Renter's Insurance?

[Dallas]

A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over renter's
insurance and liability.

Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
did you use and how much did it cost you?

Here's his comments:

You should talk to me about FBO insurance too. Unless your FBO is
different than every other FBO I've ever been into, their insurance
provides them (and/or the aircraft owner if it is leased to the FBO) with
hull coverage and liability insurance. In the event of damage to the
aircraft, of harm to a person (but maybe not you), the insurance will pay
to repair the aircraft and defend and pay and lawsuits that arise out of
the event. However, when all is said and done, to the extent that the
incident is your fault (most are), the insurance company will have the
right to sue you to recover all the amounts they paid to 'clean up your
mess'. If you are renting from an FBO, getting a renter's policy
(sometimes called a non-owned aircraft policy) is a good idea. I've never
figured out how the 'hull' portion of those polcies work - if you were
flying a $100K aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of
hull coverage on top of the liability coverage.


--
Dallas

[Dan[_1_]]

On Dec 5, 9:53 am, Dallas > wrote:
> A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over renter's
> insurance and liability.
>
> Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
> did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
> Here's his comments:
>
> You should talk to me about FBO insurance too. Unless your FBO is
> different than every other FBO I've ever been into, their insurance
> provides them (and/or the aircraft owner if it is leased to the FBO) with
> hull coverage and liability insurance. In the event of damage to the
> aircraft, of harm to a person (but maybe not you), the insurance will pay
> to repair the aircraft and defend and pay and lawsuits that arise out of
> the event. However, when all is said and done, to the extent that the
> incident is your fault (most are), the insurance company will have the
> right to sue you to recover all the amounts they paid to 'clean up your
> mess'. If you are renting from an FBO, getting a renter's policy
> (sometimes called a non-owned aircraft policy) is a good idea. I've never
> figured out how the 'hull' portion of those polcies work - if you were
> flying a $100K aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of
> hull coverage on top of the liability coverage.
>
> --
> Dallas

When I rented, I did get this supplemental coverage. It was about
$550/yr for liability and $60k of hull. This was in the late 90s
though.

Since then, I've joined a club whose members are "named insured".
Another benefit of a club...

--Dan

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 11:53:39 AM, Dallas wrote:

> Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
> did you use and how much did it cost you?

Your buddy is correct. The FBO's insurance protects the FBO and the aircraft.
You need to protect yourself. When I rented I paid about $300 per year for a
renter's insurance policy from USAIG.

You might also try these folks here: http://www.air-pros.com/

They are a broker but usually can land very competitive prices on both owner
and renter insurance policies. I use them now for my Bonanza's insurance.

AOPA also has leads on renter's insurance so you may check with them, too.

--
Peter

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Dallas wrote:
> A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over
> renter's insurance and liability.
>
> Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If
> so who did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
> Here's his comments:
>
> You should talk to me about FBO insurance too. Unless your FBO is
> different than every other FBO I've ever been into, their insurance
> provides them (and/or the aircraft owner if it is leased to the FBO)
> with hull coverage and liability insurance. In the event of damage
> to the aircraft, of harm to a person (but maybe not you), the
> insurance will pay to repair the aircraft and defend and pay and
> lawsuits that arise out of the event. However, when all is said and
> done, to the extent that the incident is your fault (most are), the
> insurance company will have the right to sue you to recover all the
> amounts they paid to 'clean up your mess'. If you are renting from
> an FBO, getting a renter's policy (sometimes called a non-owned
> aircraft policy) is a good idea. I've never figured out how the
> 'hull' portion of those polcies work - if you were flying a $100K
> aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of hull
> coverage on top of the liability coverage.


Is everything above after "Here's his comments:" really a lawyers comments?
If so he really needs to go do some remedial work on insurance law. Because
the last part about hull versus liability shows a significant cluelessness.

The liability covers the insured against damage done to OTHER's person or
property. The hull coverage covers the insured aircraft.

That said, if you need renter's insurance depends on two things. The policy
that to FBO has and your personal net worth. There are policies out there
that cover renters with no or limited right to subrogation. If your FBO has
one of those you don't need renter's insurance. Also, if you don't have
enough assets you don't need to worry about it either.

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 12:10:40 -0500, Peter R. wrote:

> Peter

Yo Peter...

I haven't seen you here for a while. I wanted to tell you that you're
directly responsible for my new PP-SEL.

