PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Weight & balance (again??)
View Single Post
Old 3rd Oct 2005, 15:42
  #48 (permalink)  
OVC002
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: TUOP
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry to carry this thread on beyond its natural life but......


Full disclosure, is normally considered as stuff like, vehicle performance, previous claims history, pre-existing conditions etc.

Does anybody tell their insurer that they from time to time drive at 77mph on motorways? Are we seriously to believe that claims are rejected because the insured failed to disclose his habit of occasionally driving through traffic lights showing amber?


It's interesting you should refer to a case where the insurer had to go to the supreme court to get a result.

For those unfamiliar : A Taku DHC beaver crashed killing 5 Passengers. Taku had applied for insurance stating that the capacity of the aircraft was only 4. Not only that but they only owned up to one accident in the previous 12months, when actually having had 3( see full disclosure above). The contract of insurance specifically stated that any misrepresentation voided the contract. An additional exclusion clause specifically stated that if there were more passengers than stated seats any claim would be invalid.

The lower court still held the insurance co to be liable to pay!!!

The higher court, in the majority, found for the insurer. Not because Taku intentionally lied in its application, i.e. deliberate non-disclosure, indeed the majority held that this was irrelevant , because, in this case, Colonial should have known Taku's claims record, but because there was a specific exclusion with regard to the number of passengers being limited to 4.



IMHO if there is a specific clause forbidding overweight ops it would be wrong, both legally and morally, to expect the insurer to pay any claim where the aircraft was so operated.

If the agreement calls for the aircraft to be operated in a safe manner then it would seem to be a stretch to insist that any claim would be repudiated in the event of an incident.

F3G

Any more un-analogous analogies, or case histories that seem to go a long way to rebutting your own points, and I shall begin to think that you are one green short of a full undercarriage

OVC002 is offline