Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

Fly Bpl - Is It The Beginning Of The End???

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

Fly Bpl - Is It The Beginning Of The End???

Old 7th Oct 2013, 12:55
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ Spanner........this is a long, complex and sorry saga.
Isuggest reading the whole thread, note the names of the protaganists and companies involved and then feed them into the "search" function...


Then, next month.....
cockney steve is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2013, 17:52
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
G Mc

Thank you for the explanation and it will be interesting to see how your business develops.

Cockney Steve

Yes, I take your point - I've written a bit of this Thread (some reasonable, some frivolous) and I'm aware of many of the issues raised.

I had hoped there might be a synopsis explaining the history but, as you state, 'this is a long, complex and sorry saga'!

I've had involvement with some of the protagonists at Blackpool over the years - BB mainly bad, RM mainly good and some bad (could have been a lot worse if the rumours on this site are true regarding aircraft serviceability) and CS none at all (although his name rings a bell from the dim and distant past?!).

Judging by his age (36) G Mc seems to be a relatively 'new kid on the block' so I hope the mould has been broken?

Never a dull moment at Blackpool though!!!

Had my first pleasure flight there in the 50s in a Dragon Rapide and seem to have been involved off and on over the years ever since.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2013, 15:32
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I note from the hangar 8 website, in common with FlyBpl, that the Pilot Flying Order Book states under Paragragh 1.7:

'It is the individual responsibility of pilots to ensure that adequate insurance is carried and that all such policy certificates are valid and current. Details of the precise terms of the insurance cover under which Company aircraft are operated may be supplied on request. Pilots are reminded that, in line with most aircraft insurance policies, personal injury cover is only extended to third parties and passengers [Hanger 8's Public Liability Insurance]. Pilots shall make their own arrangements for personal accident insurance.'

So be careful - you will most likely find yourself liable in the event of an accident - whether you're liable in any event needs to be clarified.

George McGuire - could you cast some light on the insurance liability of pilots/club members as you see it?

You have been helpful so far with information relating to your new venture.

Last edited by SpannerInTheWerks; 9th Oct 2013 at 15:37.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2013, 16:06
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Manchester
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bit confused by this as it doesn't look as onerous as you seem to want to make out but I may be missing something.

The PL insurance cover extends to include third parties - ie passengers and third parties. It doesn't extend to include the pilot for Personal Accident.

To me this says if you hit a third party, something drops off or you have an accident and injure a passenger then the insurance will cover the legal liability to the third party should they make a claim. What it won't cover is the injury, hospitalisation etc of the pilot.

If you review the risks of such a policy i would assume that claims from pilots for injury are the highest risk, an aeroplane will always have a pilot i presume. The passangers LIabilty is next on the list but there won't always be passangers and thirdly hitting TP's would be low on the risk profile so it doesn't seem odd that insurers would limit or exlude Pilot injury.

The pilot could, if proven that the aircraft was faulty beyond the pre-flight inspection, ie faulty wing strut etc claim against the flying club, afterall the club can't completley avoid its legal liability. The flying club could then subrogate this against the engineering firm who carried out the inspection for example.

It doesn't say that the pilot is liable for the cost of the aeroplane in the event of an accident as appears to be suggested in earlier posts.

I may be wrong and am happy to be corrected.
MrYeti is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2013, 17:47
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr Yeti

What it won't cover is the injury, hospitalisation etc of the pilot
- and any damage to the aircraft and/or any consequential loss suffered by a passenger or third party.

Yes, in my mind there is some confusion.

I always believed when flying in a club/school environment, as a club member, the insurance provided by the club/school was the equivalent of a 'fully comprehensive' car insurance policy.

When you took passengers (non-club members) flying they became temporary members (signed a 'blood chit') which effectively gave them the benefits of the insurance cover provided for the member pilot.

It seems the insurance which is actually available is 'third party only' - with the passenger not being a club/school member and treated as if they were a member of the public under a company's Public Liability Insurance.

The hapless pilot does not seem to be covered at all? Not being a 'third party' and not having cover as a consequence of any vicarious liability of the club - I wonder where instructors fit into this, particularly if they're 'self-employed'?

So, the wording of the Pilot Flying Order Book does seem to reflect this state of affairs where the pilot is liable for any loss suffered as a consequence of him hiring and operating the aircraft whether or not it could be deemed to be 'pilot error' in the event of an incident or accident - liable in any event irrespective of whether it was caused by the negligence of the pilot.

Last edited by SpannerInTheWerks; 9th Oct 2013 at 18:12.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 05:07
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The race to the bottom in terms of absolute hourly cost does have implications across the board in terms of aircraft, and insurance etc etc !

There is a minimum standard which all those who train, hire, fly should insist on and be prepared to pay for. This is a general observation not aimed at anyone in particular but useful for those who may be new to the GA game to be aware of !
asitwas is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 08:38
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The North
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SpannerInTheWerks,

Don't take this the wrong way but i think you need to pick a couple of books up and start reading.

