Teaching airworthiness

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...

Here is a quote from my insurance policy:

"This policy does not apply:
...
2) To any Insured while the aircraft is in flight
...
(c) if the Airworthiness Certificate of the aircraft is
not in full force and effect;
(d) If the aircraft has not been subjected to appropriate
airworthiness inspection(s) as required under current
applicable Federal Aviation Regulations for the operations
involved."

As Roger said, it's entirely possible (and maybe even likely) that, since
the aircraft was not airworthy, the insurance policy would not be in force.

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"

That said, while the language could be interpreted that way, when
I've posed the question to my brokers, they've interpreted it to mean
that you have to have a valid airworthiness cert. The reference to
appropriate airworthiness inspections refers to the annual or 100 hr.
inspections required by the FAA to keep the airworthiness certificate
valid.

Anyone ever heard of coverage being denied because someone didn't
perform a proper preflight inspection? I know of at least two cases
where the opposite is true.

Generally speaking, you have to be pretty clearly outside the bounds
of your policy in order for the underwriter to deny coverage. They
know that arbitrarily denying coverage reduces the value of a policy
in the eyes of the aircraft owner.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

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