So far i have only looked at avemco. It looks like for personal injury coverage it would cost $205/year for $100k per person 1 million property and each accident coverage. Thats not too bad. However, for the aircraft damage coverage at $150k coverage ot would cost me $1400/year. this is a little high and I would want this max coverage because if something happened I dont want to worry about the $.
Can anyone recommend any other companies I should look at?
Joined Mar 6, 2019 Messages 2,392 Location Chicagoland Display Name Display name:
The pilot formerly known as Cool Beard Guy
As I understand it, non-owned insurance is typically excess insurance. Therefore unless the airplane you're renting has no hull coverage itself, it would seem unlikely you should have hull coverage that covers the entire replacement cost.
For me, the only airplanes I rent come from clubs or flight schools where I have proof of their insurance (and see their terms). Therefore my hull coverage is something like 40k - and that's only because I fly twins. The goal for this hull coverage is to cover my deductible and some subrogation.
My understanding is that with non-owned insurance there is very little difference between the companies that provide it cost wise and I have found this to be true in my research. I carry a policy for liability on the one aircraft currently fly that does not belong to me and I know has no hull insurance on it. So I carry enough to pay for most of it. Having said that the broker for my airplane says that non-owned policies rarely pay anything the way they are structured. I don't know anyone who has ever used a non-owned policy and had it pay out so I don't know if that is true or not.
I would check with an aviation insurance expert. While there may be insurance on the aircraft you’re renting or borrowing, that insurance protects the aircraft owner. The insurance company will subrogate the claim and go after you for the insurance company’s loss.
As I understand it, non-owned insurance is typically excess insurance. Therefore unless the airplane you're renting has no hull coverage itself, it would seem unlikely you should have hull coverage that covers the entire replacement cost.
For me, the only airplanes I rent come from clubs or flight schools where I have proof of their insurance (and see their terms). Therefore my hull coverage is something like 40k - and that's only because I fly twins. The goal for this hull coverage is to cover my deductible and some subrogation.
Most of the classic aviation insurance companies offer this. I would call a broker (I use Falcon) and see what they can offer.
If you are eligible for USAA coverage, go through their site and you get a special group at Falcon that only handles USAA customers.
My FBO (I do some rental) requires $20,000 (IIRC, may be 25K) coverage.
I went with a company called aviation insurance resources
-I got 1 million per occasion/100k per passenger for $191/yr
-medical expenses for me and airplane occlupant at 10 000/passenger for $95/yr
-100k coverage for the airplane for $855/yr
For hull coverage, you are protecting yourself against the deductible (usually minimal for aviation policies) and subrogation. So, you either need coverage for the full hull value, be listed as a named (not additional) insured on the primary policy, or be certain there is a no-subrogation clause in the primary insurance to protect yourself.
If you can't be a named insured on the policy or have a no-subrogation clause, then another course of action is to have a non-owned policy with the same company that holds the primary insurance, with only liability and deductible (if there even is a meaningful deductible) coverage. What this does is it would put any subrogation back onto the same company, and they aren't going to sue themselves for subrogation. The only catch to doing it this way is to be sure that you know if/when the primary policy changes underwriting companies.
So far i have only looked at avemco. It looks like for personal injury coverage it would cost $205/year for $100k per person 1 million property and each accident coverage. Thats not too bad. However, for the aircraft damage coverage at $150k coverage ot would cost me $1400/year. this is a little high and I would want this max coverage because if something happened I dont want to worry about the $.
Can anyone recommend any other companies I should look at?
The problem is that hull coverage is typically the most expensive part, so you might not find much difference in premium.
You are looking at something to cover full hull. I understand the reasons why, but it is going to cost you. Have you thought about a more limited risk analysis? Something like, "what is the likelihood I will cause damage and, if I do, what is the most likely damage I will cause?"
And, as others said, a subrogation waiver can help a lot, if it's available in your situation.
Joined Oct 16, 2019 Messages 5,870 Location Atlanta / KRYY Display Name Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
I had renter's insurance when training with the flight school to cover the cost of the deductible, as the flight school's policy would cover everything else. It was fairly inexpensive.
If the plane you're renting doesn't have insurance or asks you to pay for it, rent from someplace else.
If you can't be a named insured on the policy or have a no-subrogation clause, then another course of action is to have a non-owned policy with the same company that holds the primary insurance, with only liability and deductible (if there even is a meaningful deductible) coverage. What this does is it would put any subrogation back onto the same company, and they aren't going to sue themselves for subrogation. The only catch to doing it this way is to be sure that you know if/when the primary policy changes underwriting companies.
That's really clever. Could they attempt to "subrogate" against your non-owned policy and then seek any excess from you? It sounds like you're saying they can't seek excess damages from client B if there is an extant policy for client A that could be used instead. This is an edge case I have zero clue about within insurance.
Edit: I see what's up here. They would need to consume the liability limit of the non-owned policy to defend the case from the owner policy. Dang. I'm gonna be thinking about that for a bit this afternoon.
Joined Jul 17, 2019 Messages 1,809 Location Chicago suburbs Display Name Display name:
The Little Arrow That Could
My approach as a renter was: give me just enough to cover deductible and any damage I'm likely to cause that their insurance company might come after me for.
My general thought process was that if I cause enough damage to total the plane (or anything close to it) I probably didn't survive the accident and paying off the damage is the least of my concerns in the afterlife.
Edit: I see what's up here. They would need to consume the liability limit of the non-owned policy to defend the case from the owner policy. Dang. I'm gonna be thinking about that for a bit this afternoon.
Yup, you've caught on. I realized this "one little trick" when I was in a car accident many years ago, and the other car was with the same insurance company as mine. Everything was wrapped up so easily and fast, it was pretty clear there was an advantage at play.
I went with a company called aviation insurance resources
-I got 1 million per occasion/100k per passenger for $191/yr
-medical expenses for me and airplane occlupant at 10 000/passenger for $95/yr
-100k coverage for the airplane for $855/yr
They are great to work with, I’ve owned for many years and love dealing with Tracey there. Wonderful folks!
Joined Jan 20, 2015 Messages 119 Location Sapulpa, OK (KRVS) Display Name Display name:
Daniel Barbee
Years ago when a friend would let me fly his airplane and I had non-owned insurance I heard a very important point to consider. What I heard was that non-owned insurance only covers the ~insured's~ liability, not the owner's. I never got to verify if it's true but it makes sense.
For example, if I had a gear up landing because I forgot to put the gear down it would be covered by my insurance. However, if the gear failed to extend for any other reason that wasn't my fault, my insurance wouldn't cover it. If I wasn't a named pilot on the owner's insurance and didn't meet the open pilot requirements, the owner would be on the hook for the repairs because his insurance wouldn't cover it either.
Fortunately, I never had to test this theory but have always been curious how it would play out in the real world. Other than that I've typically only carried enough non-owned insurance to cover the deductible, even though its not required at the place I rent from.