insurance: vote with your $

How many of you would dare to own a new a/c without having a full hull
value coverage?

After being hit with a $15K premium with a $10K deductable, I have
decided to vote with my hard earned cash against the outrage and to only
get the mandatory liability and not-in-motion. After all, my personal
experience with car insurance is that money-wise, it does not make sense
over any 10yr period.

If we get out of mentality 'everybody does it, so should I', maybe the
insurance industry will wake up (again) to a sharp drop in revenue and
stop the rip-off. In the meanwhile many of us would save some money.
Comments?

The insurance industry is not making a lot of money even at the new higher
rates, so don't expect them to decline soon. Personally I only carry
liability because I think that the hull coverage I have been offered is not
a good deal. Insurance pricing is a combination of premiums and how much
money the insurance company can make by investing those premiums before
there is a claim. Obviously the expected rate of return on those
investments is much lower than it was three years ago.

What plane are you trying to insure and what are your pilot qualifications?

Mike
MU-2


"misha" wrote in message
...
How many of you would dare to own a new a/c without having a full hull
value coverage?

After being hit with a $15K premium with a $10K deductable, I have
decided to vote with my hard earned cash against the outrage and to only
get the mandatory liability and not-in-motion. After all, my personal
experience with car insurance is that money-wise, it does not make sense
over any 10yr period.

If we get out of mentality 'everybody does it, so should I', maybe the
insurance industry will wake up (again) to a sharp drop in revenue and
stop the rip-off. In the meanwhile many of us would save some money.
Comments?

"misha" wrote in message ...
How many of you would dare to own a new a/c without having a full hull
value coverage?

I hope the discussion is coverage vs. not coverage, and not full value versus
not full value. If you're going to insure it, not insuring it for the full value is a
bad idea.


After being hit with a $15K premium with a $10K deductable

On what value hull or what value aircraft? I'm only paying $1500 and have no
deductable.

After all, my personal
experience with car insurance is that money-wise, it does not make sense
over any 10yr period.

If you're talking collision, I might be inclined to agree. The question is can
you afford the loss. On cars it's common for many to drop the collision (hull)
coverage once the value of the car drops (and the loan is paid off).

If we get out of mentality 'everybody does it, so should I', maybe the
insurance industry will wake up (again) to a sharp drop in revenue and
stop the rip-off. In the meanwhile many of us would save some money.

We saw a steep jump in our premium last year but it dropped back down to
what it's been all the prior years this year.

I hope the discussion is coverage vs. not coverage, and not full value versus
not full value.

Right.

On what value hull or what value aircraft? I'm only paying $1500 and have no
deductable.

See prev. post.

If you're talking collision, I might be inclined to agree. The question is can
you afford the loss.

I though that chances of survival are pretty slim in a total loss event
in flight - I hope to make it to Eden and not to be too worried about
the money part. Hull insurance on the ground (not in motion) is cheap,
and we're not talking about it.

I guess that tells you all you need to know about what the insurance
companies think about low time pilots in plastic planes.

What does it have to do with plastic?

In any case - I am not asking why the premium is high. The question is
whether it makes sense. I assume that experience multiplied by cost is a
constant? Are you insured *primarily* because
-it saves you money,
-it gives you good night sleep
-it is what everybody does?

If it's not the first two, why would van experienced pilot pay his$2K/yr
if the risk in the air (unlike on the road) is largly under his/her control?

"misha" wrote in message ...

If you're talking collision, I might be inclined to agree. The question is can
you afford the loss.

I though that chances of survival are pretty slim in a total loss event
in flight - I hope to make it to Eden and not to be too worried about
the money part.

You can do a lot of damage to the aircraft and still survive. If you have a loan
secured by the aircraft, they will almost certianly want insurance to protect
their interests by the way.

"misha" wrote in message ...
I guess that tells you all you need to know about what the insurance
companies think about low time pilots in plastic planes.

What does it have to do with plastic?

Plastic is very expensive to repair. HP aircraft are more prone to accidents
by low time pilots.

If it's not the first two, why would van experienced pilot pay his$2K/yr
if the risk in the air (unlike on the road) is largly under his/her control?

Who's in control is immaterial to the insurance company. It's the probability
of loss multiplied by the amount likely to be paid out. My airplane and auto
insurnace are about the same. I have $500 deductible on the car and zero
on the airplane (nice traditional metal).

misha writes:

In any case - I am not asking why the premium is high. The question is
whether it makes sense. I assume that experience multiplied by cost is
a constant? Are you insured *primarily* because
-it saves you money,
-it gives you good night sleep
-it is what everybody does?

Spread out over everything, insurance is more expensive than replacing
things yourself. You're paying the extra money to minimize the risk
of extraordinary expenses, like the loss of house or car, not of
routine expenses. So ask yourself, if your plane got hit by an
unexpected blast of wind in the flare and caught a wing, would
replacing it be a significant expense for you? If so, insure; if not,
don't.

If I were a retired guy keeping a J3 Cub on my hobby farm (with
perhaps a couple of others in the barn for parts), I probably wouldn't
buy hull insurance, any more than I buy cancellation insurance for my
commercial plane tickets.


All the best,


David

--
David Megginson, , http://www.megginson.com/

You're not Ben Jackson the ex insurance agent are you?
H.
N502TB

"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:fDmPa.29828$Ph3.2440@sccrnsc04...
In article , misha
wrote:
What plane are you trying to insure and what are your pilot
qualifications?

SR20, I'm a new PPL with 90hr total experience.

If you'd flown for another 10 hours before insuring the SR20 I bet the
rates would be significantly better (maybe not enough to convince you
to get it...).

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Call the insurance company and say you made a mistake in your addition
and you really have 110 hours.

Ben Jackson wrote:
In article , misha wrote:

What plane are you trying to insure and what are your pilot qualifications?

SR20, I'm a new PPL with 90hr total experience.


If you'd flown for another 10 hours before insuring the SR20 I bet the
rates would be significantly better (maybe not enough to convince you
to get it...).