Hello,

Does anyone have a recommendation for insurance in Alaska. There is a 180 that I am looking to buy which has floats, skis and wheels. I will probably operate on skis and wheel gear for the first year. Someone once told me that all the A/C insurance carriers operate in collusion so all their rates are the same or are very close. Anyway, I would like to find someone that is good to deal with.

Thanks,

RT

Contact Avemco direct or London Aviation Underwriters through an agent. Those are the only choices in AK, unless someone else has joined in the last few months.

gb

I get a non motion Pol. for AK..Bears and Wx..the way I see it.
Bill White is the best by far, but there are minimums.
happy day

Tulsa,

There is no collusion in the insurance industry. What happens is you contact an agent or broker. That broker (your agent) then shops the market for you, as in all the UNDERWRITERS who may be willing to insure you. The Broker then recommends to you what the best coverage for the money is. Once you have designated a broker as your agent, that broker is the only one who can shop the market for you. It would make little sense to have five brokers contacting the few underwriters, looking for coverage for the same airplane.

You are VERY limited on choices for aircraft insurance in Alaska, particularly when it comes to insurance for a floatplane. Bring a BIG checkbook, and be seated when you get the quote.

I would contact Falcon Insurance and engage them as a broker to shop the market for you.

Then, I would contact AVEMCO, since AVEMCO is also an independant underwriter. In other words, they underwrite their own policies, as opposed to a broker who finds insurance from an underwriter. Because AVEMCO is independant, they will give you a separate quote from your broker, who will shop the rest of the market.

Be realistic about the value of the airplane, and DO NOT underinsure it.

Good luck. Insurance, particularly hull coverage, is expensive in AK. I never carried hull coverage while I lived there, because my airplanes always went on floats. Wheel plane insurance in AK isn't really all that bad, though.

MTV

Hello Everyone,
As Long as we are on the subject of insurace, I have a question also. I have my insurace
through avemco, have for 13 years. I never realy shopped around after first sellecting them.
This year at Oshkosh I had Falcon give me a quote from a company calle Chubb. They gave
a higher coverage and lower deductable and $650.00 cheaper (thats a lot of 100ll).
I called avemco to ask why the big difference and got the story of "will you really be covered
if somthing happens". Has anyone ever had a claim that thier insurance company denide
because of some hidden clause in the binder. I am also insuring a cessna 180 and am thinking
about changing companys but not sure if it's a good idea. Any thoughts would be wellcome.
46tcrft

I have been using Avemco in Alaska almost exclusively. I have used Falcon on a couple occasions in the past to get comparative quotes, but did not find the price difference, in light of policy stipulations, sufficient to make a change -- but I do advocate taking a look. Chubb is a very large and good insurance company, but I have never received an aviation insurance quote from them.

Nizina

46TCRFT wrote:Hello Everyone,
As Long as we are on the subject of insurace, I have a question also. I have my insurace
through avemco, have for 13 years. I never realy shopped around after first sellecting them.
This year at Oshkosh I had Falcon give me a quote from a company calle Chubb. They gave
a higher coverage and lower deductable and $650.00 cheaper (thats a lot of 100ll).
I called avemco to ask why the big difference and got the story of "will you really be covered
if somthing happens". Has anyone ever had a claim that thier insurance company denide
because of some hidden clause in the binder. I am also insuring a cessna 180 and am thinking
about changing companys but not sure if it's a good idea. Any thoughts would be wellcome.
46tcrft

Avemco is full of crap. If people were getting denied for silly reasons we'd all hear about it. I used Avemco for one year because when I bought my Bo I had zero retract time and they were cheaper. After that they were never competitive. Now I'm down to $1250 a year and Avemco would be many hundreds higher.

Make certain that you are comparing apples to apples when shopping insurance for aircraft (or anything else, for that matter). It's easy to get a quote from another insurer that's a lot higher or lower than the one you're with, but make certain that the policy provisions and limits of coverage are the same. Policy differences that may appear small could wind up huge in a settlement.

I'm with AVEMCO now that I'm in MN, and their rates are almost identical to other quotes (for the same coverage) that I've gotten from another broker.

MTV

Have a strong cocktail ready for when you receive your Alaska floats quote. Makes it go down better I recommend Yukon Jack, neat.

Have no idea what your experience or hours are but with both Avemco and LAU, C180 rates were almost double my 170 rates, which are almost double what 170 rates would be in the CONUS. High enough that it dissuaded me from buying that 180. Or put another way, convinced me that the 170 was the right airplane for me at the present time

And that was on wheels only no floats. Avemco quotes skis the same as wheels don't remember if LAU does.

Bonanza Man wrote:

46TCRFT wrote:Hello Everyone,
As Long as we are on the subject of insurace, I have a question also. I have my insurace
through avemco, have for 13 years. I never realy shopped around after first sellecting them.
This year at Oshkosh I had Falcon give me a quote from a company calle Chubb. They gave
a higher coverage and lower deductable and $650.00 cheaper (thats a lot of 100ll).
I called avemco to ask why the big difference and got the story of "will you really be covered
if somthing happens". Has anyone ever had a claim that thier insurance company denide
because of some hidden clause in the binder. I am also insuring a cessna 180 and am thinking
about changing companys but not sure if it's a good idea. Any thoughts would be wellcome.
46tcrft

Avemco is full of crap. If people were getting denied for silly reasons we'd all hear about it. I used Avemco for one year because when I bought my Bo I had zero retract time and they were cheaper. After that they were never competitive. Now I'm down to $1250 a year and Avemco would be many hundreds higher.

