John Galban wrote:

I've seen that clause. It's a far cry from Roger's original
statement :

"there is a clause in most policies
giving them the option of not paying if the plane isn't flown in
accordance
with regulations"

Anyone ever heard of coverage being denied because someone didn't
perform a proper preflight inspection?

I know of one case in which the company refused to pay out because the pilot
descended below minimums during an IFR approach. Their argument was that, if
he had followed the regs, he wouldn't have crashed. This case is sometimes
mentioned in Wings seminars sponsored by the Allentown FSDO. It was still under
litigation when I heard of it in the late 90s.

George Patterson
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that cannot
be learned any other way. Samuel Clemens