Insurance for RA-AUS aircraft

[BrendAn]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

PL insurance is not just for a passenger. Someone could walk into a prop, You could run up the back of another aircraft, you could drop an insecure panel or prop etc. Anything where someone could be hurt or killed because you didn’t discharge your duty of care. 

do you understand that he is automatically covered for public liability as an raa member.  

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

do you understand that he is automatically covered for public liability as an raa member.  

Yes I do.

[turboplanner]

I haven't been watching recent cases so thes figures are only rough guesses:

While the RAA insurance may cover you for killing someone or makinh someone a paraplegic, aquadripleic + legal costs used to be around $14 million so you would need to buy a top up to cover that.

Also there's a wide variety of risk.

If you are flying out of your own property strip, never carry passengers, and don't allow people near the airstrip and aircraft, then you'd expect the risk to be low.

 

If you fly out of a busy airport with people milling around airside, gliders stopping on the strip with people on the strip and chatting within a few metres of active powered aircraft and on multiple and conflicting strips, the odds are that someone will forget a safety item and be responsible.

 

If you don't take the VFRG seriously and don't bother to fly a correct circuit, you could be in a place that someone else hits etc. and that's your negligence.

 

If you fly out of an RPT Airport the aircraft usig it are so dissimilar that an airprox is a common risk and the payout if you are negligent (as in make a mistake or forget something rather than doing beat ups), could be in the tens of millions.

 

So it's worth looking at your level of risk rather that just going along with blanket numbers.

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

Not that it's going to change anything ;

The way I see it, our (Au) system of compensation favours the legal industry and deep pockets. It inherently expensive, on various levels and potentially unjust.

Unlike some enlightened societies, our system of "justice" is adversarial. Compensation payment are awarded by the court, even where the "at fault party" is not contesting the claim, by the injured party.

The main beneficiaries in all of this are the ambulance chasers/lawyers. 

More enlightened systems remove the need for an injured party to make a claim against the at fault. Instead they make a claim to an impartial committee who rule on the matter. The committee will also rule on the culpability of the at fault, where appropriate referring the criminally negligent for prosecution/court.

One of the "flow on" effects of our system is the fear generated in the public, of being sued. This plays into the hands of another unproductive group, the insurance industry. 

Why we allow ourselves to be "milked" without complaint, by two non productive parasitic industries, is beyond me.😈

It's the way of Australia. We get shafted by big business and  governments. Look at ATMs now. The banks are removing them everywhere and now if you want cash it's up to $4 to withdraw.  Transurban absolutely rip us off, 

Woolies and Coles with the fake discount fiasco. And yet we just let it happen because none of us can be bothered rocking the boat.  The snouts are getting longer and the troughs deeper.

[danny_galaga]

My ex has been phoning around for me. The consensus seems to be that 5 million on the policy is adequate.

[turboplanner]

19 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

My ex has been phoning around for me. The consensus seems to be that 5 million on the policy is adequate.

So $10 mil on RAA and $5 mil = $15 mil? Sounds in the ballpark depending on the airfield environment, flying over suburbs etc.

[danny_galaga]

On 23/12/2024 at 11:45 AM, turboplanner said:

120 cars, 40 events on one night is a single event. You tell the insurer exactly what will be happening.

 

He may decide to include it in the annual subscription.

I've thought about this some more, and I see the virtue in it now and I'm going to quiz the insurer about this. After all, test flying can take quite a while, might end up being a year anyway.

[BurnieM]

On 23/12/2024 at 9:42 PM, turboplanner said:

So $10 mil on RAA and $5 mil = $15 mil? Sounds in the ballpark depending on the airfield environment, flying over suburbs etc.

Not meaning to be grim but if you have no shared assets and you are unlikely to outlive an event that causes significant other damage, do you need any public liability insurance at all ?

 

Edited December 27, 2024 by BurnieM

[danny_galaga]

33 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Not meaning to be grim but if you have no shared assets and you are unlikely to outlive an event that causes significant other damage, do you need any public liability insurance at all ?

 

Plenty of times I've heard of one person surviving and another dying. I mean, the first heavier than air fatality was of Orville Wrights passenger in 1908.

[turboplanner]

28 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Not meaning to be grim but if you have no shared assets and you are unlikely to outlive an event that causes significant other damage, do you need any public liability insurance at all ?

 

Since you've attracted attention; shared assets can be sorted out proportionately, "No Assets" will be investigated, and where there has been evasion, you're for a higher place, and Assets might be needed if you are silly enough not to have PL Insurance. For the second half of the equation, you've picked a vanishingly small percentage of the population. Usually it might be that you just fitted a prop incorrectly and it flies off and injures or kills someone etc. Or you serviced an aircraft and sold it and two people died because it had not been serviced in accordance with the engine manufacturer's requirements. I posted an ongoing case a few days ago about a jumping castle accident where the castle had 8 tie down points and the operator opted to use only four. You'll be able to see what happens as the case unfolds.

[BrendAn]

Seems to be a lot of advice being given here. Is the poster a qualified legal professional. Danny is covered by his raa pl. The brokers they use are well respected and I honestly think they would not short change the policy. For an individual to be advising otherwise may be misleading and causing people to second guess a policy developed by experts for raas.

