Contest Insurance Grumblings

OK, just had to post: Is anyone else here really annoyed at the SSA's
insurance requirement "changes" for this year?

I had an unpleasant experience with Costello when I bought my first
sailplane (2007). I was very satisfied with my move to Avemco for the
last 4 years. They've provided me with comparable rates & coverage,
flexible payment plans, and helpful, friendly staff. Unfortunately,
they cannot comply with the revised/clarified requirements for soaring
contest liability insurance.

In fact, it seems that only one carrier out there words their policy
in a way that the SSA approves of: Costello.

I know that Costello has a positive relationship with the SSA and
witnessed the nice check they handed over to the SSA at the Reno
convention. But setting up a de-facto monopoly just rubs me the wrong
way... Shouldn't private companies be competing to do business with
us, as a group of several-hundred customers (who are likely to have
good income and be a relatively low risk of defaulting on our
payments)?

The "disputed" issue is a little bit of extra coverage for bystanders
(or other pilots in a midair). Does that actually help defuse any
ridiculous litigation or civil suits or financial penalties, in the
wake of an accident? It certainly doesn't provide any special
indemnification for the SSA, so I highly doubt it has a practical
benefit in a legal/liability situation. Seems to me that the primary
benefit of this insurance requirement is that it guarantees Costello a
certain volume of business each year.

Annoyed that I'm being forced to change carriers,

--Noel

On Apr 3, 1:53*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
OK, just had to post: *Is anyone else here really annoyed at the SSA's
insurance requirement "changes" for this year?

I had an unpleasant experience with Costello when I bought my first
sailplane (2007). *I was very satisfied with my move to Avemco for the
last 4 years. *They've provided me with comparable rates & coverage,
flexible payment plans, and helpful, friendly staff. *Unfortunately,
they cannot comply with the revised/clarified requirements for soaring
contest liability insurance.

In fact, it seems that only one carrier out there words their policy
in a way that the SSA approves of: *Costello.

I know that Costello has a positive relationship with the SSA and
witnessed the nice check they handed over to the SSA at the Reno
convention. *But setting up a de-facto monopoly just rubs me the wrong
way... *Shouldn't private companies be competing to do business with
us, as a group of several-hundred customers (who are likely to have
good income and be a relatively low risk of defaulting on our
payments)?

The "disputed" issue is a little bit of extra coverage for bystanders
(or other pilots in a midair). *Does that actually help defuse any
ridiculous litigation or civil suits or financial penalties, in the
wake of an accident? *It certainly doesn't provide any special
indemnification for the SSA, so I highly doubt it has a practical
benefit in a legal/liability situation. *Seems to me that the primary
benefit of this insurance requirement is that it guarantees Costello a
certain volume of business each year.

Annoyed that I'm being forced to change carriers,

--Noel

I have had the opposite experience with Avemco. They would not cover
my experimental aircraft without a lot of additional cost, and "non-
owners" insurance and guest pilots were big adders as well. Much
better deal in my situation with Costello.

Matt

On Apr 3, 1:53*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
OK, just had to post: *Is anyone else here really annoyed at the SSA's
insurance requirement "changes" for this year?

I had an unpleasant experience with Costello when I bought my first
sailplane (2007). *I was very satisfied with my move to Avemco for the
last 4 years. *They've provided me with comparable rates & coverage,
flexible payment plans, and helpful, friendly staff. *Unfortunately,
they cannot comply with the revised/clarified requirements for soaring
contest liability insurance.

In fact, it seems that only one carrier out there words their policy
in a way that the SSA approves of: *Costello.

I know that Costello has a positive relationship with the SSA and
witnessed the nice check they handed over to the SSA at the Reno
convention. *But setting up a de-facto monopoly just rubs me the wrong
way... *Shouldn't private companies be competing to do business with
us, as a group of several-hundred customers (who are likely to have
good income and be a relatively low risk of defaulting on our
payments)?

The "disputed" issue is a little bit of extra coverage for bystanders
(or other pilots in a midair). *Does that actually help defuse any
ridiculous litigation or civil suits or financial penalties, in the
wake of an accident? *It certainly doesn't provide any special
indemnification for the SSA, so I highly doubt it has a practical
benefit in a legal/liability situation. *Seems to me that the primary
benefit of this insurance requirement is that it guarantees Costello a
certain volume of business each year.

Annoyed that I'm being forced to change carriers,

--Noel

Noel
Who is the carrier of your insurance? Not your broker but the carrier?

On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 4:53:14 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
OK, just had to post: Is anyone else here really annoyed at the SSA's
insurance requirement "changes" for this year?

