Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Flying without insurance

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

cvsfly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
723
Anyone know people who own aircraft (vs a bank) that aren't insured? If you were asked to fly one for the owner, would any kind of non-owner policy be enough to cover the pilot's butt if something happened. If you did have your own non-owner policy (to cover you the pilot and any damage to anyone/thing on the ground) is there any legal document that you could get the owner to sign waiving any right to sue for aircraft damage? I was asked to fly a single-eng, H.P. plane a guy owns to fly him to pick-up a R-44 he is buying. When I asked to be added as a named insured, he said he didn't have insurance. I said no thanks. He also claims he doesn't plan on insuring the R-44, which he probably isn't insurable anyway at 20-40 hrs in the R-44. I was offered free training in the R-44 because he is trying to get my boss interested in using it. I think I'll pass with that as well. I did get 1 lesson from the dealer/instructor. Still makes me nervous that this aircraft has to have a separate SFAR to address special handling qualities. I've heard plenty of "watch outs" for the Robinsons. Can anyone offer any comparisons with other piston helicopters and any benefits other than being a current production, availability of a "4 seat" in the R-44 and I assume lower aquistion cost. What would it take to insure a R-44? How many hours? He is thinking the pilot will probably need 250 hrs in the R-44.
 
Last edited:
You don't fly in NJ do you cause there's a guy up here with a 44 and some bigger stuff that dosn't "need" insurance. He's sortof a mennace...
 
I've heard of quite a few jet operators not carrying "in motion" hull or liability, especially if they're single pilot ops. If it's paid for, then it's the owners call, although personally I think it's retarded wouldn't fly for them.

When I had a non-owned policy, I remember it was pretty restrictive on horsepower, value (I think) and it prohibited commercial operations other than flight instruction.
 
ya, me too. Worked for one operator that took hull off of the paid for aircraft. They were only worth like 100K tho. I know a guy around here that has his pilots flying a $2mm aircraft totally uninsured. To save what? $15,000/year
 
Even if they have insurance, simply being named doesn't remove your liability...it simply means that the insurance company will pay off if you have an accident. They can then come back to you for payment. That's what the non-owned-aircraft insurance protects you against.

Obviously, there are more details (insurance policies are longer than the paragraph above), but I'm by no means an expert.

Fly safe!

David
 
MauleSkinner said:
Even if they have insurance, simply being named doesn't remove your liability...it simply means that the insurance company will pay off if you have an accident. They can then come back to you for payment. That's what the non-owned-aircraft insurance protects you against.

Obviously, there are more details (insurance policies are longer than the paragraph above), but I'm by no means an expert.

Fly safe!

David



You know I of course have always heard that and know that to be the case but have always wondered how the insurance company could get away with that since when you rent from an FBO or club you don't sign anything warning you of subrogation, etc. Seems like any half decent (or actually scummy) ambulance chasing lawyer would be able to get that thrown out right away since no one warned you of that clause even verbally, much less in writing. Also the fact that you ARE named and if you have an accident they subrogate against you is crazy. That legally constitutes "fraud in the inducement" and I'm sure even a brain dead lawyer again could take that on and win bigtime. I personally think it is criminal for the insurance company to do that without making you sign a waiver or whatever but will always protect myself w/ non-owner policies anyway.
 
Last edited:
PAPA FOX! said:
You know I of course have always heard that and know that to be the case but have always wondered how the insurance company could get away with that since when you rent from an FBO or club you don't sign anything warning you of subrogation, etc. Seems like any half decent (or actually scummy) ambulance chasing lawyer would be able to get that thrown out right away since no one warned you of that clause even verbally, much less in writing. Also the fact that you ARE named and if you have an accident they subrogate against you is crazy. That legally constitutes "fraud in the inducement" and I'm sure even a brain dead lawyer again could take that on and win bigtime. I personally think it is criminal for the insurance company to do that without making you sign a waiver or whatever but will always protect myself w/ non-owner policies anyway.

Holy balls that is maybe the worst example of a run on sentence I have ever seen at first I thought that that there were no commas for the whole godawful mess but then I spotted one (,) although there are a couple of periods. Great.
Work. That was sure easy to read
 
YGBSM said:
Holy balls that is maybe the worst example of a run on sentence I have ever seen at first I thought that that there were no commas for the whole godawful mess but then I spotted one (,) although there are a couple of periods. Great.
Work. That was sure easy to read



Does anyone know if Tony C has 2 accounts??????
 

Latest resources

Back
Top