I credit you for goading me off my ass and out the door to fly.

Thanks, (I think.. :-)

--
Dallas

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:35:52 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> Is everything above after "Here's his comments:" really a lawyers comments?

Sorta yes and no.. he's a paralegal at the firm.

> Also, if you don't have enough assets you don't need to worry about it either.

Yeah, the ole blood out a turnip... The nice thing about Texas is they
can't come after your homestead. But, I'm guessing they can clean out a
stock portfolio.

--
Dallas

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> That said, if you need renter's insurance depends on two things. The policy
> that to FBO has and your personal net worth. There are policies out there
> that cover renters with no or limited right to subrogation. If your FBO has
> one of those you don't need renter's insurance. Also, if you don't have
> enough assets you don't need to worry about it either.


Exactly so. Way back when I was young and poor, I tore up a C-210 to the tune
of about $17,000 in damage. I was warned the insurance company might come after
me but all I could offer them was my **** pot. That was the end of that. I
guess they weren't interested in my '69 Fury I.

So sad, too bad... for them. I got away with that when I was young. Today I
wouldn't take the chance... too much to lose now.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Dallas wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:35:52 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> Is everything above after "Here's his comments:" really a lawyers
>> comments?
>
> Sorta yes and no.. he's a paralegal at the firm.
>

It would somewhat concern me that you ae taking advice from someone that
doesn't understand the difference in what is covered by liability and hull
coverage.


>> Also, if you don't have enough assets you don't need to worry about
>> it either.
>
> Yeah, the ole blood out a turnip... The nice thing about Texas is
> they can't come after your homestead. But, I'm guessing they can
> clean out a stock portfolio.

Yes they can. Assets are assets unless they are protected.

AOPA has a perfectly good renter's policy. I'd check it out if you are in
the market.

[Yes - I have a name[_2_]]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...

> > Yeah, the ole blood out a turnip... The nice thing about Texas is
> > they can't come after your homestead. But, I'm guessing they can
> > clean out a stock portfolio.
>
> Yes they can. Assets are assets unless they are protected.

Sounds like Texas may have a Homestead Act as well.

The Homestead Act
Questions & Answers
Massachusetts General Laws, Ch. 188, §1-10
What is a Declaration of Homestead/Homestead Protection?
An Estate of Homestead is a type of protection for a person's residence, in
the form of a document called a "Declaration of Estate of Homestead". The
form is filed at the Registry of Deeds in the county where the property is
located, referencing the title/deed to the property. It allows homeowners in
Massachusetts to protect their property up to five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000) of the value of their primary residence, per family.

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 2:08:00 PM, Dallas wrote:

> I haven't seen you here for a while.

Yeah, I am one of the many casualties of the war that has been going on
inside this group for the last year or so. However, since I am still using my
airplane to commute weekly I occasionally look for the gem of information
that sometimes surfaces.

> I wanted to tell you that you're directly responsible for my new PP-SEL.

Really? I didn't realize. First, congratulations to you on your new
certificate. When did you get it? I knew you were in training but my lack of
regular reading here caused me to miss the day you passed your checkride.

Secondly, if you ever purchase your own airplane promise me you won't turn
that appreciation into loathing. ;)


--
Peter

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 5, 9:10 am, "Peter R." > wrote:
> On 12/5/2007 11:53:39 AM, Dallas wrote:
>
> > Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
> > did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
> Your buddy is correct. The FBO's insurance protects the FBO and the aircraft.
> You need to protect yourself. When I rented I paid about $300 per year for a
> renter's insurance policy from USAIG.

Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company is
obligated to defend them against any legal action.

-Robert

[xyzzy]