There is a lot of i "believes" and "seems" in your posts. Why not look at the aircraft document book, see who the insurers are and call them for a chat to discuss your exposure? I am sure they would be more than happy to cover the risk for you passengers and aircraft as a separate policy. You would be surprised how cheap it is!! Most clubs are very similar to what you have outlined.
Impressive_Wingspan is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 11:23
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Impressive_Wingspan

No offensive taken in any way.

Why not look at the aircraft document book, see who the insurers are and call them for a chat to discuss your exposure?
I'm not sure any insurer would disclose information unless you were a member of a club/school - as this would be data protected information.

'Believes' and 'seems' because I don't have access to any information other than that published in the public domain. Without complete knowledge it is difficult to draw a definite conclusion - hence the uncertaintly surrounding my comments.

Most clubs are very similar to what you have outlined.
Yes, I'm beginning to realise that you're probably right and the situation that prevailed years ago when I started flying is very different to the one today.

I wonder how many pilots know the true nature of the insurance in place when the hire a club aircraft and what their actual liability might be?

Imagine writing off an average twin, injuring four passengers and causing damage to 'third party' property at the scene of the incident - £millions potentially in damages.

Below is an extract of the Terms and Conditions relating to the delivery of flight training, as published on the web by one of the country's private/commercial flight training organisations:

6.13 [The Company] and the Student acknowledge and agree that there are inherent risks and dangers associated with the operation of aircraft and, further, that many of these risks and dangers continue to arise, despite the exercise of reasonable care by the parties. The Student hereby acknowledges that it assumes all risks, both known and unknown, associated with or related to the operation of aircraft. [The Company] shall not be liable for any liability arising out of the Course, save where such liability arises from the neglect or wilful act or default of [The Company], or its employees, agents or sub-contractors, in which case, [The Company]’s liability shall be limited to the smallest of: the actual amount of any loss or damage suffered by the Student; and £500,000. However, nothing in this agreement shall exclude any liability of [The Company] for death or personal injury resulting from its own negligence or that of its employees, agents or sub-contractors. THE STUDENT’S ATTENTION IS DRAWN SPECIFICALLY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CLAUSE 6.13.

6.14 The Student shall indemnify [The Company] against any loss or damage which is related to any breach by the Student of this agreement or any act or omission by the Student in relation to the Course, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including professional fees, incurred in, and [The Company]'s reasonable charges for, dealing with the breach and its consequences. This clause shall not apply to any loss or damage covered by any separate agreement between the Student and [The Company] pursuant to which the Student is not liable for such loss or damage.
I've omitted the Flight School's name for obvious reasons and substituted 'The Company'. My italics, but the Flying School's bold print. The implications are obvious - no 'believes' or 'seems' here!!!

Next time you go flying (or instructing) consider the potential monetary liability that could arise - and for which you may be liable - out of an accident or incident irrespective of whether it's your fault or not?!

Some may consider RM tactless in his alleged approach for the recover of damages from the pilot of the Cherokee which crashed at Caernarvon.

But this is a commercial World with little place for sentiment. It may be that RM was legally quite justified in his pursuit of damages from the pilot in connection with that accident?

... and that any other flying training organisation would be advised by their lawyers and insurers to do the same.

Last edited by SpannerInTheWerks; 10th Oct 2013 at 11:43.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 11:52
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I find it difficult to believe that anybody would knowingly rent an aircraft with third party only insurance. I am also surprised that the CAA permit training under these circumstances.

It is suggested on here that this may be common practice. It certainly is not where I come from. Perhaps we should name and shame organisations who rent under these circumstances.

D.O.
dont overfil is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 12:19
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I find it difficult to believe that anybody would knowingly rent an aircraft with third party only insurance. I am also surprised that the CAA permit training under these circumstances.
I completely agree! If FTOs are effectively offering lessons and renting out aircraft with, what is in effect, third party only insurance, then this is plain wrong.

Even if a student was made fully aware what was happening in return for cheap rates, you have to question the ethics of doing such a thing and whether the student fully understand the consequences. Flying is an expensive game and saving £10 or £20 p/h will draw attention and encourage take up.

Certainly hiding the insurance SCAM in the small print is not on, I doubt anyone is actually told they are hiring 3rd party insurance only!
Lost in Cloud is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 13:18
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Certainly hiding the insurance SCAM in the small print is not on, I doubt anyone is actually told they are hiring 3rd party insurance only!
Yes, I wondered a few years ago why flying clubs and schools never insisted on 'blood chits' anymore.

The reason is obvious now I've thought about it and looked into the implications in more detail.

This Thread has been useful in that regard if no other.

You're not covered because you accept full liability for ALL losses, save that of negligence by the flying school and it's 'servants and agents'.

Although I deal with insurance and the law in the course of my business and profession, I'm not an expert in the sense that I know the precise common law situation and whether any precedents have been set recently in this regard (in other words are the terms and conditions legal in all respects?).

I can only imagine that they are because the case I highlighted above has the hallmark of a professionally drafted set of terms and conditions - with advice (no doubt) being taken from the legal and insurance professions?

