Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

For historical info, here is some history for the insurance on my -10.



2006 	$3441

2007	$3389	(Note: Increased hull value $10K...same hull was $3228)

2008	$3087	(Note: TAA program was not yet in place with AIG)



Now comes 2009.  I easily qualified for the TAA program, which gives

10% off, and after 400+ hours of RV-10 time, and higher corresponding

total time, my rates are naturally also decreasing.



The dilema is that this year I finally have 2 options, and it's making

it tough on me to decide...and I need to just pull the trigger.

Previously I've been with AIG, on my old plane, and my RV-10.  No

claims, so no experience of anything.  AIG was the only reasonable

rate at the time, and of course Avemco is always just plain insane

on rates for the -10.



This year, my quotes are:



Global Aerospace	$2849

AIG			$2709  (or $2774 with expanded coverage)



The problem is that the coverage with Global is so much better

that I'm not sure which way to go anymore.  Certainly, with

the expanded coverage with AIG, the rates are so close that I'd

just choose Global.



Here is a comparison to some of the things that are different:



Medical Payments:	$10,000 Global 	/ $3,000 AIG

Deductable: 		$0 Global	/ $100 AIG

Headsets/handheld av.	$1,000 Global	/ $500 AIG

Personal Effects	$5,000 Global	/ $3,000 AIG

Hangar Contents		$50,000 Global	/ $25,000 AIG

(hangar damage/unowned)	

Search and Rescue	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIG

Emergency Conditions	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIG

(runway foaming...)

Precautionary Landing	Include Global 	/ Included AIG only expanded

Extended phys damage	Included Global / Not offered AIG

(war,sabotage,riots)

Hurricane Reimbursement: Global is far better.



Now, if I want the lowest rate, and skip the Expanded coverage

with AIG, I lose the headset/handheld coverage, personal

effects goes down to $1,000, hangar contents to $10,000,

no coverage for premises, no coverage for Precautionary

landing, no hurricane reimbursement (don't get many in

Wisconsin though.  ) and no physical damage coverage

for non-owned aircraft.



So clearly, the insurance is better at least in the bullet

points with Global.  The question is, the value of the

add-on coverages....and of course, I have no experience with

Global.

Does anyone have any comments, especially positive and negative

experiences in dealing with claims with either?

-- 

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

dmaib@me.com

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 454
Location: New Smyrna Beach, Florida

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:27 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Tim,



I had extensive experience with Global in my professional life and  

had no problems. Same with AIG over the years as well. I would have  

no problem choosing Global at this time.



David Maib

40559



On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Tim Olson wrote:






For historical info, here is some history for the insurance on my -10.



2006 	$3441

2007	$3389	(Note: Increased hull value $10K...same hull was $3228)

2008	$3087	(Note: TAA program was not yet in place with AIG)



Now comes 2009.  I easily qualified for the TAA program, which gives

10% off, and after 400+ hours of RV-10 time, and higher corresponding

total time, my rates are naturally also decreasing.



The dilema is that this year I finally have 2 options, and it's making

it tough on me to decide...and I need to just pull the trigger.

Previously I've been with AIG, on my old plane, and my RV-10.  No

claims, so no experience of anything.  AIG was the only reasonable

rate at the time, and of course Avemco is always just plain insane

on rates for the -10.



This year, my quotes are:



Global Aerospace	$2849

AIG			$2709  (or $2774 with expanded coverage)



The problem is that the coverage with Global is so much better

that I'm not sure which way to go anymore.  Certainly, with

the expanded coverage with AIG, the rates are so close that I'd

just choose Global.



Here is a comparison to some of the things that are different:



Medical Payments:	$10,000 Global 	/ $3,000 AIG

Deductable: 		$0 Global	/ $100 AIG

Headsets/handheld av.	$1,000 Global	/ $500 AIG

Personal Effects	$5,000 Global	/ $3,000 AIG

Hangar Contents		$50,000 Global	/ $25,000 AIG

(hangar damage/unowned)	

Search and Rescue	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIG

Emergency Conditions	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIG

(runway foaming...)

Precautionary Landing	Include Global 	/ Included AIG only expanded

Extended phys damage	Included Global / Not offered AIG

(war,sabotage,riots)

Hurricane Reimbursement: Global is far better.



Now, if I want the lowest rate, and skip the Expanded coverage

with AIG, I lose the headset/handheld coverage, personal

effects goes down to $1,000, hangar contents to $10,000,

no coverage for premises, no coverage for Precautionary

landing, no hurricane reimbursement (don't get many in

Wisconsin though.  ) and no physical damage coverage

for non-owned aircraft.



So clearly, the insurance is better at least in the bullet

points with Global.  The question is, the value of the

add-on coverages....and of course, I have no experience with

Global.

Does anyone have any comments, especially positive and negative

experiences in dealing with claims with either?

