at no charge by the
Piper company--the pilots included!


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[gilan]

Are there many companies that sell renter insurance???
The place I was taking lessons from now requires renter insurance.
Just wondering if the prices vary much?
--
Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
See ya on Sport Aircraft group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/







"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote ..
> Larry Dighera wrote:
>> The Non-owners Policy should probably cover the FBO's deductible
>> amount, and loss of service as a minimum. There is also the issue of
>> subrogation to address.
>
>
> The base policy (with AOPA's company) covers damage to others and property
> but not the aircraft itself. Depending on how much hull insurance I add,
> the premium goes up *very* rapidly and significantly. That's why I
> thought to only cover the FBO's deductible.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
>
>
>
>
>