Non-Owners insurance- Worthless?

[Matt Herron Jr.]

I recently purchased Non-Owners (renter/borrower) Insurance so that I
could rent a ship at Minden, and take friends up in a 2 seater at
Williams. The company was Avemco, and they claimed when I called them,
that Experimental aircraft were covered as long as there was a valid
airworthiness certificate.

I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
obviously sketchy here..)

When I complained, to their credit, Avemco allowed me to cancel with a
full refund, but I am glad I caught this. It doesn't seem to be
explicitly stated in the policy or the website.

Does anyone know where a guy can get non-owner's insurance that covers
experimental gliders from a reputable company?

Thanks!

[jcarlyle]

Interesting! I don't have an answer for Matt regarding Non-owner's
insurance, but it appears that the SSA Endorsement to my AIG policy for
my ASW-19 has a useful amendment. This amendment changes the standard
policy exclusion of only allowing coverage for Standard Airworthiness
Certificated aircraft to permit coverage for Standard, Utility and
Experimental aircraft. Not only does this apply to my own aircraft, it
applies to aircraft I might rent.

It probably worth reading your policy if you don't get your aircraft's
insurance through the SSA and you want to rent an Expermental ship.

Matt, have you tried contacting Costello (the official insurance broker
for the SSA)? They advertise renter's insurance, and if it comes with
the same SSA endorsement I have you'll be covered with Experimental
ships.

-John

Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> I recently purchased Non-Owners (renter/borrower) Insurance so that I
> could rent a ship at Minden, and take friends up in a 2 seater at
> Williams. The company was Avemco, and they claimed when I called them,
> that Experimental aircraft were covered as long as there was a valid
> airworthiness certificate.
>
> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
> obviously sketchy here..)
>
> When I complained, to their credit, Avemco allowed me to cancel with a
> full refund, but I am glad I caught this. It doesn't seem to be
> explicitly stated in the policy or the website.
>
> Does anyone know where a guy can get non-owner's insurance that covers
> experimental gliders from a reputable company?
>
> Thanks!

[Frank Whiteley]

That is one of the real pluses of the SSA plan if you are a private
owner and an extended coverage that I understand was dropped by USAIG
last time around. Coverage is to the limit of your hull coverage, so
may not be adequate in some cases. Ask Costello.

Frank

jcarlyle wrote:
> Interesting! I don't have an answer for Matt regarding Non-owner's
> insurance, but it appears that the SSA Endorsement to my AIG policy for
> my ASW-19 has a useful amendment. This amendment changes the standard
> policy exclusion of only allowing coverage for Standard Airworthiness
> Certificated aircraft to permit coverage for Standard, Utility and
> Experimental aircraft. Not only does this apply to my own aircraft, it
> applies to aircraft I might rent.
>
> It probably worth reading your policy if you don't get your aircraft's
> insurance through the SSA and you want to rent an Expermental ship.
>
> Matt, have you tried contacting Costello (the official insurance broker
> for the SSA)? They advertise renter's insurance, and if it comes with
> the same SSA endorsement I have you'll be covered with Experimental
> ships.
>
> -John
>
> Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> > I recently purchased Non-Owners (renter/borrower) Insurance so that I
> > could rent a ship at Minden, and take friends up in a 2 seater at
> > Williams. The company was Avemco, and they claimed when I called them,
> > that Experimental aircraft were covered as long as there was a valid
> > airworthiness certificate.
> >
> > I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
> > Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
> > aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
> > gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
> > up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
> > depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
> > obviously sketchy here..)
> >
> > When I complained, to their credit, Avemco allowed me to cancel with a
> > full refund, but I am glad I caught this. It doesn't seem to be
> > explicitly stated in the policy or the website.
> >
> > Does anyone know where a guy can get non-owner's insurance that covers
> > experimental gliders from a reputable company?
> >
> > Thanks!

[Vaughn Simon]

"Matt Herron Jr." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
> obviously sketchy here..)

Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
prohibit that?

Vaughn

[Marc Ramsey]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "Matt Herron Jr." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
>> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
>> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
>> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
>> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
>> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
>> obviously sketchy here..)
>
> Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
> prohibit that?

How so? A pilot renting a glider is not "Carrying persons or property
for compensation or hire."

Marc

[Matt Herron Jr.]

Looks like paragraph f) prohibits it, but I know for a fact it is
happening. Interesting. So then what happens in the event of an
accident in an experimental rental? Lawsuit? Or worse, your insurance
that claims to cover experimental then denies coverage based on
91.319f. They would still be on the hook for "borrowed" experimental
aircraft I expect.

Any lawyers out there have an opinion?


Vaughn Simon wrote:

> Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
> prohibit that?
>
> Vaughn

[Matt Herron Jr.]

Looks like paragraph f) prohibits it, but I know for a fact it is
happening. Interesting. So then what happens in the event of an
accident in an experimental rental? Lawsuit? Or worse, your insurance
that claims to cover experimental then denies coverage based on
91.319f. They would still be on the hook for "borrowed" experimental
aircraft I expect.

Any lawyers out there have an opinion?


Vaughn Simon wrote:

> Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
> prohibit that?
>
> Vaughn

[[email protected]]

(f) No person may lease an aircraft that is issued an experimental
certificate under §21.191 (i) of this chapter, except in accordance
with paragraph (e)(1) of this section.




Marc Ramsey wrote:
> Vaughn Simon wrote:
> > "Matt Herron Jr." > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof of insurance with
> >> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco and Experimental
> >> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding is that many
> >> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental category, perhaps
> >> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider either, as it
> >> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc. (my knowledge is
> >> obviously sketchy here..)
> >
> > Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
> > prohibit that?
>
> How so? A pilot renting a glider is not "Carrying persons or property
> for compensation or hire."
>
> Marc

[rustynuts]

Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> Looks like paragraph f) prohibits it, but I know for a fact it is
> happening. Interesting. So then what happens in the event of an
> accident in an experimental rental? Lawsuit? Or worse, your insurance
> that claims to cover experimental then denies coverage based on
> 91.319f. They would still be on the hook for "borrowed" experimental
> aircraft I expect.
>
> Any lawyers out there have an opinion?
>
>
> Vaughn Simon wrote:
>
> > Under what conditions can you rent an experimental glider? Doesn't 91.319
> > prohibit that?
> >
> > Vaughn

1) Experimental A/C are supposed to have the word Experimental in a
conspicues (sp) place on the A/C.
2) It's up to the PIC to determine that the A/C is in airworthy
condition ie. ARROW. This goes as far as for you to check the A/C log
to see if the annual or 100 hour inspection has been performed as
required per FAR's.
3) You won't find very many if any 2 place rental ships in the
Experimental catagory on the flight line for rent.

How bout it CB ?

[Nyal Williams]

The word 'lease' might be misunderstood here. It refers
to the owner; he/she is forbidden to let an experimental
aircraft out for hire. The pilot/renter is probably
also in trouble.

At 01:00 13 January 2007, wrote:
>(f) No person may lease an aircraft that is issued
>an experimental
>certificate under =A721.191 (i) of this chapter, except
>in accordance
>with paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
>
>
>
>
>Marc Ramsey wrote:
>> Vaughn Simon wrote:
>> > 'Matt Herron Jr.' wrote in message
>> > oups.com...
>> >> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof
>>>>of insurance with
>> >> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco
>>>>and Experimental
>> >> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding
>>>>is that many
>> >> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental
>>>>category, perhaps
>> >> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider
>>>>either, as it
>> >> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc.
>>>> (my knowledge is
>> >> obviously sketchy here..)
>> >
>> > Under what conditions can you rent an experimental
>>>glider? Doesn'=
>t 91.319
>> > prohibit that?
>>
>> How so? A pilot renting a glider is not 'Carrying
>>persons or property
>> for compensation or hire.'
>>=20
>> Marc
>
>

[Matt Herron Jr.]

I agree. So given that many single seat rentals ARE experimental, what
to do? Will my insurnace company pay for an accident knowing the
lessor illegaly leased an experimental plane to me? I guess I just
shouldn't rent...

