The other problems are the varying rules.
Example, a RV9 with funky glass panel and owner panel mounted G496 crashes. Insurance pays out.
A privately run PA28 with normal instruments and panel mounted G496 crashes, yet insurance doesn't pay out due to "illegal" (note not dangerous) mod.
I don't think that in an instance like this then the insurance should NOT pay out, and in my hypothetial case of the PA28 with GPS, had the GPS not had anything to do with the crash then I think the insurance should cough up. Otherwise insurance companies will use any loophole to not pay out, even if it had no bearing on the accident and we might as well give up flying now.
Interesting that in the Graham Hill case the AAIB kept refering to (paraphrase) "he didn't have a licence but met all the requirements had he applied". It sort of implied that he was qualified to fly the approach but that his papers were not in order.
From a layman's POV how are we to know that a maintenance place is doing their duty and actually doing the correct maintenance? I have heard a horror story of one well known place passing off second hand parts as new, or not actually doing the work that has been logged and paid for. If this is subsequently dug up as part of an AAIB investigation, you can bet the maintenance place will wash their hands of it and cover their arse the best way they can (lie?)......