Student pays insurance excess

[AngelOfMusic]

Hi all -

Ive just started doing some training at a particular flying school, and im a little wary of the document theyve given me that basically says, if I, as a student, bend their plane, I have to pay the insurance excess - which depending on the plane can be close to $10,000 :eek::eek:

Is this normal? I've done a lot of flying out of different schools in the past and this is the first time ive ever heard of this... mind you ive never bent a plane either..

I thought the schools would have their planes insured for even student pilots, being a school - is it right that they would pass the cost of the excess on to the student??

[AussieNick]

sounds odd to me. most schools i know of the insurance cover's the students if they bend an aircraft during any flight for the purpose of instruction or training.

[Snatch]

That's what insurance is for.... and due care and diligence on the part of the School you're working with. Or so I thought. :confused:

That said, we do have a clause that basically allows for gross negligence or intentional breach by the hirer of the aircraft... then you pay the excess (and you never get the keys again :ouch: )

[AngelOfMusic]

That said, we do have a clause that basically allows for gross negligence or intentional breach by the hirer of the aircraft... then you pay the excess (and you never get the keys again http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/shiner.gif )

Well that makes sense - but thats not what this one is about - it says I have to pay the excess in any insurance claim from damage caused by me...

Its got me worried enough that im considering not continuing with the course and going to another school.

[Clearedtoreenter]

Its got me worried enough that im considering not continuing with the course and going to another school.

I think you will find that clause is normal, at least when the pilot is at fault. There is not really much financial benefit to owners placing their pride and joy on line and if the worst does happen, then they will try to collect the excess from the negligent party, piilot or otherwise, because the insurance company won't pay it for sure.

PS Good on ya for reading the small print! That's the sort of thing that makes agood pilot!

[Wombat35]

Just be VERY careful... check and see if it only applies when you are flying solo, not when Dual as you are not PIC and it's the PIC responsibility to ensure your safety...

As for me, I carry the excess regardless of who's flying for my aircraft... it's just a cost of doing business.

Also 10K is very high for an excess.. mine has been as low as 2.5K.. seems to me that if they are so stretched that they need to do this then what else are they doing...

My advice... find another school/aircraft.

[rep]

sounds exremley suss to me!

never had to do anything similiar at my two flying schools :bored:

[Sunfish]

If you are flying with an instructor, you won't be paying any excess. It's only when you are on your own and you caused the damage. The excess is usually 10% of the total cost of the repairs, so you would get asked to pay $10,000 pretty much only if you wrote off an aircraft on your own, and it was totally your fault.

Bending a firewall on a C172 through trying to land it at 70 knots when you have been taught otherwise, will set you back about $1,500 :{

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

You need to find somewhere else to learn to fly!

Dr :8

[bestpilotindaworld]

Thats normal. Where I fly if you flying Dual the club pays the excess but your flying solo you pay unless theres something wrong with plane.

If you think theres something wrong that I wouldn't let you fly my plane.

[empacher48]

I had to sign a similar agreement when I was learning to fly, but the excess was only $1000..

The aircraft was insured to operate from any prepared or unprepared strips, paddocks, riverbeds, just about anywhere we wanted to land the aircraft we were covered as long as we paid the excess if we bent it.

In the end I got a lot of experience during my CPL training of operating into some pretty awesome places - the beach on Big Bay, Stewart Island beaches, strips down the Landsborough River too. :ok:

But $10,000 seems quite steep especially if you aren't allowed to have any fun while you're learning!

[kingtoad]

The clause is pretty normal - what is high is the excess. Most excesses are 1 - 2% of hull value. So a $10K excess shows you're either flying a half to $1M plane or the flying school is saving money on their premium by nominating a higher excess.

The excess can vary with the pilot experience too. eg greater than 500 hrsr TT then 1% or less than 500hrs TT then 2% of hull value for excess.

[PlankBlender]

In one sentence: Find another school, it's a rip-off!

[PlankBlender]

..and post the name of the school here, if you don't mind, so others are warned! :D

[VH-XXX]

It's purely arse covering. If they were confident in their instruction they wouldn't need that clause. It's not like you are going to deliberately bend their aircraft, so they need to make sure you are ready to go solo etc.

Find another school.

If the aircraft is privately owned and online in a school, the school should cover this gap in the event of a claim; it's just one of the risks that the school takes on and why they should charge their margin on the aircraft.

[Integro]

I think $10k is a bit steep. I had a similar concern at my last flight school. The subject of excess came up after my instructor opened is door on the taxi way after landing and the wind caught it broke it off of one of the hinges.

He said that if I was flying I would have to pay the excess which is rubbish. He's logging command hours, he's the one that makes the final decision. Logging solo hours I'd be more than happy to pay the excess and I think that's only fair.

I'd be incline to move schools. There's so many of them out there, no need to stay with one that's going to bend you over if the worst were to happen!

[whack_job]

that is total bull@h1t, WALK AWAY NOW.

A company has to factor accidents in as a cost of doing business, if you worked at a supermarket and one day you rammed a pallet jack into a wall, you would not have to pay to fix the wall, you might get a warning, but that would be it.

If you worked as a crane operator and one day you lost a load worth 50K, you would not have to pay for that, you would be in deep sh@t, but you wouldn't have to pay. Go down today and ask a crane operator (for example) what they think about being financially responsible for every load they move. I think you know the response you will get.