On Dec 5, 1:35 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net>
wrote:
> Dallas wrote:
> > A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over
> > renter's insurance and liability.
>
> > Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If
> > so who did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
> > Here's his comments:
>
> > You should talk to me about FBO insurance too. Unless your FBO is
> > different than every other FBO I've ever been into, their insurance
> > provides them (and/or the aircraft owner if it is leased to the FBO)
> > with hull coverage and liability insurance. In the event of damage
> > to the aircraft, of harm to a person (but maybe not you), the
> > insurance will pay to repair the aircraft and defend and pay and
> > lawsuits that arise out of the event. However, when all is said and
> > done, to the extent that the incident is your fault (most are), the
> > insurance company will have the right to sue you to recover all the
> > amounts they paid to 'clean up your mess'. If you are renting from
> > an FBO, getting a renter's policy (sometimes called a non-owned
> > aircraft policy) is a good idea. I've never figured out how the
> > 'hull' portion of those polcies work - if you were flying a $100K
> > aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of hull
> > coverage on top of the liability coverage.
>
> Is everything above after "Here's his comments:" really a lawyers comments?
> If so he really needs to go do some remedial work on insurance law. Because
> the last part about hull versus liability shows a significant cluelessness.
>
> The liability covers the insured against damage done to OTHER's person or
> property. The hull coverage covers the insured aircraft.
>
> That said, if you need renter's insurance depends on two things. The policy
> that to FBO has and your personal net worth. There are policies out there
> that cover renters with no or limited right to subrogation. If your FBO has
> one of those you don't need renter's insurance. Also, if you don't have
> enough assets you don't need to worry about it either.

Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
exercise their right of subrogation. I might even say never. I know
an insurance broker who's been in the business for decades who tells
me he's never seen it happen, and it actually kind of annoys him
because he has seen some cases that really cried out for subrogation
(particularly stupid people with money being really negligent and
causing his clients' insurace to pay out large sums). They have the
right but don't for whatever reason don't exercise it.

Last time this topic came up I asked if anyone could name any case
that they knew of where subrogation actually occurred, and the answer
was crickets.

That said, I belong to a club where I am a named insured so it's
academic to me. If not for that, I might take the plunge into renters
insurance anyway, seems cheap compared to what's at stake.

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 3:56:26 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

> Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
> around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company is
> obligated to defend them against any legal action.

So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought against him
by the families of the children on that school bus who were killed when the
aircraft struck the bus? (for some reason this was always the example given
to me by my mentor instructor)

--
Peter

[Vaughn Simon]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
...
>
> A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over renter's
> insurance and liability.
....you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of
> hull coverage on top of the liability coverage.

I won't fly without renter's insurance. Furthermore, my FBO has a nice long
line of tempting newish G1000 $250,000 172's just waiting to be flown. I won't
touch any of them. You can't buy $250,000 of renter's hull insurance, and you
wouldn't want to pay for it if you could.

I only fly cheap airplanes.

Vaughn

[Gig 601XL Builder]

xyzzy wrote:
>
> Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
> exercise their right of subrogation.

Are you talking aviation related insurance only? Because if not I've got two
work comp subrogation cases working right this second.

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 5:31:03 PM, "Vaughn Simon" wrote:

> I won't
> touch any of them. You can't buy $250,000 of renter's hull insurance, and
> you wouldn't want to pay for it if you could.

I would bet a paycheck that those airplanes are fully covered by the aircraft
owner's and/or FBO's insurance should a renter accident occur. Had you used
the excuse that you were avoiding those airplanes for the hourly rental fee,
that would be a more reasonable objection.

--
Peter

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 5, 1:09 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:
> On 12/5/2007 3:56:26 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> > Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
> > around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company is
> > obligated to defend them against any legal action.
>
> So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
> protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought against him
> by the families of the children on that school bus who were killed when the
> aircraft struck the bus? (for some reason this was always the example given
> to me by my mentor instructor)

Yes.

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 5:50:21 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

> On Dec 5, 1:09 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:
>> On 12/5/2007 3:56:26 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>>
>> > Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
>> > around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company is
>> > obligated to defend them against any legal action.
>>
>> So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
>> protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought against him
>> by the families of the children on that school bus who were killed when the
>> aircraft struck the bus? (for some reason this was always the example given
>> to me by my mentor instructor)
>
> Yes.

Impressive. Those are some caring FBOs.

The ones around these parts only protect themselves and the aircraft
leaseback owners.

--
Peter

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 5, 3:05 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:

> > Yes.
>
> Impressive. Those are some caring FBOs.
>
> The ones around these parts only protect themselves and the aircraft
> leaseback owners.

Probably the difference between the come-lately FBO vs. the guys who
have build business from father to son.


