Rent plane from another private pilot?

In article ,
GEG wrote:

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

It's a commercial operation (e.g., 100hr inspections required).
But, yes you can rent from him (subject to insurance restrictions).
My Avemco policy used to specifically allow me to rent to up to 3
named pilots. I don't know if they still offer that since I no longer
have the named pilots on my policy.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

I rented mine to a friend for a month. According to the AOPA Q&A folks
I talked to, no, the FAA does not consider it a commercial operation
becuase your buddy isn't "holding out" ie. advertising and offering to
rent it to anybody. It's considered just a deal between two buddies.

I had an insurance policy under AOPA that would allow such a thing, but
as posted here, it really depends upon who insures it. The policy
called it "limited rental," which again means that they recognized money
was changing hands but that this wasn't a comercial operation. It added
10% on to my insurance premiums which my friend covered as part of the deal.

On other thing. My insurance does have an "open pilot clause" and also
lets me add two other higher time pilots at no cost as also mentioned in
the posts. However, my insurance won't let people taking advantage of
these items pay for anything but fuel and oil. The "limited rental"
add-on is required for me to charge a maintenance fee.

Also, I've known of pilots who got around this insurance problem by
making a buddy a $1 owner of the plane. If you are listed as an owner,
you can fork in whatever amount of money you want in airplane upkeep
without any questions from the insurance folks.

Helen

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

"T o d d P a t t i s t" wrote in message
...
I've been through this before. First, find out if your
buddy can get an "open pilot" clause. He'll be covered for
anyone who meets the experience requirements of that clause.
They are getting harder to get, so if he doesn't have open
pilot, he can get your name put on his policy.

As you don't yet have your licence, it's fair to assume you're
inexperienced. Unless your friend wants to pay vast amounts for "any pilot"
insurance, it's definitely going to be cheaper to have you as a "named
pilot" on the policy.

As a guide, a friend of mine looked into getting an "any pilot" clause in
his insurance, and the only way to keep the cost sensible was to have a
minimum experience requirement of 200 hours.

D.

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
GEG wrote:


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


It's a commercial operation (e.g., 100hr inspections required).

No, it's not, and 100 hour inspections are not required.

But, yes you can rent from him (subject to insurance restrictions).
My Avemco policy used to specifically allow me to rent to up to 3
named pilots. I don't know if they still offer that since I no longer
have the named pilots on my policy.

I've been in a situation where I've let someone else use my
plane for several weeks. I had them added to the policy
as another named insured. This would be the first place
to start and he should ask his insurance company.


"GEG" wrote in message
...
I'm about 15 flight hours along in flight training.
My buddy is about 30 hours along and rounding the bend.

He's going to buy a plane - just part of his overall goal.

So here's a question:

(Let's assume I get a my PPL and checkout in the plane
and everything is cool .. .)

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

I would certainly want to get my own insurance.
And I'm sure he'd want to be covered appropriately.

Can anyone help on that matter?
Should we talk to AOPA?

Thanks!

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)

John Galban wrote:
The insurance
company will cover the pilot and pay out, or defend him if necessary.
You (the open pilot) are on your own.

Sorry, that should have read "the insurance company will cover the
owner...

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

: 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.

Another example, as I understand it, would be suppose you borrow the plane
under the open pilot clause and do something horribly stupid... taxi into a light pole
for instance. The insurance company will cover the aircraft and owner, but may go
after you for the damage. At least that's what I was told.... basically means
"open-pilot clause" isn't a good way to fly a plane.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

In article 1118756796.487014@sj-nntpcache-3, Dave Butler wrote:

It's a commercial operation (e.g., 100hr inspections required).

No, it's not, and 100 hour inspections are not required.

oops. my mistake. 100 hour inspections are not necessarily required.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule