Originally Posted by
Captain Stable
The problem lies (or will quite possibly be found to lie) in how far one could go in such a matter as, say, an expired medical, which was one of the factors mentioned by the AAIB.
In the US, there is such legislation in some states. IIRC, it broadly says that the omission must be relevant to the incident at hand. So for instance
- Circuit Break AD not complied with - Accident - VFR into IMC - Insurance pays out
- CB AD not complied with - Accident - Inflight fire - cause unclear - Insurance doesn't pay out as the CB AD could reasonably be material.
In CS's hypothetical case, there would normally be a post-mortem as part of the investigation which would either say - no evidence of pre-existing medical condition or medical blah blah ... might have contributed to loss of control.
As a general principle it seems like having tight conditions on the hull aspect makes good sense, I am less convinced of the merits of 'punishing' third parties for the errors of the pilot.