Insurance excess

[BrendAn]

I heard something quite disturbing about a training accident recently.

The student was asked to pay the insurance excess which was a lot of money. Is that normal. I just assumed that you were covered when you pay for your training.

Minor accidents can be expensive repairs.

[BurnieM]

Does not seem unusual to me.

 

Rental cars have always required you to pay the excess (or an additional fee to avoid it).

 

[BrendAn]

3 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Does not seem unusual to me.

 

Rental cars have always required you to pay the excess (or an additional fee to avoid it).

 

A rental is only hired to an experienced driver. A student in a flying school is paying them to teach them to fly. I would have thought the student would not be held responsible.  Maybe you are right , I just never thought of it before.

[onetrack]

It should be itemised in the T's & C's of the training agreement. As the trainee is renting the aircraft, I would expect the same rules apply as hiring a car or truck.

[BrendAn]

3 minutes ago, onetrack said:

It should be itemised in the T's & C's of the training agreement. As the trainee is renting the aircraft, I would expect the same rules apply as hiring a car or truck.

The word is trainee.

Trucks and cars are not hired to trainees. The schools I have used have never supplied any  t and c,s.

Certainly worth looking into.

 

[BrendAn]

It's a fine line. A hard landing can cause a lot of damage.

[BrendAn]

As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft.

[skippydiesel]

 

Student pilots are not the PIC.

 

The PIC is the instructor - he/she is legally responsible for the safe operation of the training aircraft . Ergo the PIC?/instructor is responsible for any damage to the aircraft.

 

Any flight school that tries to undermine the above, is fighting a seriously uphill battle - which I think they would lose.😈

[BrendAn]

I have read that on Google but also I read that once you become solo you are responsible for the excess. The same as if you have your licence and hire an aircraft.

[Red]

So what if it did?, would make no difference to the case in point as third party doesnt cover airframe you are flying 

[BrendAn]

4 hours ago, Red said:

So what if it did?, would make no difference to the case in point as third party doesnt cover airframe you are flying 

I have no idea which post you are referring too.

[Arron25]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

I have no idea which post you are referring too.

"As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft."

[T510]

Under RAAus that the instructor is the PIC so therefore they are responsible, there isn't even the availability for ICUS for students that have done their solo but want to fly with their instructor.

 

Unless the student has signed a rental or training contract that specifically states they are liable for the excess in case of damage to the aircraft I would be telling the flight school the liability lies with them

[skippydiesel]

"Unless the student has signed a rental or training contract that specifically states they are liable for the excess in case of damage to the aircraft I would be telling the flight school the liability lies with them"

 

Once again - I doubt that the principal of PIC being responsible, can be undermined by an individual signing a document doing this or a flight school attempting the same.

 

The concept of PIC being responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft he/she is in charge of goes way way back to the law of the sea. The PIC (like a sea captain) has extraordinarily powerful authority and with it responsibility. This "tradition" exists in international law as well as domestic law. Cant see this arrangement being changed any time soon.

 

A document signed by a student accepting responsibility for the aircrafts safe operation,  is unlikly to be worth the paper its writen on.

 

For the most part, Australian law does not allow an individual or organisation to sign away (agree to) reductions in rights & responsibilities, particularly when it comes to questions of safety/liability😈

Edited Friday at 12:25 AM by skippydiesel

[KRviator]

17 hours ago, BrendAn said:

As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft.

RAAus insurance coverage is for personal injury isn't it? Not hull damage?

[FlyBoy1960]

the RA-Aus insurance (try and get a copy out of the head office is impossible) only ensures third-party property and person damage.

 

An example would be if you crashed and killed somebody. If it could be proven that that you were completely compliant with the regulations, your aircraft was up-to-date with all maintenance requirements and there was no other excuse for them not to provide coverage then, there will be an amount paid to your passengers family.

 

Likewise, if you ran into a power line in the process of a completely legal flight (which is unlikely if you hit a power line) then they would cover the cost of getting the powerline repaired.

 

From what I was told there have only ever been 3 successful claims because there is always a way to avoid fulfilling the insurace coverage.

[BrendAn]

today i have spoken to raaus and geoff tompkins the raaus insurance broker.

