I'm out of this debate, I smell a troll . Aluckyguess - go and lookup what
subjugation actually means, and then come back asking sensible, well
informed questions. The insurance company underwriting the FBO's plane WILL
come after you in most cases.

- Barney

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...

"Barney Rubble" wrote in message
...
Do you really think the insurance co give a flying sh1t about "bad word
of mouth"? Your'e making a mistake in believing the insurance company
have any morals or scruples. I know of someone who did not have renters
insurance, landed short, took out some runwany end identifier lights,
prop strike, engine teardown and new landing gear. The costs were well
north of $40K, and they came after that person for every penny. Had to
sell car and house to pay it. He thought he was insured. To the OP, look
at AOPA. I think I pay about $200 PA, for the basic deal.

So no one had any insurance on the plane? Something doesnt sound right.
The owner of the plane has some liabiltiy. Again it sounds like this guy
needed a good lawyer.
Sounds like the FBO didnt pay their policy they had no money and went
after the pilot.
- Barney

"TaxSrv" wrote in message
...
"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
Has that ever happened in the case where an uninsured renter pilot
with no money (orig poster) will be sued?

Being low on cash is not the same as having zero assets or zero net
worth
and no anticipated future cashflow source.

Agree there, but if someone does $5,000 damage to an airframe, that
amount won't go far at all to pursue it to see if collection is even
practically possible, much less establish the facts of the case. Can
you answer my question about the ins co's business sense, for a mere
$5K minus costs, spreading such ill will in the pilot community over
the matter?

Fred F.