Capt. Kirk wrote:At which time all those confusing words will be clarified by a lawyer and you will discover that your policy was not valid whenever the key is in the ignition.

That seems to be the general opinion of Joe Pilot.

The insurance companies are just scammers out to get your money and run.

The truth is, if the agent does his job correctly to get your needs covered and you abide by the guidelines of the insurance agreement (policy) your claim will be covered. You are paying your agent to act on your behalf...ask him anything that you have questions on before you have a problem...it is his job to make sure you understand. After the claim it is too late...his hands are tied.

Claims don't get denied very often unless the claim was obviously excluded by the policy coverage, or fraudulent information was provided at the time the policy was agreed to. The courts tend to side with the "little man" instead of the big companies who are trying to yank the carpet out from under the "innocent" policyholder.

I got into this business as a way to talk airplanes, fly airplanes, eat, sleep and breathe airplanes...all while someone else picked up the tab. I was a pilot first and an insurance agent long afterward. There are those out there who are in it just for the money, but there are a lot of us in it for the love of aviation. I knew when I accepted the job that I would not be well liked by the general aviation population, but that is OK...I get paid to do what I love and I get to help fellow aviators out in the process.

Back to scamming my next victim...

lowflybye wrote:

Capt. Kirk wrote:At which time all those confusing words will be clarified by a lawyer and you will discover that your policy was not valid whenever the key is in the ignition.

That seems to be the general opinion of Joe Pilot.

The insurance companies are just scammers out to get your money and run.

The truth is, if the agent does his job correctly to get your needs covered and you abide by the guidelines of the insurance agreement (policy) your claim will be covered. You are paying your agent to act on your behalf...ask him anything that you have questions on before you have a problem...it is his job to make sure you understand. After the claim it is too late...his hands are tied.

Claims don't get denied very often unless the claim was obviously excluded by the policy coverage, or fraudulent information was provided at the time the policy was agreed to. The courts tend to side with the "little man" instead of the big companies who are trying to yank the carpet out from under the "innocent" policyholder.

I got into this business as a way to talk airplanes, fly airplanes, eat, sleep and breathe airplanes...all while someone else picked up the tab. I was a pilot first and an insurance agent long afterward. There are those out there who are in it just for the money, but there are a lot of us in it for the love of aviation. I knew when I accepted the job that I would not be well liked by the general aviation population, but that is OK...I get paid to do what I love and I get to help fellow aviators out in the process.

Back to scamming my next victim...

I agree that it's the agent's responsibillity to provide thier client with a useful policy that suits the pilots needs.
I've still got a bad taste in my mouth from my last policy (7 years ago).
I basically bought a policy so that my brother could ferry my new-to-me plane up from the lower 48 and to cover me while I was spending some time getting reaquainted with the plane. My fault...but I didn't read the fine print which basically said coverage was void when working into and out of unimproved fields. So, my plane was only covered during flight since 99.9999% of my flying is into and out of unimproved fields. The policy I paid $1200 for was junk for my needs...but then again, if I got a policy that would cover unimproved fields, I would have spent a lot more than I did.
I like you just fine...I don't base my opinions of a person on their occupation...with the exception of realestate agents

Regarding Alaskan Rates, the insurance for my stock Cessna 150 is almost exactly doubled since I'm in Alaska. And that's even with the Off Airport exclusion (which they won't give to tailwheel aircraft up here). However, it's still barely more than my auto insurance and I have pretty cheap vehicles.

Phil

Capt. Kirk wrote:

lowflybye wrote:

Capt. Kirk wrote:with the exception of realestate agents

No man it's lawyers. I used to want to be a lawyer years ago, then I found out they wouldn't let me, see my parents were married

Quick!!! Grab an umbrella or raincoat cause it's about to hit the fan.

AntiCub wrote:Regarding Alaskan Rates, the insurance for my stock Cessna 150 is almost exactly doubled since I'm in Alaska. And that's even with the Off Airport exclusion (which they won't give to tailwheel aircraft up here). However, it's still barely more than my auto insurance and I have pretty cheap vehicles.

Phil

Phil,
I haven't checked on insurance since I first got my M@#&% (<---dirty word on this site) up here. So, are you saying that they're not issuing policies for planes landing off field? What are they considering off field? Gold King? Chena Marina?...etc.
I've heard float insurnance is through the roof...combine that with Alaska and I could probably buy a new plane every 3 or 4 years!

Capt. Kirk wrote:So, are you saying that they're not issuing policies for planes landing off field? What are they considering off field? Gold King? Chena Marina?...etc.