[turboplanner]

13 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

Seems to be a lot of advice being given here. Is the poster a qualified legal professional. Danny is covered by his raa pl. The brokers they use are well respected and I honestly think they would not short change the policy. For an individual to be advising otherwise may be misleading and causing people to second guess a policy developed by experts for raas.

No one has said he wasn't covered; no one has questioned the policy.

[BrendAn]

3 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

No one has said he wasn't covered; no one has questioned the policy.

I understand that but all the posts about needing more cover I believe are false. We pay good money for raa cover and  they are advised on the correct amount.  I can't see the need to just keep giving insurance companies more and more money. T

[BrendAn]

The ultimate insurance policy I believe is fly without passengers . Which he is doing for the 25 hour flyoff anyway. The second is fly in the country and not over built up areas.

[onetrack]

You need to keep in mind that if the manure hits the rotating blades, and you end up involved in lengthy trials and lawsuits, the legal costs can often be ruinous - besides any payout you're deemed responsible for.

Even when someone else has done something wrong (such as locating a Ferris Wheel inside a flight path splay), the pilot can still be found partly responsible for losses/damages/injury or death.

 

In the Ferris Wheel case, the Council was found largely responsible, but the pilot was still deemed to be 35% responsible (for the crash) as well. The payout to the girl trapped on the Ferris Wheel was well over $1.5M and I hate to think what the legal costs were in total. The legal profession often charge daily rates that exceed monthly earnings for many people.

 

Plane crashes into Ferris Wheel at Festival – child riding successfully sues Council and Pilot for damages | McAuley Lawyers

MCAULEYLAWYERS.COM.AU

---

On 1 October 2011, at the Old Bar Festival in Old Bar NSW a pilot of a light aircraft travelled from Taree Airport, to the Old Bar Airstrip, which lays adjacent to the land on which the Festival was taking place. While...

 

The bloke who had the Ball Bay (Qld) crash that killed his mate and passenger, has narrowly avoided a manslaughter charge, but he still faces a handful of aviation law infringement charges next year - and the daughters of the bloke killed are very angry just at the dropping of the manslaughter charge, and no doubt they're planning a lawsuit that will possibly result in a major payout. But even if they fail in acquiring a payout for their fathers death, the legal costs are going to make this pilot wish he'd never taken to the skies.

 

Queensland pilot avoids manslaughter charge over fatal Ball Bay plane crash - ABC News

WWW.ABC.NET.AU

---

Nearly three years after a fatal plane crash near Mackay, the Department of Public Prosecutions has decided not to formally charge the aircraft's pilot with manslaughter.

 

www.couriermail.com.au%2Fnews%2Fqueensland%2Fmackay%2Ffamily-of-gerardus-miltenburg-angry-as-manslaughter-case-dropped-in-fatal-plane-crash-case

 

ATSB discontinues investigation into fatal Ball Bay light aircraft accident | Mirage News

WWW.MIRAGENEWS.COM

---

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has discontinued its investigation into a light aircraft accident in which a passenger was fatally injured

 

Edited December 27, 2024 by onetrack

[BrendAn]

2 minutes ago, onetrack said:

You need to keep in mind that if the manure hits the rotating blades, and you end up involved in lengthy trials and lawsuits, the legal costs can often be ruinous - besides any payout you're deemed responsible for.

Even when someone else has done something wrong (such as locating a Ferris Wheel inside a flight path splay), the pilot can still be found partly responsible for losses/damages/injury or death.

 

In the Ferris Wheel case, the Council was found largely responsible, but the pilot was still deemed to be 35% responsible (for the crash) as well. The payout to the girl trapped on the Ferris Wheel was well over $1.5M and I hate to think what the legal costs were in total. The legal profession often charge daily rates that exceed monthly earnings for many people.

 

The bloke who had the Ball Bay (Qld) crash that killed his mate and passenger, has narrowly avoided a manslaughter charge, but he still faces a handful of aviation law infringement charges next year - and the daughters of the bloke killed are very angry just at the dropping of the manslaughter charge, and no doubt they're planning a lawsuit that will possibly result in a major payout. But even if they fail in acquiring a payout for their fathers death, the legal costs are going to make this pilot wish he'd never taken to the skies.

 

Queensland pilot avoids manslaughter charge over fatal Ball Bay plane crash - ABC News

WWW.ABC.NET.AU

---

Nearly three years after a fatal plane crash near Mackay, the Department of Public Prosecutions has decided not to formally charge the aircraft's pilot with manslaughter.

 

http://www.couriermail.com.au%2Fnews%2Fqueensland%2Fmackay%2Ffamily-of-gerardus-miltenburg-angry-as-manslaughter-case-dropped-in-fatal-plane-crash-case

 

ATSB discontinues investigation into fatal Ball Bay light aircraft accident | Mirage News

WWW.MIRAGENEWS.COM

---

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has discontinued its investigation into a light aircraft accident in which a passenger was fatally injured

 

We can come up with what if scenarios until the cows come home. Follow the rules and do the right thing and it's very unlikely you will ever have any major accident .