Matt


Nyal Williams wrote:
> The word 'lease' might be misunderstood here. It refers
> to the owner; he/she is forbidden to let an experimental
> aircraft out for hire. The pilot/renter is probably
> also in trouble.
>
> At 01:00 13 January 2007, wrote:
> >(f) No person may lease an aircraft that is issued
> >an experimental
> >certificate under =A721.191 (i) of this chapter, except
> >in accordance
> >with paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Marc Ramsey wrote:
> >> Vaughn Simon wrote:
> >> > 'Matt Herron Jr.' wrote in message
> >> > oups.com...
> >> >> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof
> >>>>of insurance with
> >> >> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco
> >>>>and Experimental
> >> >> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding
> >>>>is that many
> >> >> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental
> >>>>category, perhaps
> >> >> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider
> >>>>either, as it
> >> >> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc.
> >>>> (my knowledge is
> >> >> obviously sketchy here..)
> >> >
> >> > Under what conditions can you rent an experimental
> >>>glider? Doesn'=
> >t 91.319
> >> > prohibit that?
> >>
> >> How so? A pilot renting a glider is not 'Carrying
> >>persons or property
> >> for compensation or hire.'
> >>=20
> >> Marc
> >
> >

[rustynuts]

Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> I agree. So given that many single seat rentals ARE experimental, what
> to do? Will my insurnace company pay for an accident knowing the
> lessor illegaly leased an experimental plane to me? I guess I just
> shouldn't rent...
>
> Matt
>
>
> Nyal Williams wrote:
> > The word 'lease' might be misunderstood here. It refers
> > to the owner; he/she is forbidden to let an experimental
> > aircraft out for hire. The pilot/renter is probably
> > also in trouble.
> >
> > At 01:00 13 January 2007, wrote:
> > >(f) No person may lease an aircraft that is issued
> > >an experimental
> > >certificate under =A721.191 (i) of this chapter, except
> > >in accordance
> > >with paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Marc Ramsey wrote:
> > >> Vaughn Simon wrote:
> > >> > 'Matt Herron Jr.' wrote in message
> > >> > oups.com...
> > >> >> I subsequently rented a glider after presenting proof
> > >>>>of insurance with
> > >> >> Avemco, and was told that they had contacted Avemco
> > >>>>and Experimental
> > >> >> aircraft were not covered. My limited understanding
> > >>>>is that many
> > >> >> gliders in the rental pool fall into the experimental
> > >>>>category, perhaps
> > >> >> up to half. I guess you can't tell by type of glider
> > >>>>either, as it
> > >> >> depends on how they were imported, equipment, etc.
> > >>>> (my knowledge is
> > >> >> obviously sketchy here..)
> > >> >
> > >> > Under what conditions can you rent an experimental
> > >>>glider? Doesn'=
> > >t 91.319
> > >> > prohibit that?
> > >>
> > >> How so? A pilot renting a glider is not 'Carrying
> > >>persons or property
> > >> for compensation or hire.'
> > >>=20
> > >> Marc
> > >
> > >

Matt
That's a question for your ins broker/carrier.

[Vaughn Simon]

"Matt Herron Jr." > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Looks like paragraph f) prohibits it, but I know for a fact it is
> happening. Interesting. So then what happens in the event of an
> accident in an experimental rental? Lawsuit? Or worse, your insurance
> that claims to cover experimental then denies coverage based on
> 91.319f. They would still be on the hook for "borrowed" experimental
> aircraft I expect.
>
> Any lawyers out there have an opinion?

Would it be OK in a true club situation? ...where the members are actually
equity owners and arguably not renters? Oh; then "non owner's" insurance
becomes a problem!

Vaughn

[Frank Whiteley]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "Matt Herron Jr." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > Looks like paragraph f) prohibits it, but I know for a fact it is
> > happening. Interesting. So then what happens in the event of an
> > accident in an experimental rental? Lawsuit? Or worse, your insurance
> > that claims to cover experimental then denies coverage based on
> > 91.319f. They would still be on the hook for "borrowed" experimental
> > aircraft I expect.
> >
> > Any lawyers out there have an opinion?
>
> Would it be OK in a true club situation? ...where the members are actually
> equity owners and arguably not renters? Oh; then "non owner's" insurance
> becomes a problem!
>
> Vaughn
Depends on the club business model. Could be that members are not
equity owners and have no owner rights nor obligations. At least one
large club carries no hull coverage, has a $3000 member deductible, and
encourages members to have non-owner/renter coverage. Another has a
category of owner members, has no hull coverage, requires higher dues
of non-owner members, and maintains a high repair fund. Whether the
non-owner members carry renter/non-owner coverage isn't clear.

YMMV,

Frank