 

fly boy is correct . if one hires an raaus registered aircraft for solo training or not the ra policy will cover 3rd party damage caused by the aircraft under your control but not the aircraft you are flying.

a good example is the jabiru that became wall art at goolwa when it went through the hangar wall at high speed. the ra members insurance covered all the repairs to the buildings.

now when a student is training the instructor is pic at all times when he is in the aircraft so he has to pay the insurance excess. as soon as he gets out the solo student becomes liable for the excess. i rang my club and asked as well what their policy is and they sent me the figures. most of the club aircraft have  a $1250 excess but some of the newer ones up to $5000.

 

the broker thinks the school with the $15000 excess is paying reduced premiums but just passes on that ridiculous excess to students nad instructors, pretty shifty.

[FlyBoy1960]

34 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

the broker thinks the school with the $15000 excess is paying reduced premiums but just passes on that ridiculous excess to students nad instructors, pretty shifty.

 

Or, the school as a history of accidents and claims possibly brought about by different training standards and the insurers need to cover their risk. Quite often you are paying a very high percentage of the aircraft cost in excess.  A $100,000 aircraft would normally have an excess of between $3000 - $5000, a $200,000 aircraft could double this

[BrendAn]

1 minute ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

 

Or, the school as a history of accidents and claims possibly brought about by different training standards and the insurers need to cover their risk. Quite often you are paying a very high percentage of the aircraft cost in excess.  A $100,000 aircraft would normally have an excess of between $3000 - $5000, a $200,000 aircraft could double this

geoff the broker deals with aircraft insurance every day and he has never heard of a $15000 excess.  He said maybe up to 10,000 max on a very expensive AC.

[BrendAn]

15k makes a solo student one hard landing away from doubling the cost of an rpc. 

most people would never have to find out i guess but it does happen occasionally.

[clouddancer]

3 hours ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

the RA-Aus insurance (try and get a copy out of the head office is impossible) only ensures third-party property and person damage.

 

An example would be if you crashed and killed somebody. If it could be proven that that you were completely compliant with the regulations, your aircraft was up-to-date with all maintenance requirements and there was no other excuse for them not to provide coverage then, there will be an amount paid to your passengers family.

 

Likewise, if you ran into a power line in the process of a completely legal flight (which is unlikely if you hit a power line) then they would cover the cost of getting the powerline repaired.

 

From what I was told there have only ever been 3 successful claims because there is always a way to avoid fulfilling the insurace coverage.

Try the main page of the RAAus website and scroll down for a complete explanation of the policy and a link to the policy.

https://raaus.com.au/news/member-benefit-raaus-members-liability-insurance/

[Red]

10 hours ago, BrendAn said:

I have no idea which post you are referring too.

 

This.. "As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft."

 

said whilst discussing the Hull insurance excess,

You appeared to not understand what 3rd party Insurance covered, but I see someone has explained to you now

Edited Friday at 07:24 AM by Red

[BrendAn]

9 minutes ago, Red said:

 

This.. "As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft."

 

said whilst discussing the Hull insurance excess,

You appeared to not understand what 3rd party Insurance covered, but I see someone has explained to you now

 i know what third party insurance is  but i did not know what it covered with raaus members insurance which you would not be familiar with. it is a policy that covers us in any raaus aircraft.  it has always been hard to get a clear explanation from them. what i wanted to know was whether they covered the aircraft because if it is not your own then it could be considered third party property.

Edited Friday at 07:32 AM by BrendAn

[BrendAn]

45 minutes ago, clouddancer said:

Try the main page of the RAAus website and scroll down for a complete explanation of the policy and a link to the policy.

https://raaus.com.au/news/member-benefit-raaus-members-liability-insurance/

far better off talking to geoff for a clear understanding of this policy. he is a great bloke to talk to, always happy to answer questions.

[BrendAn]

17 minutes ago, Red said:

 

This.. "As raaus members we have third party cover. Would that extend to a flight school aircraft."

 

said whilst discussing the Hull insurance excess,

You appeared to not understand what 3rd party Insurance covered, but I see someone has explained to you now

owning four trucks you get to know about insurance .