Erik,

I'm really intrigued that at one time there was specific language
that nullified aviation insurance coverage if you weren't operating
in compliance with the FARs. If you could find the exact phrase they
used, I'd love to see it.

Agreed - insurance companies will do everything they can to avoid a
payout, and it's smart to keep that in mind. Probably it would also
be wise to note that most (all?) US states have an insurance department
or agency. There's a very good reason for this - 100 years ago
there wasn't much difference between an insurance company and a
privateer.

The reason I gave my insurance company name and address was to make an
ironic point, and it clearly failed. You see, the company was formed in
Pittsburgh, PA, while the address is in New York. Furthermore, I live
in Pennsylvania. Oh, well...

I understand your mission to persuade/coerce people to play by the
rules. My own incentive to stay legal is simple - if it weren't for
bad luck I wouldn't have any luck at all. Thus any rule I try to bend
will bite me in the butt. Instant rule enforcement!

-John

Papa3 wrote:

John,

Absolutely correct. I was operating from memory without the benefit
of having my SSA Group Policy in front of me. I had a policy in the
past which specifically had verbiage to the effect that the aircraft
must be "operated in compliance with all applicable federal regulations
under CFR parts..." I'll see if I can dig that one up.

A few comments related to your post.

- As you note, the SSA Group Policy does in fact specify pilot and
aircraft airworthiness qualifications. There is an endorsement which
modifies the section you cited to include Experimental Airworthiness.
- In practice, the insurer can and will use any limitations to their
benefit if there is a major claim. Everyone needs to remember that
the insurer's goal is to avoid paying claims. So, even if
airworthiness (for example) is not the cause of an accident, that can
be used to void coverage (see the case history in Yodice's article).
I have several more examples of this available.
- As far as all of the different company names and addresses on your
policy, that has to do with the fact that insurance is regulated by the
states. Insurers typically acquire or establish entities in a given
state in order to meet licensing requirements. In our case (SSA Group
Policy) it all rolls back to AIG.

I guess my bigger mission was to point out that there is a significant
personal, financial risk involved in operating at the boundaries of
what is legal. Since the altruistic approach of looking out for our
fellow sportsmen doesn't always work, I hoped that the idea of looking
out for one's selfish interests might be additional incentive to play
by the rules.