Generally if it can be found on a sectional then it is not considered "off airport" since if it made it on the sectional then the FAA must recognize it as a landing strip. This is different than "unimproved strips". It all depends on how the policy is worded. You should be able to get clarification from the definitions section of the policy...otherwise call your agent and have him clarify it for you.

Float planes are a different policy wording all togather.

Capt. Kirk wrote:

AntiCub wrote:Regarding Alaskan Rates, the insurance for my stock Cessna 150 is almost exactly doubled since I'm in Alaska. And that's even with the Off Airport exclusion (which they won't give to tailwheel aircraft up here). However, it's still barely more than my auto insurance and I have pretty cheap vehicles.

Phil

Phil,
I haven't checked on insurance since I first got my M@#&% (<---dirty word on this site) up here. So, are you saying that they're not issuing policies for planes landing off field? What are they considering off field? Gold King? Chena Marina?...etc.
I've heard float insurnance is through the roof...combine that with Alaska and I could probably buy a new plane every 3 or 4 years!

Kirk
I'm insured with Avemco, they asked if I wanted the off-airport coverage or not. For tailwheel aircraft they require that you buy the off-airport coverage in Alaska. Wise of them I'd have to say. Avemco explained it to me as being anywhere that's not designated as an airport by the FAA, so pretty much anyplace that's not on a sectional. My coverage doesn't apply at Goldking since it's listed as "closed" or "unverified" or something like that. However, I am covered at Chena Marina, or Lakloey since they are designated airports. At least I would be if I was still buying in-flight coverage.

Phil

For tailwheel aircraft they require that you buy the off-airport coverage in Alaska.

That right there is just not fair...that's "Tail Wheel Profiling" if you ask me.
Just because I own a tail wheel aircraft means I just can't fight the feeling to go land on some gravel or something...OK, maybe that's a bad example.

A friend of mine has a 1958 182A that he converted to a tail wheel plane. He never got hull insurance and only used it for personal use. He is thinking of selling it and I am thinking of buying it.

Called one of the insurance outfits that does this to get a quote. His questions were:

1 How much coverage? I said 50K (probably should have said 60 or so)

2 How many pilots listed? Just me.

3 What ratings? Single engine land and instrument.

4 How many total hrs? About 1100

5 How many in last year? I average about 125 per year.

6 How many in type and model? About 750, maybe close to 800.

7 How much tailwheel time. Less than 2.

8 Oh yes the tail number and I gave it to him.

I probably should have updated my log book to give exact figures. His quote was $759.00. I never told him about the conversion. Don't ask, don't tell.

They would probably get out of the deal if I put in a claim.

Tim

qmdv wrote:6 How many in type and model? About 750, maybe close to 800.

7 How much tailwheel time. Less than 2.

I probably should have updated my log book to give exact figures. His quote was $759.00. I never told him about the conversion. Don't ask, don't tell.

They would probably get out of the deal if I put in a claim.

Tim

If you bind it then you will just be paying $795 for a useless stack of paper...you no longer have a Cessna 182, you have a Cessna 182 with a TW conversion. By paying for a policy and signing the application you enter into a legal contract between you and the insurance company. If you did not disclose that information and you bind that policy you have not only voided your policy, but also committed fraud. Fraud is punishable by law in many states. Withholding pertinent information or giving misleading information can be considered fraud. You were fraudulent in one of two ways: 1) You did not disclose the conversion which means that you withheld pertinent information. 2) The TW conversion no longer makes it the same make & model as a stock Cessna 182 as it was designed from the factory and you stated that you had 750 hours of M&M time.

You are walking on dangerous ground if your story is true, but I do not know which is the dumber move...actually committing the fraud or going on the internet and bragging about it thereby creating evidence that you did it intentionally. There are some of us in the insurance industry that actually fly and participate on these forums.

The dumbest thing about this is that you admitted that you know they wont cover the claim yet you are going to pay for a useless policy. I'll make you a better deal than that...how about you send me $500 and I will send you my old college notebook from Geology class...it will be just as useless to you but will cost you less.

What confuses me is the inconsistencies in your story..if you did not disclose that it was a TW then why did he even asked for your tailwheel time? That is not a common question to ask unless it is pertinent to the risk...he did not ask for retract time or multi time for the same reason.

qmdv wrote:I probably should have updated my log book to give exact figures. His quote was $759.00. I never told him about the conversion. Don't ask, don't tell.

They would probably get out of the deal if I put in a claim.

Tim

Yeah, I'm betting the $$$ is going to go way above the $759 when they find out it's conventional gear.

That's a really nice looking conversion by the way. I look at it every time I go home to Montague.

Gump

I don't know what the rates are for someone with low tailwheel hours, but the tailwheel coverage isnt' that bad, actually.