I am always surprised that sensible people let themselves get walked on by aviation companies, just because its an aviation company doesn't mean the normal rules of business and ethics don't apply to them.

Start now how you mean to continue, and tell them to F off.

The hourly rate you pay already ready covers the cost of business, it doses not just cover the cost to run the machine, your hourly rate is covering (or should cover) the machine operating cost, the admin costs for the business, the sales costs, the insurances, the facility costs like power, phone and heat, AND unexpected costs like accidents, if it doesn't then the company has no idea what its doing and is doomed.

Tell them its bullshi%

[Blue Sky Baron]

Why should you think this is such a big deal?

Have you ever hired a car from Budget or Avis, you always pay the excess should you have an accident.

Having said that I think 10k is a bit rich for an excess.

BSB

[Will964]

Have you ever hired a car from Budget or Avis, you always pay the excess should you have an accident.

Not the same. Perhaps if you walk in off the street, licence in hand, and hire an aircraft for an hour. But if you are undertaking a ‘course’ at a flying school then there is no justification for this. :=

As most flying schools lease their aircraft, they’re not actually paying any insurance on the aircraft anyway, the owner is. If this is the case, the flying school should ‘self insure’ the excess. If they own their own aircraft, then they should do the same and ‘self insure’ any excess. After all, this is an industry with a certain amount of risk associated with it, as a business you can’t distance yourself from that risk and pass any loss onto the student.

I have flown with six flying schools and not once have I had to sign an agreement like this, tell’em to get bent!

[bestpilotindaworld]

If your PinC and you bend it. Its your problem.

Say if your a instructor at a aero club or a flying school its normal for them to pay the excess for your stuff up when your teaching.

But if your flying solo ie PinC and you bend it in all places that I know you have to pay the excess unless its mechanical fualt or something like that.

[whack_job]

Blue sky, this is completely different to hiring a car from Avis, If I hired an aircraft from an aeroclub (say I already hold a CPL) and was told, you bend it you pay the access, I would probably live with that, but this guy is undertaking a course of study, he is seeking training.

What if the guy walked into a folk lift training school (he's gone to learn!) and he was told, you are responsible for any damage, hello!!! I would run a mile.

Stop getting walked on man.

[AngelOfMusic]

The almost-$10k excess (closer to 8) was for a Duchess, not a little trainer. They have a whole range of excesses per aircraft, ranging from just over $2000 for a little two-seater, up to the scary figure for a twin.

Ive flown out of many flying schools and aero clubs across the country, and this is the first time Ive heard of it being the student's responsibility (other than in the case of gross negligence).

As a CPL holder, I expect that I won't be accidentally landing on the nosewheel, or taxiing into another plane, but then again, isnt that the point of insurance?

[BrazDriver]

I have seen it calculated as a percentage on the value of the hull. Usually 1 or 2%

[Mr. Hat]

have a look around at other schools australia wide and see if they all do it. I say australia wide because the local operators might have all agreed to put this one in.

whck job makes some good points. When you go to avis do you turn up and say your here to practice some driving in adverse weather before you go for your licence. They'd laugh at you.

Do you have access to a union at all? Ask them.

[43Inches]

A student should not be liable for damage on dual or solo training flights as he is not capable of authorising his own flight.

The student is sent solo only when an instructor is satisfied that he safe to do so, the instructor is liable but as an employee the company assumes responsibility.

A student will only be liable if he operates outside of his solo authorisation, unless the authorisation was ambiguous, e.g goes to the training area when sent solo circuits or lands at an airfield not authorised by the instructor/company for solo nav operations.

As soon as the operation becomes a Private Hire the hirer becomes liable for damage.

There is no such thing as 'cover all insurance' except self coverage. Most schools will be on minimum coverage for training ops as this is already up around 3%-6% hull value per year. In the past it usually had licensed aerodromes only coverage, for larger aircraft such as twins Private hire usually has an minimum hour/min rating/licence restriction as well but some have waivers based on a flight with insurance approved checkers. The 10k excess sounds more like your outside their insurance coverage with low hours/experience and they have a dispensation increaseing excess guaranteeing some help in damage coverage.

[supercub150]

I think it is a bit sus. I work for a flying school myself and we do have people sign a Private Hire Agreement, but only for Private Hire. Any excess that is incured during a training flight is the responsibility of the organisation! as for the amount of excess they are charging for the duchess, It would want to be a bloody good duchess :eek:

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

definately not normal, find another School.

[Jamair]

Where I did PPL & CPL they had the same clause. While I was there a student hit a duck on take off while solo in the 172, went through the windscreen. He did quite well to abandon the takeoff and put it back down without any further damage and was lauded in the newsletter for doing so.:D Then they sent him a $750 excess bill.:mad: He told 'em to roll it into a tight tube and jam it where the sun don't shine:p They backed down.

Another club member bent a PA32 wheel spat by hitting a gable marker:rolleyes: She got a bill and paid it.

It's all situational.

[blade root]

Angel of Music,

Are you getting a reduced hourly rate over other flying clubs etc.?

It sound like a cost cutting excercise in reducing their insurance premiums, just wondering if the savings are being passed on to the students....