So the answer is clear - fly and/or instruct at your peril because whether you take 'reasonable care' or are 'negligent' you APPEAR to be liable in any event!

WIVES love this sort of thing - NOT!!!

When you go home tonight tell her that not only should she worry about you aviating for a hobby in the first place - with all its perceived risks - but that if you are ever killed in a light aeroplane accident, in the weeks after she buries you, and before she has time to grieve, she will probably have her house, car and possessions taken away as well in the ensuring insurance claim!!!

Just the thing to put a right old spanner in the works!

Last edited by SpannerInTheWerks; 10th Oct 2013 at 13:39.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 17:42
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Scenario:

Instructor, taxiing aircraft to apron, suffers brake failure.

In spite of his best efforts he is unable to avoid a collision with a parked aircraft owned by a third party.

The student is acting as PUT and the instructor, as P1, is in command of the aircraft.

There is no negligence on the part of the instructor.

According the Terms and Conditions stated above:

'The Student hereby acknowledges that it assumes all risks, both known and unknown, associated with or related to the operation of aircraft.'

and,

'[The Company] shall not be liable for any liability arising out of the Course, save where such liability arises from the neglect or wilful act or default of [The Company], or its employees, agents or sub-contractors …'

The instructor is an employee and was not guilty of any 'neglect or wilful act or default …'

The student is apparently liable for all losses arising out of the incident.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 18:23
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Spanner in the works
Surely It's similar to car hire I rented a car fully insured all I had to do in case of accident was to pay the excess of 1500, I could if I wanted take extra insurance out that was my choice

I insure my helicopters 3 rd party because it's cheaper ,why shouldn't other people be allowed to do same especially if it made a good enough saving on training and SFH you have already said it was in the terms and conditions

Your venom against the owners of flybpl maybe clouding your judgement
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2013, 19:20
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With car insurance, insurance in place for third party claims are a requirement of the law.
So you can either have 'comprehensive' or '3rd party'
The main difference is that the costs of repairing/replacing your car are included in comprehensive (plus other sundry stuff).
Regardless of what policy you have you are always covered against claims made against you for damage to other vehicles and other stuff you might hit including people by your actions.

It appears here and from the extract provided above that there is no third party insurance being offered by the club to the pilot hiring and if said pilot is under instruction then the club is deliberately transfering all its risks onto the pilot under instruction - who is not being insured at all - in effect the "excess" is unlimited.

This might be against the unfair contracts acts assuming this transaction is regarded as a consumer related one and not a business to business one as well as some CAA rules.

So no, quite different in my opinion - as a layman not legally trained.
dsc810 is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2013, 07:58
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Your venom against the owners of flybpl maybe clouding your judgement
Not at all.

The extract quoted above was from the Terms and Conditions of a major commercial flight training organisation, not FlyBpl.

In fact I stated that:

It may be that RM was legally quite justified in his pursuit of damages from the pilot in connection with that accident?
Having carried out further research on the Web it seems many flying training organisations put the risk on the student/private pilot - and state quite clearly this is the case.

Private pilots hiring club aircraft are clearly not adequately covered against potential claims if things go wrong and it is a fact that there is an insurance industry out there which will provide the kind or insurance necessary if so required.

I think the point is few pilots ever consider their liability in this respect.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2013, 08:24
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Manchester
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr Yeti


Quote:
What it won't cover is the injury, hospitalisation etc of the pilot
- and any damage to the aircraft and/or any consequential loss suffered by a passenger or third party.
Mr Werks,

Not sure how you make this link. Personal Accident in terms of commerical insurance covers core benefit with sums for loss of sight, teporary disablement/loss of limb, permenent disablement/loss of limb, hospitalisation etc. It doesn't include any material damage covers or indeed third party cover.

I am trying to get hold of an aviation policy wording to help clarify this discussion as i feel it may be getting a little OTT.
MrYeti is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2013, 19:50
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: the dark side
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Two of the impounded FlyBpl PA28s were released today to move into the ex- Flight Academy hangar. (One of them registered to RM).
horatio_b is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2013, 14:33
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Philippines
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
he sent the demand for £35000 5 days after the accident whilst the Pilot was still in intensive care.
i feel it may be getting a little OTT
I doubt the pilot involved in the accident would consider the discussion about insurance (or lack of it) as being 'OTT'.
SpannerInTheWerks is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2013, 21:20
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Spanner
Did the pilot agree to flying with 3rd party insurance only or did he think it was fully comp ?
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 13:56
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This thread has drifted widely from its subject, however all license holders are required to pass Air Law and as always ignorance is no excuse.
Mandatory Insurance Requirements | Aircraft Register | Operations and Safety
Note it covers
the minimum levels of insurance required by aircraft operators and air carriers in respect of third party cover, passenger cover and cover for risks of war and terrorism
not hull damage.

Also be aware that it is your neck on the block if you fly in breach of the law. You are absolutely 100% entitled to ask for evidence of insurance from the club and if it is not forthcoming or you are not satisfied you should go elsewhere.

Last edited by Mike Cross; 14th Oct 2013 at 13:57.
Mike Cross is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.