London Aviation Underwriters had some exclusions up here. Been a while but I think one was operation above a certain latitude?

Avemco has none, other than the standard ones about commercial ops etc.

I've used Avemco all along in Alaska. Always get a human being when I call. Very simple to suspend coverage to not-in motion if I'm traveling for an extended time. No claims to date, so can't speak to that. As far as the question of collusion, the reason AK rates are so high is related to the places where accidents occur. It's not on the side of an airport runway with half a dozen FBOs on the field. It's on a mountainside, or in a crevasse, or below the high tide line during IMC. Claims get spendy fast due to logistics of recovery.

denalipilot wrote:I've used Avemco all along in Alaska. Always get a human being when I call. Very simple to suspend coverage to not-in motion if I'm traveling for an extended time. No claims to date, so can't speak to that. As far as the question of collusion, the reason AK rates are so high is related to the places where accidents occur. It's not on the side of an airport runway with half a dozen FBOs on the field. It's on a mountainside, or in a crevasse, or below the high tide line during IMC. Claims get spendy fast due to logistics of recovery.

...and I believe that recovery is covered under liability not hull. Don't know about the lower 48 but up here liability only aint that cheap for that reason, though cheaper than full coverage.

Thanks guys for the good info. I am going to call Falcon insurance tomorrow, and then Avemco. I used to think of insurance as legalized extortion(having never had a claim) but now knowing quite few pilots who that have put planes down in the bush my attitude has changed a little.

Insurance isn't extortion--it's actually more like gambling.

If you can afford to walk away from the value of the airplane, you probably don't need hull coverage. Liability, however, is a different deal. Not many of us can really afford to deal with a lawsuit, or pay for that Cessna Caravan that we ran into on a slick ramp, or the Turbine Otter we pranged into at the dock in Bettles.....

For most of the 29 years I flew in AK I carried liability insurance. I never carried hull insurance. Now that I'm in the Lower 48, hull coverage is much less expensive, and to me it's worth the cost.

MTV

""...and I believe that recovery is covered under liability not hull. Don't know about the lower 48 but up here liability only aint that cheap for that reason, though cheaper than full coverage.""

I am no expert on insurance but this doesn't sound right. Will be interested in hearing from others with knowledge.

I just renewd with Avemco. I went to Avemco and AOPA Insurance. AOPA came back with a slightly cheaper quote , but it was not immediately clear if off field landings were covered. The Avemco quote included all off field landings and covered me in AK (not sure about Canada) the cheaper one from AOPA did not cover flights in Alaska or Canada. Even though Avemco was a little higher, ($60), I decided to go with them.

Rant on insurnce (all insurance):

Insurance companies are crooks. In good times they invest your premium in high risk markets hoping for major returns, then when the market turns south or there is an act of god (ie hurricane) which causes them to pay a large number of policy holders they raise your premium. They apparently take little or no risk and shift it to the consumer. Win-win for insurance. If you make a claim on your homeowner's or aircraft or auto insurance they will drop you. If you decide to drop them for another company , you have to explain why and request to have your policy refunded and can be extremely difficult to recieve your refund.

Not in Alaska, but Avemco wasn't even close in the US. Chartis was 6-700 less for hull and liability, covering the plane on skis and off airport. Not sure if the Avemco covered the skis and off airport, I never bothered to check after the quote came back high.

I can't imagine float insurance

AVEMCO makes no exemptions for skis or for off airport. I'm covered for both with AVEMCO.

I think that aircraft type has a lot to do with the differences in rates that we sometimes see. I check periodically with a broker to shop the market and compare to AVEMCO, and the response has always (in the lower 48) been virtually identical, or a little higher on the commercial market.

I did not use AVEMCO in AK because they don't underwrite commercial operations, and I operated commercially there. A couple friends of mine were insured with AVEMCO in AK, on wheels/skis, and had very good coverage for not much more than i'm paying down here in MN.

MTV

FloatFlyer wrote:""...and I believe that recovery is covered under liability not hull. Don't know about the lower 48 but up here liability only aint that cheap for that reason, though cheaper than full coverage.""

I am no expert on insurance but this doesn't sound right. Will be interested in hearing from others with knowledge.

Well, you had me second guessing myself so I went and looked at my policy. And then since I wanted to get quotes on future prospects anyhow I called Avemco too.

For them at least (though I imagine other underwriters are similar) typical aircraft recovery and transportation is covered under hull coverage, not liability, yes.

HOWEVER, if recovery is mandated by law, or if there is some other mandate (such as the property owner threatening a lawsuit with good cause) it might also be covered under your liability coverage.

And so, up here, where more likely than not you are going to crash on public property and recovery is almost always required these days even if it is only bits and pieces of you and the airplane, if you don't carry hull coverage your liability coverage will pay to recover the aircraft out of the field. YMMV, etc. etc.

And so liability-only coverage for Alaska airplanes is priced accordingly. Bell 212 time is expensive

On an only somewhat-related note, I found out that for me a four-seat retract is cheaper to insure than a six-seat fixed-gear airplane, even with a training wheel up front I also found that insuring a C-180 for full coverage in Alaska continues to be cost prohibitive for someone with almost no time-in-type regardless of tailwheel hours in other smaller airplanes.

I don't think it's been brought up here yet, but what about different companies' experience thresholds? For instance, I think Avemco has a premium break at 1,000 hours PIC. Does anyone know if these tend to be similar among companies, or vary significantly?