I had an unpleasant experience with Costello when I bought my first
sailplane (2007). I was very satisfied with my move to Avemco for the
last 4 years. They've provided me with comparable rates & coverage,
flexible payment plans, and helpful, friendly staff. Unfortunately,
they cannot comply with the revised/clarified requirements for soaring
contest liability insurance.

In fact, it seems that only one carrier out there words their policy
in a way that the SSA approves of: Costello.

I know that Costello has a positive relationship with the SSA and
witnessed the nice check they handed over to the SSA at the Reno
convention. But setting up a de-facto monopoly just rubs me the wrong
way... Shouldn't private companies be competing to do business with
us, as a group of several-hundred customers (who are likely to have
good income and be a relatively low risk of defaulting on our
payments)?

The "disputed" issue is a little bit of extra coverage for bystanders
(or other pilots in a midair). Does that actually help defuse any
ridiculous litigation or civil suits or financial penalties, in the
wake of an accident? It certainly doesn't provide any special
indemnification for the SSA, so I highly doubt it has a practical
benefit in a legal/liability situation. Seems to me that the primary
benefit of this insurance requirement is that it guarantees Costello a
certain volume of business each year.

Annoyed that I'm being forced to change carriers,

--Noel

Noel - Avemco did provide me with the required coverage and a
separate binder page for presenting at SSA contests. I've been
very happy with their service for many years and insure a
number of aircraft with them...
Perhaps you should give them another call ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Noel - Avemco did provide me with the required coverage and a
separate binder page for presenting at SSA contests. I've been
very happy with their service for many years and insure a
number of aircraft with them...
Perhaps you should give them another call ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Dave -

Sent you a private email. Would love to know who at Avemco you worked
with on this... I've talked to several people and it seems that inside
Avemco there may be different understandings of what they can and
can't do.

I'm also looking at a couple of other carriers as possibilities.

To address some of the comments by others: I'm not trying to trash
Costello. But I found that Avemco gave me more flexible payment
options, could cover both my glider and the Experimental Sonex kit-
plane that I'm building, and my premiums were the same or slightly
less than with Costello. I am loathe to give up the payment
flexibility and deal with multiple insurance carriers for my 2
aircraft (OK, one is still mostly parts in my garage; but I'm still
required to insure it).

Lastly: Anyone who thinks that an insurance policy protects them from
being sued in an accident is ludicrous. In the US, if someone thinks
they can sue you and get more money, they will. I also don't see how
higher coverage will somehow indemnify the SSA from being sued as a
party to the contest (if the argument is that we need higher coverage
at sanctioned contests to "protect" the SSA)...

--Noel

On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:54:34 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
Noel - Avemco did provide me with the required coverage and a
separate binder page for presenting at SSA contests. I've been
very happy with their service for many years and insure a
number of aircraft with them...
Perhaps you should give them another call ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Dave -

Sent you a private email. Would love to know who at Avemco you worked
with on this... I've talked to several people and it seems that inside
Avemco there may be different understandings of what they can and
can't do.

I'm also looking at a couple of other carriers as possibilities.

To address some of the comments by others: I'm not trying to trash
Costello. But I found that Avemco gave me more flexible payment
options, could cover both my glider and the Experimental Sonex kit-
plane that I'm building, and my premiums were the same or slightly
less than with Costello. I am loathe to give up the payment
flexibility and deal with multiple insurance carriers for my 2
aircraft (OK, one is still mostly parts in my garage; but I'm still
required to insure it).

Lastly: Anyone who thinks that an insurance policy protects them from
being sued in an accident is ludicrous. In the US, if someone thinks
they can sue you and get more money, they will. I also don't see how
higher coverage will somehow indemnify the SSA from being sued as a
party to the contest (if the argument is that we need higher coverage
at sanctioned contests to "protect" the SSA)...

--Noel



On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:54:34 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
Noel - Avemco did provide me with the required coverage and a
separate binder page for presenting at SSA contests. I've been
very happy with their service for many years and insure a
number of aircraft with them...
Perhaps you should give them another call ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Dave -

Sent you a private email. Would love to know who at Avemco you worked
with on this... I've talked to several people and it seems that inside
Avemco there may be different understandings of what they can and
can't do.

I'm also looking at a couple of other carriers as possibilities.

To address some of the comments by others: I'm not trying to trash
Costello. But I found that Avemco gave me more flexible payment
options, could cover both my glider and the Experimental Sonex kit-
plane that I'm building, and my premiums were the same or slightly
less than with Costello. I am loathe to give up the payment
flexibility and deal with multiple insurance carriers for my 2
aircraft (OK, one is still mostly parts in my garage; but I'm still
required to insure it).

Lastly: Anyone who thinks that an insurance policy protects them from
being sued in an accident is ludicrous. In the US, if someone thinks
they can sue you and get more money, they will. I also don't see how
higher coverage will somehow indemnify the SSA from being sued as a
party to the contest (if the argument is that we need higher coverage
at sanctioned contests to "protect" the SSA)...