MTV

QMDV

You were just getting a quote. Just call them back and tell them that you forgot to mention that it was converted to a tailwheel. The quote will probably increase but maybe not that much. Make sure, if you do proceed, that you have their acknowledgement in writing that it is a taildragger.

Remember that there are Insurance Agents, Lawyers, and probably FAA people on this website. I guess we cannot speak freely. We must save that for the campfire where we know who is listening.

flyer

flyer wrote:Remember that there are Insurance Agents, Lawyers, and probably FAA people on this website. I guess we cannot speak freely. We must save that for the campfire where we know who is listening.

flyer

I do not take anything on these postings past the website without changing the names and numbers to protect the innocent, hence the in my post to QMDV. I do however, try to answer your questions, keep you all informed as much as possible, and try to warn you about mistakes before you make them.

QMDV only said he got a quote, not that he bound it. Notice my post said IF YOU BIND it this could be the outcome. Like I said in a previous post, I got into the aviation insurance business to support my flying addiction, not the other way around. The more fellow aviators that I can help along the way, the better.

My posting to QMDV was a warning, not a threat...I doubt that he fully understood the repercussions of what he said he was planning to do. I will tell you that there are pilots out there that knowingly do these things and know the repercussions. I dealt with one such individual today, and I refuse to represent people with that approach. My clients expect me to be up front and honest and they trust that I have their best interest in mind with my recommendations...I should expect nothing less from them.

The bad part is that we all wind up paying higher premiums when others try to cheat the system.


My apologies if I seemed a little aggravated with you QMDV...my intent was only to warn you of the consequences of your impending actions. I have a real pet peeve with dishonest people and I had to deal with one today that tried to slip one by me just as you were describing. Had I not known my airplanes, he would have succeeded.

Hey lo fly guy, I guess that if sombody was ripping on my plumbing indsustry like we all rip on yours, I would be testy too. No comments please about "plumbers but" or "the payday thing" or "don't eat the last bite of your sandwich" See, it is already happening to me .I was getting the quote for a test. With less than 2 hrs tailwheel and no endorsement I could not legally even fly the plane.

The plan is to do the old "Oh by the way" I forgot to mention that there was slight mod made to the plane. Now you know that a 182 tail wheel mod is not a 180 so I am interested in what box they will put it in.

Now for the unintended consequence. The same company, different salesman has been charging me about 1050 bucks for the same insurance on my 1959 182 that I fly now. Not quite the same cus it is insured for a 60K value and my quote for the other was based on 50K. If I stick with the plane that I have, I will call this guy for the renewal quote.

I bet that the increased cost of the 182 tailwheel insurance would be less than the savings on insurance if you took a 180 and put a nose wheel on it. Wink.

Tim

Accually, I really appreciate it when sombody that has obvious expertise trys to answer our questions. I have learned a lot on many subjects from posts here.

Tim

AntiCub wrote:

Capt. Kirk wrote:

AntiCub wrote:Regarding Alaskan Rates, the insurance for my stock Cessna 150 is almost exactly doubled since I'm in Alaska. And that's even with the Off Airport exclusion (which they won't give to tailwheel aircraft up here). However, it's still barely more than my auto insurance and I have pretty cheap vehicles.

Phil

Phil,
I haven't checked on insurance since I first got my M@#&% (<---dirty word on this site) up here. So, are you saying that they're not issuing policies for planes landing off field? What are they considering off field? Gold King? Chena Marina?...etc.
I've heard float insurnance is through the roof...combine that with Alaska and I could probably buy a new plane every 3 or 4 years!

Kirk
I'm insured with Avemco, they asked if I wanted the off-airport coverage or not. For tailwheel aircraft they require that you buy the off-airport coverage in Alaska. Wise of them I'd have to say. Avemco explained it to me as being anywhere that's not designated as an airport by the FAA, so pretty much anyplace that's not on a sectional. My coverage doesn't apply at Goldking since it's listed as "closed" or "unverified" or something like that. However, I am covered at Chena Marina, or Lakloey since they are designated airports. At least I would be if I was still buying in-flight coverage.

Phil

That explains why they never bothered to even mention it to me. Nice to know I was paying for off-airport coverage for over a year before I even needed it

Well, if you READ your policy from AVEMCO, it tells you these little gems of knowledge, like are you approved off airport or not.

I think one of the bigger mistakes that most aircraft owners do is acquire an insurance policy, then never actually read its provisions.

As to cost of insurance, it would be interesting to examine each person's CAR insurance, and consider the value and risk involved in THAT world.

My car insurance, for two vehicles, both of which together don't add up to the stated hull value of my airplane is half again what my aircraft insurance is.


Course, I drive more than I fly. Dang it.
MTV