-- 

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

_________________
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
New Smyrna Beach, FL

robin1(at)mrmoisture.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:36 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Tim,

	I have no experience with either company however since your

highest coverage cost ($2,849) is still far less than you were use to

paying (2006-2008) you might as well go with the company proving "so

much better" coverage (your words). When you look at the individual line

items like Personal Effects and consider your table PC or various other

electronic doodads you probably have in your -10 that may be enough

alone to make a decision. The difference in Hangar Coverage is

significant. I don't know what is involved in Hangar Coverage but when

things go wrong in a hangar they can go wrong in a big way (fire,

tornado, crushing snow, auto/aircraft impact). Quick story... a friend

had his mechanic pull his freshly painted Aero Commander out for some

reason. The mechanic jumped out of the plane with the plane on a SLIGHT

incline. It slowly rolled into my neighbors hangar taking out the nose

wheel etc... $60,000 later for the plane and $9,000 later for the hangar

all is good as new...I suggest with numbers this close you go for the

higher coverage (assuming all other factors are acceptable).



Robin 



--

jim(at)CombsFive.Com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:42 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Why not back down the hull value.  Take the difference in insurance and bank it specifically for the hull replace should something happen.  Over time, you should be able to reduce the hull amount to zero and then use interest from the hull money to pay the liability insurance.  You do plan on keeping the airplane for a long time don't you?I know of a person who is doing that and they are seeing a significant return on their investment.  (IE much lower insurance cost and keeping money in house!)Just a thought.Jim CN312F Flying!Do Not Archive--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com>For historical info, here is some history for the insurance on my -10.2006 	$34412007	$3389	(Note: Increased hull value $10K...same hull was $3228)2008	$3087	(Note: TAA program was not yet in place with AIG)Now comes 2009.  I easily qualified for the TAA program, which gives10% off, and after 400+ hours of RV-10 time, and higher correspondingtotal time, my rates are naturally also decreasing.The dilema is that this year I finally have 2 options, and it's makingit tough on me to decide...and I need to just pull the trigger.Previously I've been with AIG, on my old plane, and my RV-10.  Noclaims, so no experience of anything.  AIG was the only reasonablerate at the time, and of course Avemco is always just plain insaneon rates for the -10.This year, my quotes are:Global Aerospace	$2849AIG			$2709  (or $2774 with expanded coverage)The problem is that the coverage with Global is so much betterthat I'm not sure which way to go anymore.  Certainly, withthe expanded coverage with AIG, the rates are so close that I'djust choose Global.Here is a comparison to some of the things that are different:Medical Payments:	$10,000 Global 	/ $3,000 AIGDeductable: 		$0 Global	/ $100 AIGHeadsets/handheld av.	$1,000 Global	/ $500 AIGPersonal Effects	$5,000 Global	/ $3,000 AIGHangar Contents		$50,000 Global	/ $25,000 AIG(hangar damage/unowned)Search and Rescue	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIGEmergency Conditions	$25,000 Global	/ $10,000 AIG(runway foaming...)Precautionary Landing	Include Global 	/ Included AIG only expandedExtended phys damage	Included Global / Not offered AIG(war,sabotage,riots)Hurricane Reimbursement: Global is far better.Now, if I want the lowest rate, and skip the Expanded coveragewith AIG, I lose the headset/handheld coverage, personaleffects goes down to $1,000, hangar contents to $10,000,no coverage for premises, no coverage for Precautionarylanding, no hurricane reimbursement (don't get many inWisconsin though.  ) and no physical damage coveragefor non-owned aircraft.So clearly, the insurance is better at least in the bulletpoints with Global.  The question is, the value of theadd-on coverages....and of course, I have no experience withGlobal.Does anyone have any comments, especially positive and negativeexperiences in dealing with claims with either?--Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flyingdo not archive   [quote][b]

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:05 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Thanks Robin for the feeback.  You too David.  To be honest,

I'm leaning towards the Global anyway.  Yes, the tablet PC

and stuff is all part of what would be covered and it's covered

for theft too. The thing is, I'd have a hard time submitting

a claim for headsets and tablets if it will cause a rate

increase in another year.  So that's why I'm so "insurance shy".

I don't cover my cars heavily at all for their own damage...just

for the damage to others.  Previously I had even been tempted

to go with "not in flight" coverage for the plane.  But

finally the rates are coming down for me after the time

put in.   I did post the historical rate trend just to

show too that over time it does make a difference as you gain

time and experience. And as you noted, either choice is

a good drop again from last year.



The other thing is, this year I may actually do a trip over

the oceans, and I can easily see the $25,000 search and rescue

coverage being something nice to have.  So looking at those

factors provides a push to Global too.



