Rent plane from another private pilot?

GEG wrote:

If he owns a plane, can I rent from him?
Or is that considered "commercial" operations?


It's all in the insurance. If you're really renting from him (i.e.
paying x $s per hour) the insurance company will likely want to sell
him a commercial policy, rather than the business/pleasure policy he
has now. Once they mention the price, that'll probably kill the deal.


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

Ask to be added to your friends insurance as a named insured and pay the
difference in the premium.

jsmith wrote:
Ask to be added to your friends insurance as a named insured and pay the
difference in the premium.

You can do that, but if the insurance company finds out he's actually
renting the plane from the owner, they probably wouldn't go for it on a
business/pleasure policy.

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

I would definitely give AOPA a call because, by RENTING the plane, the
owner has just likely turned into a business. By RENTING the plane, the
owner will now have to comply with the regs that FBO's use, including
100 hr inspections. This can be considered a grey area, but the call to
AOPA is free (so why not?). The (potential) cost of NOT calling AOPA is
very high for all involved.

Chris


John Galban wrote:

jsmith wrote:

Ask to be added to your friends insurance as a named insured and pay the
difference in the premium.


You can do that, but if the insurance company finds out he's actually
renting the plane from the owner, they probably wouldn't go for it on a
business/pleasure policy.

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

John Galban wrote:

You can do that, but if the insurance company finds out he's actually
renting the plane from the owner, they probably wouldn't go for it on a
business/pleasure policy.

what about buying a share? (would it have to be 50% or could the
friend get away with selling a smaller share?)

--Sylvain (just curious)

Sylvain wrote:


what about buying a share? (would it have to be 50% or could the
friend get away with selling a smaller share?)

Can't comment about whether it would have to be 50% or not, but if
both of them were co-owners, then they could get away with a standard
business/pleasure policy. The main problem the OP had was that he
specifically said he wanted to rent the plane. Rental immediately
sends the policy cost skyrocketing.

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

My policy specifically says that I cannot rent to named pilots. I guess
they consider "renting" to be commercial. However, more specific to the
original poster, he can buy his own fuel and even help out when it
comes time for maintenance. I think the word "renting" set off some
alarms within the newsgroup. However, if you actually talked to the
agent about specifically waht you want to do, I'd be it wouldn't really
be considered "renting".

Also, as a side note, do **not** be mis-lead by talks of "open pilot
clauses". All policies appear to prevent coverage when pilots flying
meet the open pilot requirements but have regular access to the plane.
Open pilot is really just for an occasional once-in-awhile thing. My
agent says that most insurance companies will not consider someone to
be "casual use" if they have their own keys. Going by your friends
house and gettnig the keys each time is probably the only way to be
considered "casual".

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Also, as a side note, do **not** be mis-lead by talks of "open pilot
clauses". All policies appear to prevent coverage when pilots flying
meet the open pilot requirements but have regular access to the plane.
Open pilot is really just for an occasional once-in-awhile thing. My
agent says that most insurance companies will not consider someone to
be "casual use" if they have their own keys. Going by your friends
house and gettnig the keys each time is probably the only way to be
considered "casual".

Another misconception about "open pilot" coverage is that the "open
pilot" is covered. That's not generally the case. Under most open
pilot clauses, the owner is covered for damage and liablility caused by
the open pilot, but the pilot himself is on his own. If you fly an
aircraft under an open pilot clause, you'd better have a policy that
covers you.

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

I'm not sure what "generally" means but subrigation is very much over
reported.

Robert M. Gary wrote:
I'm not sure what "generally" means but subrigation is very much over
reported.

"Generally" means in every insurance contract I've had over the last
15 yrs. with most of the available underwriters. I can't speak for
every underwriter or individual policy. You have to read your own to
be sure.

I was not referring to subrogation. I was referring to the fact
that the insurance on the plane covers the owner for damage and
liablility caused by the open pilot. It does not cover the open pilot.

A quick example would be that you borrow your friend's plane under
the open pilot clause and crash it into a house. The homeowner sues
you (the open pilot) and the owner of the airplane. The insurance
company will cover the pilot and pay out, or defend him if necessary.
You (the open pilot) are on your own.

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