--Noel



On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 3:54:34 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
Noel - Avemco did provide me with the required coverage and a
separate binder page for presenting at SSA contests. I've been
very happy with their service for many years and insure a
number of aircraft with them...
Perhaps you should give them another call ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Dave -

Sent you a private email. Would love to know who at Avemco you worked
with on this... I've talked to several people and it seems that inside
Avemco there may be different understandings of what they can and
can't do.

I'm also looking at a couple of other carriers as possibilities.

To address some of the comments by others: I'm not trying to trash
Costello. But I found that Avemco gave me more flexible payment
options, could cover both my glider and the Experimental Sonex kit-
plane that I'm building, and my premiums were the same or slightly
less than with Costello. I am loathe to give up the payment
flexibility and deal with multiple insurance carriers for my 2
aircraft (OK, one is still mostly parts in my garage; but I'm still
required to insure it).

Lastly: Anyone who thinks that an insurance policy protects them from
being sued in an accident is ludicrous. In the US, if someone thinks
they can sue you and get more money, they will. I also don't see how
higher coverage will somehow indemnify the SSA from being sued as a
party to the contest (if the argument is that we need higher coverage
at sanctioned contests to "protect" the SSA)...

--Noel

On 4/4/2012 3:54 PM, noel.wade wrote:


To address some of the comments by others: I'm not trying to trash
Costello. But I found that Avemco gave me more flexible payment
options, could cover both my glider and the Experimental Sonex kit-
plane that I'm building,

Costello is very easy to work with, but I also discovered that other
routs may be better if you wish to be insured for both gliders and
airplanes.


Lastly: Anyone who thinks that an insurance policy protects them from
being sued in an accident is ludicrous.

The reality can be exactly the opposite. It's the deep pockets of the
insurance money that attracts lawsuit. Actual individuals are
notoriously difficult to collect huge judgements from, so lawyers
(working on contingency) won't take the risk.

Vaughn

All -

With a little help from Dave Nadler and Helen (a friendly rep at
Avemco), I have been able to resolve the insurance coverage issues and
stay with Avemco Insurance (important to me as they are also insuring
my kit-plane as I build it in my garage; and that insurance is part of
the financing deal I got on the kit).

For anyone else wanting to use/stay with Avemco and compete in SSA
contests, here is the crucial info:
1) You cannot compete in more than 2 contests a year (regional or
national, doesn't matter)
2) You must specifically ask for the policy changes (I gave them the
PDF detailing the coverage clarifications from the SSA website), and
mention that a couple of other glider pilots have recently gotten this
change approved as a special exemption.
3) You must be willing to pay a couple of extra dollars per month on
your premium (for me it adds up to about $60 total, on a 12 month
policy).

Beyond that, its a relatively simple change. Hope this info helps!

--Noel

Unpleasant experiences can undoubtedly bias you against a company. For myself, though, Costello has been great. On advice from others, I got quotes from two other companies when I insured my LS8 (experimental A/W) three years ago. Costello offered by far the lowest cost policy. And when I factored in their annual lowering deductible and their renter's coverage, it got even better. I'm definitely a fan of Costello, but maybe you being "forced" to change insurance companies will turn out to be a good thing...

-John

On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 4:53:14 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
OK, just had to post: Is anyone else here really annoyed at the SSA's
insurance requirement "changes" for this year?

I had an unpleasant experience with Costello when I bought my first
sailplane (2007). I was very satisfied with my move to Avemco for the
last 4 years. They've provided me with comparable rates & coverage,
flexible payment plans, and helpful, friendly staff. Unfortunately,
they cannot comply with the revised/clarified requirements for soaring
contest liability insurance.

In fact, it seems that only one carrier out there words their policy
in a way that the SSA approves of: Costello.

I know that Costello has a positive relationship with the SSA and
witnessed the nice check they handed over to the SSA at the Reno
convention. But setting up a de-facto monopoly just rubs me the wrong
way... Shouldn't private companies be competing to do business with
us, as a group of several-hundred customers (who are likely to have
good income and be a relatively low risk of defaulting on our
payments)?

The "disputed" issue is a little bit of extra coverage for bystanders
(or other pilots in a midair). Does that actually help defuse any
ridiculous litigation or civil suits or financial penalties, in the
wake of an accident? It certainly doesn't provide any special
indemnification for the SSA, so I highly doubt it has a practical
benefit in a legal/liability situation. Seems to me that the primary
benefit of this insurance requirement is that it guarantees Costello a
certain volume of business each year.

Annoyed that I'm being forced to change carriers,

--Noel

Costello has been easy to deal with from my viewpoint.

Lane
XF