-Robert

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

xyzzy wrote:
>
>Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
>exercise their right of subrogation. I might even say never. I know
>an insurance broker who's been in the business for decades who tells
>me he's never seen it happen, and it actually kind of annoys him
>because he has seen some cases that really cried out for subrogation
>(particularly stupid people with money being really negligent and
>causing his clients' insurace to pay out large sums). They have the
>right but don't for whatever reason don't exercise it.
>

It is rare, but it happens. A friend owns an FBO and his insurance company
has gone after renter pilots twice in the past 20 yrs. or so. In both
cases, the accidents were caused by obvious pilot stupidity, and the pilots
also had attractive assets. Seems that the renter has to pass both tests
before an insurance company will bother exercising their subrogation rights.

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

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[Maxwell]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
...
> On Dec 5, 3:05 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:
>
>> > Yes.
>>
>> Impressive. Those are some caring FBOs.
>>
>> The ones around these parts only protect themselves and the aircraft
>> leaseback owners.
>
> Probably the difference between the come-lately FBO vs. the guys who
> have build business from father to son.
>

Also a major factor in selecting an FBO. Just because one appears to have
cheaper for rental rates, it may actually cost more depending on the
insurance coverage they provide.

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:57:26 -0500, Peter R. wrote:

> Yeah, I am one of the many casualties of the war that has been going on
> inside this group for the last year or so.

The war has pretty much faded away, you've got a steady green light to come
back. :-)


> Really? I didn't realize. First, congratulations to you on your new
> certificate. When did you get it?

Thanks, I'm not even a week old yet... it's just starting to sink in.
And.. I don't know what to do with all this new found free time.

> Secondly, if you ever purchase your own airplane promise me you won't turn
> that appreciation into loathing. ;)

Don't worry about that, the wife gave me two choices:

1) Stay married
2) Buy an airplane

Pick one.

(I'll miss her. :-)

--
Dallas

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 13:02:40 -0800 (PST), xyzzy wrote:

> Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
> exercise their right of subrogation. I might even say never.

That statement could save me $300 - $600 annually.

I'd love to see some official numbers, if they existed. I'm guessing
there's no place to get data like that.

--
Dallas

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:37:44 -0500, Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:

> That was the end of that. I guess they weren't interested in my '69 Fury I.

> So sad, too bad... for them. I got away with that when I was young. Today I
> wouldn't take the chance... too much to lose now.

Yeah, that '69 Fury's got to be worth a lot more now.

:-)

--
Dallas

[Dallas]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 13:37:49 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> It would somewhat concern me that you ae taking advice from someone that
> doesn't understand the difference in what is covered by liability and hull
> coverage.

That's why I come here.

:-)

--
Dallas

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Dallas wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:37:44 -0500, Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>
>> That was the end of that. I guess they weren't interested in my '69 Fury I.
>
>> So sad, too bad... for them. I got away with that when I was young. Today I
>> wouldn't take the chance... too much to lose now.
>
> Yeah, that '69 Fury's got to be worth a lot more now.



I have my doubts. I, on the other hand....



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Judah]

Dallas > wrote in news:1mlyeehb35czz
:

> Don't worry about that, the wife gave me two choices:
>
> 1) Stay married
> 2) Buy an airplane

Divorce is cheaper than flying...

It's hard to say which is a better value, though.

[nobody[_2_]]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...


> Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
> exercise their right of subrogation. I might even say never.

Someone I know fell asleep while smoking. The ensuing fire caused $70,000 in
damage. He was sued by the insurance company for the damage. When he
declared bankruptcy, he simply added that to his list of debts.

[Judah]

"Peter R." > wrote in
:

> On 12/5/2007 5:50:21 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
>> On Dec 5, 1:09 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:
>>> On 12/5/2007 3:56:26 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>>>
>>> > Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
>>> > around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company
>>> > is obligated to defend them against any legal action.
>>>
>>> So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
>>> protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought
>>> against him by the families of the children on that school bus who
>>> were killed when the aircraft struck the bus? (for some reason this
>>> was always the example given to me by my mentor instructor)
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Impressive. Those are some caring FBOs.
>
> The ones around these parts only protect themselves and the aircraft
> leaseback owners.

I have also heard of FBOs that have a no-subrogation clause. But even in
that case you would probably want your own coverage in case you were named
in a suit. As pilot, you would surely be blamed...

