Well?
If it isn't do any of you have thoughts about not carrying it?
For what?
Well?
If it isn't do any of you have thoughts about not carrying it?
I think the answer to the topic is probably "Generally, no, not by law, your state my vary." To answer the last question personally, "Hell no." I carry life insurance. I won't care if I'm dead =)Well?
If it isn't do any of you have thoughts about not carrying it?
Virginia requires proof of liability insurance when you file your state registration.
Avemco says that ~50% of their claims expense is from ground damage.
yea from all the props scraping the nice runways when pilots forget to put the gear down.
I guess I do not buy that....
In the approximate 12 years of flying I have done I have only had a/c insurance a few years when I elected to allow someone else to use my airplane(s) and split expenses, they paid for the insurance.
When I am the only pilot flying my plane I am 100% self insured. If I crash and walk away I will consider myself lucky and possibly not fly again if I can not fix it. If I do not live, then the plane is worthless, my heirs are covered as I do not own anything. I do not even own the airplane, some corporation owns it. There are no other assets in "risky corp LLC." "safe trust for kids, trust" owns everything else.
The airport I was on for 10 years demanded insurance so I moved to another field for $60 per month less hangar rent. Then the original airport asked me to come back and said they can work around the insurance thing.
One way to ensure your heirs are sued is to have deep pockets unprotected or to have insurance. Ask an attorney.
Many states require liability insurance for any airplane registered in them and anyone not complying can be levied a hefty fine. And whether or not it's required by law, IMO anyone without it (or sufficient assets to cover at least a half million dollar liability) is morally deficient.Virginia requires proof of liability insurance when you file your state registration.
Serious question: How do I insulate my personal assets (cash, real estate) from lawsuit if I crash my airplane into someone's head or property, while also not carrying liability insurance as you suggest?
It is already well established that incorporating the aircraft doesn't do jack to insulate you when you're at the controls of the aircraft, but I'm quite open to other ideas. I still consider the yearly premium for that $1M smooth liability coverage pretty decent protection, but if you think I'm actually harming or attracting harm to my household's financial security by carrying said liability insurance then I'm all open to suggestions.
You are required to have liability insurance only during the period of contemplated use or operation of your aircraft. Minnesota Law requires you to state the period of contemplated use or operation of your aircraft. The minimum amount required by the act is as follows: $100,000 per passenger seat liability for passenger bodily injury or death and for property damage; $100,000 for bodily injury or death to each non-passenger in any one accident; and $300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or death to non-passengers in any one accident. The minimum insurance amounts for passenger liability shall be upon the number of type certificated seats for each aircraft.
Well?
If it isn't do any of you have thoughts about not carrying it?
Insurance guarantees a lawsuit but it does not guarantee they will only seek $1 million. So even if you keep the insurance you should move all your assets into two types of entities. 'Risky Corp' for airplanes and things that cause law suits (also keep loans on those assets so that the net worth of such an entity is not positive or not very high' and 'safety LLC or Trust' which only holds assets that do not do risky business and raise possibilities for law suits. Privacy is also important. If you are worth more than 8 figures you might even have "Safety Corp or trust" in another jurisdiction such as Grand Cayman Islands not for tax haven but to keep it out of the reach of snooper and attorneys and Judges.
Some people work in industries where it is not if they get sued but when they get sued. Such plans are necessary even with good insurance.
Alternatively you can take safety corp assets and put them into a family limited trust where you control but only own 1-3% and the family owns 97-99% but has not control until the controlling partner dies and passes control to the next chief.
We have at least a thread a week on liability, insurance, lawsuits, you name it.
The answers from some are consistently you don't need to worry about any of it. Strangely some still do.
Sounds like a good reason to move.
Many states require liability insurance for any airplane registered in them and anyone not complying can be levied a hefty fine. And whether or not it's required by law, IMO anyone without it (or sufficient assets to cover at least a half million dollar liability) is morally deficient.
Hull insurance OTOH is a purely personal issue.
It's amazing how the subject can get twisted from protecting assets though the use of instruments specifically designed for that purpose to some half-cocked theory about being sued if you do.
Those who have visited the scene of the crash in which their cabin-class twin was reduced to rubble understand full well the sheer folly of this nonsense. What really happens is that the insurance company writes a check for the face value of the policy, the surviving owner deposits the check and pays off the bank and then distrbutes the remaining cash in accordance with the terms of the JOA.
End of story. Well, almost. The only theory that's more stupid is that deferring the purchase of insurance "until you's gots enough time in the plane so the rates won't be so high" while blithely ignoring the high percentage of time that "recently purchased plane" is part of the NTSB and newspaper reports of crashes.
Total annual premium for most planes is less than 2% of value.
1.7% for me, and that's in the 310. It's the best value in all of my flying costs.
My C-180 taildragger is less than 1.6%. If they only knew.
If you can afford to walk away from your airplane if you crunch it and not worry about the loss, maybe you can do without insurance.
-BUT-
If you can afford to toss airplanes aside, you probably have significant assets that make you a target for attorneys if you damage somebody's property by parking your now-damaged airplane on their now-damaged house.
Better carry significant liability if you have significant assets.
I'm also with you in the camp of finding it ridiculous that people go without insurance until it comes down, since it's highest during the point where you're most likely to need it. Looking back on my first year in the Aztec (after which the premium dropped by 25%), it's obvious why the insurance rate dropped so much in spite of raising the hull value by $10k.