I just got Jim C's message about hull value as I typed

this....You know, I do kind of agree with him on that...at

least that's exactly how I feel about my cars (which I

usually PURCHASE with 90K+ miles on them)...and you save

tons over time.   But, in an RV-10 all decked out with

nice things, I don't think that you will save enough

money quick enough to make the payoff work out.  If I

actually HAD a couple hundred grand in liquid cash that

I could just have without it affecting anything, then

yeah, I'd probably skip the hull coverage, because I can

always build another hull.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Robin Marks wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Tim,

 	I have no experience with either company however since your

 highest coverage cost ($2,849) is still far less than you were use to

 paying (2006-2008) you might as well go with the company proving "so

 much better" coverage (your words). When you look at the individual line

 items like Personal Effects and consider your table PC or various other

 electronic doodads you probably have in your -10 that may be enough

 alone to make a decision. The difference in Hangar Coverage is

 significant. I don't know what is involved in Hangar Coverage but when

 things go wrong in a hangar they can go wrong in a big way (fire,

 tornado, crushing snow, auto/aircraft impact). Quick story... a friend

 had his mechanic pull his freshly painted Aero Commander out for some

 reason. The mechanic jumped out of the plane with the plane on a SLIGHT

 incline. It slowly rolled into my neighbors hangar taking out the nose

 wheel etc... $60,000 later for the plane and $9,000 later for the hangar

 all is good as new...I suggest with numbers this close you go for the

 higher coverage (assuming all other factors are acceptable).

 

 Robin 

 

 --

Bob Turner

Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 885
Location: Castro Valley, CA

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:09 am Post subject: Re: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

You want to be a little careful with "backing down the hull value". Remember, if the insurance company pays out this amount, they then own the aircraft.To make up an extreme example, suppose you declare the  hull value at $50K. You then damage  both wings, and you think you can fix it for $30K. But the insurance company has the option to declare the plane a total loss, and pay you $50K. They then own the airplane, and can sell the engine, radios, etc., to recoup their loss.

_________________
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB

jim(at)CombsFive.Com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 12:36 pm Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Good Point!I had not considered that.To date, I have full coverage.  Jim CDo Not Archive--> RV10-List message posted by: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>You want to be a little careful with "backing down the hull value".Remember, if the insurance company pays out this amount, they then own theaircraft.To make up an extreme example, suppose you declare the  hullvalue at $50K. You then damage  both wings, and you think you can fix itfor $30K. But the insurance company has the option to declare the plane atotal loss, and pay you $50K. They then own the airplane, and can sell theengine, radios, etc., to recoup their loss.--------Bob TurnerRV-10 QBRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 29389#229389   [quote][b]

pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:37 pm Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

I cut down my insurance to 'not in motion' to meet the hangar lease 

agreement.  I have no insurance on my house either.  I'm an optimist.    

I personally have no assets to be taken. I've saved enough over the 

years to replace the big ticket items should be lost.  If I'm lost too, 

then I don't care.  The only concern I have is that a friend will be 

injured while riding in my plane (or boat or ......) and will have to 

foot his medical bills himself.  That's a big concern, but I don't have 

an answer.  I don't usually have an empty seat when I fly so it must not 

concern them very much .... and yes, they've been told .... and even 

reminded once in a while.

Linn



jim(at)CombsFive.Com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Why not back down the hull value.  Take the difference in insurance 

 and bank it specifically for the hull replace should something 

 happen.  Over time, you should be able to reduce the hull amount to 

 zero and then use interest from the hull money to pay the liability 

 insurance. 



 You do plan on keeping the airplane for a long time don't you?



 I know of a person who is doing that and they are seeing a significant 

 return on their investment.  (IE much lower insurance cost and keeping 

 money in house!)



 Just a thought.



 Jim C

 N312F Flying!

 Do Not Archive

planesmith(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:06 pm Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Hi Tim C

  

 With the economy as it is C it's good to check on the financial stability of both companies. A good deal isn't so good if the company goes belly up after you send in your premium.

  

 Vern Smith (#324 finishing)

  

 do not archive



 	  Quote: 	
		   > 

 > 

 > Does anyone have any comments C especially positive and negative

 > experiences in dealing with claims with either?

 > 

&=======================
	


&g=================

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 


	


Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.  See how it works.

tganster

Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Posts: 28

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 6:43 pm Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

I agree with you Linn. There is nothing I own that I cannot do without. My

coverage includes only liability. That I will not do without. If you have

been sued you get that way.

  Tom Ganster 40778  Fuselage



--

_________________
Tom Ganster 40778 Fuselage

hsdexo

Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 10

Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:57 am Post subject: Re: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Tim, can you tell us how much hull coverage you are caring. Then we can make a comparison.

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:59 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

175k



Tim

do NOT archive

hsdexo

Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 10

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:37 am Post subject: Re: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Tim, I would say now to go with the best coverage. Your prices are right in line with mind for the same coverage. Go with the best value for you dollar.



R/

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:58 am Post subject: Insurance comparison...what's your opinion

Thank you and thank everyone else for their comments on and off

line.  I did decide that at least this year I'd go with Global,

and pay a little more but get a little better coverage. This

year I'm maybe doing a little more travel that I would be

comfortable having that extra insurance for.  It's only

a once-a-year bill anyway.  Might add a couple of ratings

this year too, so who knows, next year I may see another drop.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

hsdexo wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Tim, I would say now to go with the best coverage. Your prices are right in line with mind for the same coverage. Go with the best value for you dollar.

 

 R/

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 29969#229969

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum