RAAus Member Public Liability Insurance

[Head in the clouds]

I was recently refused permission to use a Shire Council controlled airfield because they required $20m PL Insurance and the RAAus member insurance only provides cover to $10m. I am aware that members can individually purchase the extra $10m but it is prohibitively expensive.

 

Yesterday morning I sent an enquiry to RAAus about this, asking whether RAAus has plans to increase our $10m to $20m.

 

At 4.30pm I received a phone call from Geoff Tonkin of PSB Brokers, they are the brokers who provide RAAus with the PL insurance that comes with our membership. He said RAAus had asked him to call me to discuss and explain the current situation.

 

Geoff agreed that the extra $10m is very expensive if bought individually. In fact he had just issued one and it cost $462 - that's about double the entire price of our annual membership! He said he has been receiving an increasing number of enquiries about this because most Councils and other controlling Authorities now require at least $20m - and some want $30m.

 

He said the RAAus Policy comes up for Review and renewal in September/October and he plans to suggest that RAAus increase the amount to $20m, he said it would probably only increase the rate per member by about $20 per annum. However, he said RAAus Board are understandably resistant to cost increases which affect membership costs, so he suggests concerned parties get in touch with the CEO/Board and make their feelings known. Otherwise, based on my own recent experience, we may well find ourselves excluded from many of the airfields we currently use, or having to pay a huge premium to buy top-up insurance individually.

 

Discussions between Geoff and the Board will commence around July. That's only a month away, so it might be a good thing to send RAAus an email asap if you want us to stay up with the current requirements.

 

 

[Yenn]

Looks like gouging by the local council.

 

 

[facthunter]

I thought they had gone to 20 Mill but obviously not. One could be forgiven for thinking the size of the plane ands the speed of it would be limiting the risk somewhat. but little details like that get missed in the wash.. Nev

 

 

[fly_tornado]

the management will see this as a win, raise membership another $20p/a + the usual $5 and throw on another $5 for the aircraft.

 

 

[Downunder]

RAA management and board reluctant to increase rates? Has there been a change in policy?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I get my insurance through Geoff for the last 7 years...he is a good guy. Very helpful

 

As a aside to this I have just today got a permit from the council in Bundy to clear land on a unmade gazetted road to make a better all weather drive up to the house on my farm. The road is along my fenceline. One of the provios in the permit is a 20 million public indemnity clause. So it must be a common amount now. My farm insurance is only 10 million

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Isis Flying Club Inc had to increase their PL from $10mil to $20mil when the Council renewed the lease (for 20 years). It is becoming pretty common.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Looks like gouging by the local council.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, the Council doesn't make anything from it.

 

I thought they had gone to 20 Mill but obviously not. One could be forgiven for thinking the size of the plane ands the speed of it would be limiting the risk somewhat. but little details like that get missed in the wash.. Nev

Councils and many other Authorities now see $20m as 'the standard'. That amount is required for model aircraft flyers on Council land, model car racing clubs, go kart racing, dirt bikes and even people operating their fishing and power boats on Council controlled waterways. It first came to light a couple of years ago when one of our members put an ultralight on floats in Moreton Bay and the Shire's permission was required to take off and land from waterways they control in the estuary (thereby not Harbours and Marine).

 

In these increasingly litigious days I think it's just a bullet we're going to have to bite or we'll be excluded from a large percentage of the airfields we currently use.

 

EDIT - By the way, HGFA members all have $20m PL cover provided within their membership.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Shows what great value the RAA insurance is and will be.

 

 

[slb]

I thought they had gone to 20 Mill but obviously not

I thought so too. The HGFA has had 20 Mil for a few years and I thought RAAus had increased theirs to match. No increase for the HGFA pilots though, so not sure why it would cost so much for a 2nd Organisation. Different Insurance Company?

 

I guess if they both went through the same insurance Company it could reduce the costs for all.

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

10,000 members at an additional $20 = $200,000 additional premium. I wonder what the claims history is? What is the current RAAus insurance expenditure with PBS?

 

 

[turboplanner]

$10 million is too light. Quadriplegic cases are running at about $13 million, so $20 seems prudent. Not much point going for $10 if you have to fork out the last $3 milli

 

 

[facthunter]

Doing it individually is not the go. If it's ONLY $20 just cop it as part of the deal. Yes it's another reason to "belong" but the litigious situation we exist in is not the fault of the RAAus . It's the REAL world we live in. Nev

 

 

[kgwilson]

Government depts have had 20 million for some years but then the insurance should be relative to the perceived risk. We have had 20 million on our aerodrome imposed by Crown Lands for some years now. Our hangar sub leases are 10 million and CL said they should be increased to 20 mil. We disagreed and determined that the risk of an issue with someone getting hurt by an inert hangar was relatively low so they accepted this. I think the perceived risk for RAA would indeed be greater than 10 mil so would be happy to fork out a bit more for them to increase the cover to 20 mil.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I sometimes fly passengers and I am very aware of the possible financial risk.

 

But here is what I have decided: The risk is so improbable that you lose more by making it change your life than you stand to gain by not carrying that risk.

 

To put some numbers onto the idea... a one in one million chance ( gain or lose) for a million dollars is worth exactly one dollar. Now in an ideal world, that is what the insurance would cost you. But in the real world, the insurance cost is more like $500.

 

So what is a sensible person going to do? Many would say to not take the passenger. I say, be a man and carry the risk yourself and fly the passenger, carefully of course. The losses from either paying the $500 or from being antisocial are there for SURE, while the loss from a liability claim is ( almost) never going to happen.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

I sometimes fly passengers and I am very aware of the possible financial risk.

 

But here is what I have decided: The risk is so improbable that you lose more by making it change your life than you stand to gain by not carrying that risk.

 

To put some numbers onto the idea... a one in one million chance ( gain or lose) for a million dollars is worth exactly one dollar. Now in an ideal world, that is what the insurance would cost you. But in the real world, the insurance cost is more like $500.

 

So what is a sensible person going to do? Many would say to not take the passenger. I say, be a man and carry the risk yourself and fly the passenger, carefully of course. The losses from either paying the $500 or from being antisocial are there for SURE, while the loss from a liability claim is ( almost) never going to happen.

Yes, well that's an excellent head-in-the-sand view ... EXCEPT if it costs you an extra $20 (not $500) and then you get total protection from any mishap that may happen, and also don't get excluded from using all Council airfields ... oh - and I recall you want to fly through corridors that will also require it ... well is $20 per annum so much you would either not be able to afford it, or protest against it, or accept being excluded for that paltry amount?

 

The thing is - costs go up every year in real dollar terms and also in CPI terms. I don't think we have had a membership cost increase due to PL insurance for many years, so quite simply - we're due for it.

 

EDIT - And surely, if HGFA believe they require it, why haven't our Board also thought so? Frankly, I think were being left vulnerable because so many of our members have complained so often about membership cost, that the Board has become gun shy about responsible management of our needs.

 

Your whole concept of "be a man and carry the risk yourself and fly the passenger, carefully of course", seems to me to be utterly stupid. Have you any idea how quickly the totally unexpected happens? To anyone, that is, however careful you may be. I've never had an air 'accident' - "my perfect safety record is no accident", as we say, but I quite allow that one could be right around the next corner. I'm not perfect, are you?

 

 

[facthunter]

The passenger is "sort of" entitled to legitimately claim and receive monies too, IF you are found to be liable at law. If you are stony broke, and not insured, they miss out. One could argue that's not what should happen, generally. The same sort of thing on the road is compulsory. ' Your good mate who has just died or badly injured, wouldn't think of suing you but what about his mother or Partner? Nev

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Gosh HIC, "total protection from any mishap that may happen for $20 "? Where from?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Gosh HIC, "total protection from any mishap that may happen for $20 "? Where from?

I think you were pretending it would cost you $500.00 per FLIGHT.

 

 

[KRviator]

I think you were pretending it would cost you $500.00 per FLIGHT.

No no - $500 a flight is only if you were going to do an hour of circuits at Warnervale!

FWIW, an extra $10M liability coverage for an additional $20 premium sounds like good value to me, but I am not a beancounter...

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I meant $500 premium for a year, but can't they refuse to pay out under various conditions?

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Interesting discussion, but one aspect not raised is multiple cover for the same "territory".

 

Individual pilots carry insurance, our club is required to have $20m cover for the bit we lease from the local council, which also has the whole airport covered for $20m. Isn't that overinsurance?

 

 

[turboplanner]

I meant $500 premium for a year, but can't they refuse to pay out under various conditions?

Every Insurance Policy has conditions, and every Insurance Company will refuse to pay if you break those conditions.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Interesting discussion, but one aspect not raised is multiple cover for the same "territory".

 

Individual pilots carry insurance, our club is required to have $20m cover for the bit we lease from the local council, which also has the whole airport covered for $20m. Isn't that overinsurance?

No, quite often each has committed a breach of their duty of care including the land owner.

 

 

[jackc]

I was recently refused permission to use a Shire Council controlled airfield because they required $20m PL Insurance and the RAAus member insurance only provides cover to $10m. I am aware that members can individually purchase the extra $10m but it is prohibitively expensive.

 

Yesterday morning I sent an enquiry to RAAus about this, asking whether RAAus has plans to increase our $10m to $20m.

 

At 4.30pm I received a phone call from Geoff Tonkin of PSB Brokers, they are the brokers who provide RAAus with the PL insurance that comes with our membership. He said RAAus had asked him to call me to discuss and explain the current situation.

 

Geoff agreed that the extra $10m is very expensive if bought individually. In fact he had just issued one and it cost $462 - that's about double the entire price of our annual membership! He said he has been receiving an increasing number of enquiries about this because most Councils and other controlling Authorities now require at least $20m - and some want $30m.

 

He said the RAAus Policy comes up for Review and renewal in September/October and he plans to suggest that RAAus increase the amount to $20m, he said it would probably only increase the rate per member by about $20 per annum. However, he said RAAus Board are understandably resistant to cost increases which affect membership costs, so he suggests concerned parties get in touch with the CEO/Board and make their feelings known. Otherwise, based on my own recent experience, we may well find ourselves excluded from many of the airfields we currently use, or having to pay a huge premium to buy top-up insurance individually.

 

Discussions between Geoff and the Board will commence around July. That's only a month away, so it might be a good thing to send RAAus an email asap if you want us to stay up with the current requirements.

RAA should have contacted you directly re your enquiry. To handball you off to the Insurance Broker is poor form.

 

Cheers,

 

Jack.