If I listened to what I read on this forum I would leave all my trucks in the yard, sell my cars and sit at home all day.  Life is a risk. You can't spend it worrying about what could happen. Do your best to mitigate risk and enjoy life. 

 

 

[facthunter]

Your Earthly trundlings are well covered. It's wise to know where you can end up if things go pear shaped. Pilots working for Airlines negotiate cover by the Airline in civilised Countries. You DO RISK losing everything, Believe it or not.  Nev

[Thruster88]

7 hours ago, facthunter said:

Your Earthly trundlings are well covered. It's wise to know where you can end up if things go pear shaped. Pilots working for Airlines negotiate cover by the Airline in civilised Countries. You DO RISK losing everything, Believe it or not.  Nev

So the risk of losing all one's money and or the risk of death in the same event, which is worse? anyway either one should focus the mind to avoid the top 4 or 5  ways for us recreational VFR pilots regardless of the class of aircraft we fly to avoid such events.

 

The fear mongering posts above by turbo have caused me to break out the calculator. I insure both my VH aircraft comprehensively. If we guessed half the premium covered liability and guessing there might be 10,000 insured light VH GA aircraft in Australia and that insurance companies like to make some profit, that would leave a pay out pool of only 5ish million. 5 million for 10,000 aircraft, the risk must be F all. What say you mr turbo.

 

The very small amount each RAAus pilot pays for insurance?  Why is that?

 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Thruster88

[turboplanner]

5 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

So the risk of losing all one's money and or the risk of death in the same event, which is worse? anyway either one should focus the mind to avoid the top 4 or 5  ways for us recreational VFR pilots regardless of the class of aircraft we fly to avoid such events.

 

The fear mongering posts above by turbo have caused me to break out the calculator. I insure both my VH aircraft comprehensively. If we guessed half the premium covered liability and guessing there might be 10,000 insured light VH GA aircraft in Australia and that insurance companies like to make some profit, that would leave a pay out pool of only 5ish million. 5 million for 10,000 aircraft, the risk must be F all. What say you mr turbo.

 

The very small amount each RAAus pilot pays for insurance?  Why is that?

 

I wasn’t talking about Comprehensive insurance  so if you want to know how they do business that’s up to you.

 

I wasn’t fear mongering. Someone asked for advice on Public Liability Insurance which is volatile and the cases that set the payouts need to be checked regularly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

The Insurance Company HAS to make a profit to ensure it stays solvent and able to pay claims.. Risky situations are more expensive. A low Hours tailwheel pilot may have trouble getting cover.  I only covered my planes on the ground and 3rd Party and didn't carry people other than my wife.. Instructing and flying other peoples planes I didn't worry as the school and owners?  has cover. Owners obviously THINK I'm competent or they wouldn't let me fly their Pride and Joy.  You SHOULD be able to suppose an INSTRUCTOR Knows how to fly.  Nev

[kgwilson]

RAA public liability insurance is not $10 million, it is $20 million. Passengers are only covered for 250k though. I don't insure my hangar or my aircraft. The aerodrome floods and the cost of premiums soon exceeds the cost of building a new hangar. Premiums for insuring the aircraft hull would have been about 25k since I finished building it so i am well ahead. If I crash it I will either rebuild it myself, scrap it completely or i'll be dead.

[kgwilson]

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

The Insurance Company HAS to make a profit to ensure it stays solvent and able to pay claims.. Risky situations are more expensive..

Insurance Companies themselves normally don't have financial problems.

Warren Buffet is arguably the world's best investor.

When he bought Berkshire Hathaway it was a successful cotton supplier for garments in the US with several cotton mills scattered around the country.

Then China began selling T Shirts to the world and Berkshire Hathaway was almost belly up.

He needed income fast, so he bought, through Berkshire Hathaway, well known US Insurance Company Geico.

He had observed that:

• Insurers laid off their risk like bookies, so the lay offs paid part of the claims.
• Insurers got their income immediately, but didn't have to pay out until a claim was made (in some cases there were no claims in 40 years, so incoming money was invested, compounding the premium paid, and this rolled on with next year's premium etc.

So for what appeared to be a small premium, big payouts could be made, while still making a copetitive profit each year.

 

Berkshire Hathaway shares today are worth $684,908.00 USD

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, kgwilson said:

Would you have a list of conditions on this policy?

I would there there will be a list of conditions for the $20 m. and it's not clear whether the passenger liability is the limit the policy will pay out on (i.e. you may need more insurance for the passenger for a serious even) or whether the passenger gets coverage of up to $250,000 for his/her negligence and the same for the other two categories (motor vehicles and Tenants)

[Thruster88]

57 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Would you have a list of conditions on this policy?

I would there there will be a list of conditions for the $20 m. and it's not clear whether the passenger liability is the limit the policy will pay out on (i.e. you may need more insurance for the passenger for a serious even) or whether the passenger gets coverage of up to $250,000 for his/her negligence and the same for the other two categories (motor vehicles and Tenants)

It is very clear that 250,000 is the passenger liability limit, read it again.