[Judah]

"Peter R." > wrote in
:

> On 12/5/2007 5:31:03 PM, "Vaughn Simon" wrote:
>
>> I won't
>> touch any of them. You can't buy $250,000 of renter's hull insurance,
>> and you wouldn't want to pay for it if you could.
>
> I would bet a paycheck that those airplanes are fully covered by the
> aircraft owner's and/or FBO's insurance should a renter accident occur.
> Had you used the excuse that you were avoiding those airplanes for the
> hourly rental fee, that would be a more reasonable objection.
>

And if the insurance company decides to come after you as pilot after thay
pay the leaseback owner for the damage to the plane, where does that get you?

[Ron]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:40:34 -0500, "Peter R." >
wrote:

>On 12/5/2007 5:31:03 PM, "Vaughn Simon" wrote:
>
>> I won't
>> touch any of them. You can't buy $250,000 of renter's hull insurance, and
>> you wouldn't want to pay for it if you could.
>
>I would bet a paycheck that those airplanes are fully covered by the aircraft
>owner's and/or FBO's insurance should a renter accident occur. Had you used
>the excuse that you were avoiding those airplanes for the hourly rental fee,
>that would be a more reasonable objection.


He may fear the subrogation clause in the FBO's policy, if there is
one. That said, you've really got to ball up a $250,000 airplane to
cause $250,000 worth of damage. *Most* accidents you live through
will leave quite a bit of the value of the aircraft intact. How far
you want to scale down your renters hull insurance depends on how
carefully you intend to crash. ;-)

I fly near new Cessna's in the $200,000 range and carry renter's hull
insurance for about 1/4 of that. My liability insurance is
considerably more. :-(

Ron

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
>
> Probably the difference between the come-lately FBO vs. the guys who
> have build business from father to son.


I wonder how much more it costs for such coverage, and if some of the
other FBO's could do it and still make a profit.

[xyzzy]

On Dec 5, 6:32 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net>
wrote:
> xyzzy wrote:
>
> > Technically it's true but as a practical matter insurers almost never
> > exercise their right of subrogation.
>
> Are you talking aviation related insurance only? Because if not I've got two
> work comp subrogation cases working right this second.

Aviation insurance only.

[xyzzy]

On Dec 5, 5:09 pm, "Peter R." > wrote:
> On 12/5/2007 3:56:26 PM, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
>
> > Or your buddy is right depending on the FBO. Several of the FBO's
> > around here have all pilots an open named so the insurance company is
> > obligated to defend them against any legal action.
>
> So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
> protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought against him
> by the families of the children on that school bus who were killed when the
> aircraft struck the bus?

That lawsuit will be for a lot more than $1 million :(

[Jay Honeck]

> Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
> did you use and how much did it cost you?

Thanks for the timely thread. Our son, Joe, also a newly-minted
pilot, is going through this debate as well.

Mary and I carried renter's insurance before we owned our plane. AOPA
is currently offering it for "as low as $90" per year -- which is
about what it cost me, 14 years ago. (It's very cheap, considering
the potential cost of a claim.)

Since Joe is a minor, I presume the insurance companies would come
after ME in the event of an accident that Joe caused -- so it's in my
best interest to make sure he's fully covered...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If
>> so who did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
> Thanks for the timely thread. Our son, Joe, also a newly-minted
> pilot, is going through this debate as well.
>
> Mary and I carried renter's insurance before we owned our plane. AOPA
> is currently offering it for "as low as $90" per year -- which is
> about what it cost me, 14 years ago. (It's very cheap, considering
> the potential cost of a claim.)
>
> Since Joe is a minor, I presume the insurance companies would come
> after ME in the event of an accident that Joe caused -- so it's in my
> best interest to make sure he's fully covered...

Yes it is and that $90 per year is for liability only. The unowned hull
coverage is more...Lots more.

[Peter R.]

On 12/5/2007 7:07:23 PM, Dallas wrote:

> Thanks, I'm not even a week old yet... it's just starting to sink in.
> And.. I don't know what to do with all this new found free time.

Get up there and fly.

> Don't worry about that, the wife gave me two choices:
>
> 1) Stay married
> 2) Buy an airplane
>
> Pick one.
>
> (I'll miss her. :-)

LOL. Maybe someday you might consider crossing over to the dark side. It is
quite the experience.


--
Peter

[Robert M. Gary]

On Dec 6, 4:08 am, B A R R Y > wrote:
> Robert M. Gary wrote:
>
> > Probably the difference between the come-lately FBO vs. the guys who
> > have build business from father to son.
>
> I wonder how much more it costs for such coverage, and if some of the
> other FBO's could do it and still make a profit.

