The perils of Pauline

[Kharon]

Being uncertain of some of the details surrounding 'law' (for want of a better expression) and procedure associated with insurance matters in the aftermath of a prang; I asked a couple of questions of that nature of folks who know what they are talking about. Turns out, my ignorance on the subject is complete.

Aircraft insured all good. Not quite so.

Not so by a long shot. Seems that in the USA you can rent an aircraft which is insured for the operator/owner liability and then over the phone, with a membership number and credit card, for a small (ish) fee get cover for the bits that YOU are/maybe liable for, should you lob into someone's paddock, smash through the chook shed, slaughter his chooks and spill fuel on the property.

I hear the 'Strikemaster' fatal near Bathurst has a $70 million dollar wrangle going on, related to the cost of fire fighting and the loss of commercial timber. That is only an over an ale rumour but it serves to highlight the perils of Pauline after the prang.

I reckon this subject is worth a couple of lines, particularly from those who actually have a clue. For enlightenment like.

Handing over.

[thorn bird]

As an annendum to your post Kharon.
I am also wondering where an operator would stand, and where CASA would stand,in the liability stakes, with what seems an increasing interference by CASA FOI's in manufacturers recommended procedures detailed in AFM's, and also requiring practices especially when conducting emergency procedures that have long been discounted in the real world as unsafe.
Many of these FOI directions seem to be based on their interpretation of the AOCM, which is not LAW and contrary to the CAR.
Given the number of CP positions being advertised lately is it becoming difficult for operators to fill these positions?
Given the total lack of respect even contempt, shown by CASA to CP's and CP candidates, the increasing interference and micro management down to dictating whar should be commercial descisions and nothing to do with safety, I dont wonder nobody wants the job, at the end of the day its your head on the block, CASA will force you to adopt their procedures but if the Doo Doo hits the fan they will hang a CP out to dry.

[Clearedtoreenter]

Better get the house into the spouse's name quick?

[mustafagander]

Clearedtoreenter,

That's easily done - divorce lawyers can do it very quickly and thoroughly!!

[jas24zzk]

That's easily done - divorce lawyers can do it very quickly and thoroughly!!

Thats how you tell how many times a lady has been married.....count how many houses she owns.
:ok:

[Kharon]

"Wet and wild " during the 'arrival' phase, and when it's gone, the house has gone with it, eh?.:D

The apparent total mess aviation insurance is in (for pilots), the way policies are structured and the almost "Machiavellian' twists and turns involved concerns me; even more so when you consider that forgetting the wheels is almost a normalised deficiency in our safety culture. It's not that 'rare' an event and although mostly it's allowed to 'slide', the legal/ insurance/ CASA prosecution ramifications can get deuced tricky, expensive and uncertain. Depending.

Thought we may have got some words or pearls of wisdom from the more 'legal' members. Oh well, at least I now have a rough idea of what's what. Just not enough to pass along.

Just be careful kiddies, really and truly careful. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif

[AerobaticArcher]

Some advice to CPs, the young and the wise, write everything down in a diarised fashion. Dealings with CASA, Pilots, Engineers, etc. You may need it when 'it' hits the fan.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hi Mr K,

You bring out a very good and little known point.

An anecdotal story from an FLYING mag (USA) many years ago was about a guy who hired a Mooney to go for a trip with his son - or family anyway - and in the course of the flight were flying over the Rockies in Colorado or similar under an overcast sky......

And......'Suddenly' during the cruise, the speed slowed dramatically, and noises were heard...and snow was coming in thru the bottom of the door....and then the aircraft actually stopped.....on a snow drift!

Well, they were able to climb out OK, collect their thoughts, and all had a good laugh - HA HA HA - at how 'lucky' they had been ...until they realised where they were.
Apparently it took them a couple of days to climb down to 'civilisation' and report the event - days before mobile phones etc -

Now the crunch.....because the aircraft was completely inaccessible, and 'UP THERE'....with no hope of recovery...couldn't fly it out, and in the Spring when the snow begins to melt....so the owner simply gave the guy the BILL for the TOTAL Value of the aircraft....like the sign in the glass shop - "If you break it - its YOURS!!"

The article was about the perils of lack of 'adequate' insurance.....

Cheers:ok::ok:

You'all be careful out there....d'ya'hear??

[Creampuff]

Insurance is very simple.

Insurance is a contract that indemnifies the insured for specified liabilities or losses.

Beyond that you need to read and understand the specific contract of insurance and about a hundred years of decisions by courts about insurance and privity of contract. The alternative is to get advice from a lawyer with sufficient professional indemnity insurance to respond to liability in the event that his/her advice is wrong. But you’d need advice from a lawyer with sufficient professional indemnity insurance to respond to liability in the event that the first lawyer’s advice was negligent…

Take care out there.

[Kharon]

CP - Once again a thank you. It is indeed food for thought and probably, even a bit left over for next week. :D

"Oh what a tangled web we weave" (apologies to the bard) even when we are not trying to deceive".

I miss getting up at 0500, landing at 1400 and nothing to worry about 'til 0500 next am.

Perhaps liability should be a 'training module' all tied up in a pretty pink ribbon and ticks in boxes.

Scary stuff kids, worse than ice, thunderstorms, fuel critical situations and a mongrel CP who hates your sister (for all the obvious reasons). Aye 'tis a puzzle.

