Insurance

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
. ..
If you cause damage to his airplane, his insurance will cover his costs and
then come after you.

Which is why I only rent cheap, elderly airplanes, even though my FBO has a
stable of new G1000 172s. I continually wonder why everybody else flies them,
because the last time I checked (just a few weeks ago) AOPA would not even quote
you on enough renter's insurance to cover one.

What part of the AOPA renter's insurance exempts G1000 aircraft?

-Robert

Which is why I only rent cheap, elderly airplanes, even though my FBO has a
stable of new G1000 172s. I continually wonder why everybody else flies them,
because the last time I checked (just a few weeks ago) AOPA would not even quote
you on enough renter's insurance to cover one.

What part of the AOPA renter's insurance exempts G1000 aircraft?

The fact that it tops out at $150,000 or something along those lines.
The G1000 equipped aircraft have hull values in excess of that.

The fact that it tops out at $150,000 or something along those lines.
The G1000 equipped aircraft have hull values in excess of that.

Well, it would pay =up=to= the policy limit. Most of the time, damage
to the airplane is a lot less. A gear up for example may be $10-20K.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
m...
The fact that it tops out at $150,000 or something along those lines.
The G1000 equipped aircraft have hull values in excess of that.

Well, it would pay =up=to= the policy limit. Most of the time, damage to the
airplane is a lot less. A gear up for example may be $10-20K.

"You pays your money and you takes your chances." But having insurance
that is only a fraction of the hull value of the plane I am renting is not a bet
I am willing to make at this stage of my life.

Depending on your state's laws, some people are effectively "judgment
proof" because no insurance company would waste tens of thousands just to win an
uncollectible "empty judgment" against someone with no attachable assets. In
that case, minimum (or no) renter's insurance may be just fine for you.

Vaughn