Insurance

[arborite]

I assume all these quotes include the $1,000,000 liability coverage with $100k per seat limit, right? or is this just for hull coverage?

[Nev]

Mine includes NZ$2m liability. I'll amend to add that.

[jaredyates]

Just thinking out loud here, should I move this thread to the members only section if we are going to talk about liability limits?

[Sir Newton]

It is common to run liability only 2 million combined.

[Bcone1381]

I started wondering to myself .... could training be connected with insurance?

Lets say a group of owners....maybe form some type of insurance club.... could get together and self insure. A part of membership might be training, and and annual proficiency requirements. Basically, training specific to the aircraft type with the goal of lowering accident rates, combined with proficency requirements, and then a group insurance cost that would be lower because the group has risk of lower claims. It might even include an aircraft inspection with the purpose of flagging issues that might elevate risk. Gear alignment? Fuel system install?

If one could partner with Mark G to agree to provide parts like wings, then even more cost control might exist. As the fleet grows, a growth area for the factory might be replacement wings and parts that have a very high level of completion. A wing built to completion at the factory would be cool.

[Bissetg]

Good comment Brooks perhaps it could be in the Stop bending Bearhawks thread too?

[Pbruce]

I’ve had mixed luck with COPA in Canada. We insured a partnership and then one year they just said “no” after no claims. We could not talk to the u dear-writer about why not. I couldn’t get builder insurance there at all so I went to EAA and that experience was frankly, outrageous. All they do is tell you how badly we need it and that they can provide it Then they refer you to an insurance broker or maybe directly to the underwriter (I’m not sure exactly). Then they take their cut or their referral fee and leave you to it. Some of the rates are preposterous and when shown, they do nothing about it.

For example, I had to disclose all kinds of info about my flying experience and intended use, all of which are totally irrelevant while building, I’m a professional with 25K hours. So what? I was trying to buy BUILDER insurance. They actually quoted me 2.5% of hull value annually (about $4k cdn) for builder insurance. I showed them comparisons to US rates and all they said was “different market”. Well, that may be, but if so, it’s a safer, less risky one in general because the demographic is generally more heavily concentrated in the middle-income strata with fewer on the wealthier or poorer ends if the spectrum and everybody generally paying a higher tax burden for benefits like fire and police. This is not a political comment, just an assessment of how the insurance company chosen by EAA Canada is flying in an opposite direction from the actuarial data. I’m really steamed about this. At the moment, I’m without the insurance because it’s simply too expensive for the risks covered. Realistically, those would be fire, vandalism/theft and flood. If anyone has found reasonable rates in Canada, I’d love to hear about it.