[blackhand]

Appears that you are speaking of both hull and liability insurance.
Hulll insurance is paid, in my experience, even for an "act of stupid".
I have heard that the liability insurance for carrying passengers and such is expensive and limitted in payout to victims.
"Wet and wild " during the 'arrival' phase, and when it's gone, the house has gone with it, eh? Exactly:(

[thorn bird]

Often wondered why it costs about the same to insure a $500 grand metro in Australia as a twenty million dollar jet in the USA.
I mean?? wouldnt be that the Insurance industries risk assessment people view an aircraft operating in Australia a greater risk than one operated in the USA??...and there I was believing CASA's Bu...sh..t that our safety record is much better than theirs...NA couldnt be, I mean just look at the volume of reg's in Australia compared with the USA...for goodness sake we MUST be safer...aint we??

[PA39]

Knew a bloke (CP/CFI) who hired an aircraft from another operator and pranged it.

The owner sued the CP/CFI for damages and over many years and much $$$ the hirer had to pay up!!

Make sure you are covered.....as mentioned in a previous post....in writing which is PERFECTLY clear to all parties.

You're all mates....until something stuffs up!

[Frank Arouet]

Like Paris Hilton's new breed of dog, (a Parasite), Insurance company's can be similarly labled. They work hand in hand with Regulatory Authorities who give carte blanche to their operations. (Water coming up instead of down to define flood etc, Hangar keepers liability insurance, and lock the doors when the aircraft is in and a work order processed).

Oh, and Blackhard, when you start correcting spelling, you should be aware of the difference between "their and there". E&OE.

Have a nice dais.:)

[blackhand]

FRANKly my dear, I don't give a damn

[Frank Arouet]

Paris Hilton, Insurance, or spelling? WOT?

"act of stupid".

That is a bit of worry in itself sunshine. Insurance does not pay for acts of negligence. Read the disclosure statements carefully.

Just because you are insured, doesn't mean they will pay you. I have had personal dealings with major Insurance entities who strung the matter out over 13 years and then settled on the top steps of the court.

I've had Department of Finance payments made to me on CASA's behalf, (because they refused to admit liability), 8 years after the initial complaint.

All these wankers work on the principle that the longer they string you out, the more chance you may get hit by a bus.

Call "Ghostbusters" before you call your insurance company.

[blackhand]

FRANKLY, don't give a damn about spelling.
Insurance is different, and infact do pay out Hull insurance in commercial ops for "acts of stupid", as explained to me by the assessor.

[Frank Arouet]

They saw you coming!

Let me get this right.

They won't pay you for natural disasters, atomic bombs, or acts of terrorism, but they will pay you for negligence and some stupid sod you alowed to go messing with your equipment?

You just confirmed what I thought of you in the first instance.

E&OE

[blackhand]

FRANKLY, you have gone off on a tangerine.:cool:(How's that for a malapropism)
Any aircraft accident that is caused by pilot error is, by definition, an "act of stupid".
You mentioned negligence not me.
Although that is a subjective term and the insurer may well be liable.
Hanger Indemnity is somewhat different, and does cover faulty work.
Although my insurer made noises about releasing private aircraft with On Condition piston engines.
They saw you coming!
As the Bishop said to the Pope

[Creampuff]

Frank

If I stuff up an in-flight fuel calculation, twice, and the aircraft is destroyed in the subsequent forced landing due to fuel exhaustion, are you saying the person who insured the hull won’t get paid?

Why on earth would anyone pay for hull insurance if hull insurance doesn’t respond to hull loss caused by mere negligence?

[Frank Arouet]

If I stuff up an in-flight fuel calculation, twice, and the aircraft is destroyed in the subsequent forced landing due to fuel exhaustion, are you saying the person who insured the hull won’t get paid?

Why on earth would anyone pay for hull insurance if hull insurance doesn’t respond to hull loss caused by mere negligence?

1) Yes, if you let that person use your hull, and he is proved to be the quintessential idiot you become the "mere idiot in their eyes".

2) Ask the thousands of Brisbane home owners who didn't get paid after the floods. They listened to "good advice".

3) Why would anybody pay for a cover that is questionable?

Well that is probably beyond the average owner but probably because someone "sold" him/her the policy, or it was a mandated included requirement of a public liability risk/ or a CASA imposed commercial impost.

If you happen to be a Lawyer you may stand a chance. That's unless CASA say the events leading up to that accident were caused, "in their opinion", by negligence. Then sunshine, unless you are a protected species, you are a "dead man walking".

[Creampuff]

It all depends on what the policy of insurance says and means.

Unfortunately, very few people seek advice from independent experts on what a policy of insurance says and means.

But it's all for a good cause: all those nice insurance companies wouldn't make billions in virtually risk-free policies if those hated lawyers made millions in taking on the risk of advising on what policies actually mean. :ok:

[blackhand]

That's unless CASA say the events leading up to that accident were caused, "in their opinion", by negligence. Then sunshine, unless you are a protected species, you are a "dead man walking". Not in my experience. The assessor I deal with doesn't have to wait for CASA, ATSB or any other report. He may need to know state of serviceability of engines etc, but has usually made a decision to pay out in a day. He told me that his job is to ensure that the damaged machine is the one that is on the policy.
I remember when volcanic action destroyed some machines in Rabaul, the insurers paid up within about 6 weeks.