The owner of one FBO I spoke to said it makes sense for him to have
that coverage. Of course he's been in business a long time and even
has insurance to do single engine 135 (which he would never be able to
get new today). His point is that when there is an accident having
your insurance company go after your customers just isn't good
business.

-Robert

[Cubdriver]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:53:41 -0600, Dallas
> wrote:

>Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance?

Yes. I don't want to be sued if I land on someone's swimming pool, and
hull insurance is required in order to rent the Cub.

If so who
>did you use and how much did it cost you?

$701 for a million dollars' liability and $60,000 hull insurance. I
get a discount for renewing before the renewal date, and another for
being an AOPA member. I use an agent in Maine.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Cubdriver]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:53:41 -0600, Dallas
> wrote:

>if you were
>flying a $100K aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of
>hull coverage on top of the liability coverage.

Sure you would. I do.

When I started out, I carried $15,000 hull insurance on a plane that
was worth $25,000, figuring that at the very least the instruments
would be salvagable. Then the airport put a $40,000 minimum on the
plane, and more recently $60,000.

(Zero Six Hotel went out the door in September 1946 for $2600 to an
FBO in Massachusetts.)

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Cubdriver]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:50:19 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
> wrote:

>> So, are you saying that the FBO's insurance policy in these cases will
>> protect the pilot or pilot's estate from a $1 mil lawsuit brought against him
>> by the families of the children on that school bus who were killed when the
>> aircraft struck the bus? (for some reason this was always the example given
>> to me by my mentor instructor)
>
>Yes.

Free advice is worth what you pay for it.

Talk to a lawyer before you bet your retirement fund on that answer!

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Cubdriver]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:12:05 GMT, "JGalban via AviationKB.com"
<u32749@uwe> wrote:

> It is rare, but it happens. A friend owns an FBO and his insurance company
>has gone after renter pilots twice in the past 20 yrs. or so.

When my instructor was teaching me how to do a wheelie, I
overestimated the forward stick required to plant the wheels, which
spread enough to ding the prop.

The instructor's insurance company thought it should be responsible
only for the airport's deductible. It lost the argument and paid for a
new prop and the engine tear-down.

(BTW, neither of us noticed the dinged tips. The instructor took off
again, went around the pattern, and landed on the mains to demonstrate
the correct technique. Then he gave me back the controls to taxi up to
the gas pump and shut down. What a weird feeling to see those curved
tips!)

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Cubdriver]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:40:34 -0500, "Peter R." >
wrote:

>I would bet a paycheck that those airplanes are fully covered by the aircraft
>owner's and/or FBO's insurance should a renter accident occur.

Of course they are!

And the insurance company will come after you if a credit check shows
that you are good for it. Why leave $250,000 on the table?



Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
new from HarperCollins www.FlyingTigersBook.com

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 10:53:41 -0600, Dallas
> wrote:

>
>A pilot buddy who works for a law firm has rattled my cage over renter's
>insurance and liability.
>
>Do you renters feel the need to pick up supplemental insurance? If so who
>did you use and how much did it cost you?
>
>Here's his comments:
>
>You should talk to me about FBO insurance too. Unless your FBO is
>different than every other FBO I've ever been into, their insurance
>provides them (and/or the aircraft owner if it is leased to the FBO) with
>hull coverage and liability insurance. In the event of damage to the
>aircraft, of harm to a person (but maybe not you), the insurance will pay
>to repair the aircraft and defend and pay and lawsuits that arise out of
>the event. However, when all is said and done, to the extent that the
>incident is your fault (most are), the insurance company will have the
>right to sue you to recover all the amounts they paid to 'clean up your
>mess'. If you are renting from an FBO, getting a renter's policy
>(sometimes called a non-owned aircraft policy) is a good idea. I've never
>figured out how the 'hull' portion of those polcies work - if you were
>flying a $100K aircraft, you wouldn't want to have to maintain $100K of
>hull coverage on top of the liability coverage.

Many, if not most FBOs do not carry insurance to cover the pilot and
has been mentioned if you screw up and they do pay they may come back
to you. I never rented without renter's insurance. Back in the early
90's I paid around $350 to $390 for "renter's insurance" on simple,
fixed gear aircraft (172, Cherokees) and figured it was well worth it.

Roger (K8RI)