Insurance - Page 2

jimpappas · #11 02-11-2005, 08:06 PM

Yes, AIG does view the 9A differently and much more favorably than the others.

I have talked to them a lot about the basic flight characteristics of the 9A model and they do understand that it is a much more (in AIG's words) "docile" aircraft, much more trainer like, and so, more forgiving of a lower time pilot than say my 7A.

As we build hours, especially time in type, we will get more breaks and as long as the basic annual increase for that class of aircraft is less than our personal increase in skill and risk level to the Insurance Company we should see lower premiums. That isn't always how it works out as seen with Phoenix leaving the market.

The best thing any of us can do besides the obvious "fly safer" we always get told, is that while we are building over several years if we continue to fly as well, we should make every effort to get time in as similar an aircraft as possible. If you can co pilot with someone in type so you can log those hours they help too.

My experience has been that the Agent (me for example) needs to talk to the underwriters and make the case for you if you are close to being what the guidelines call for. If we can give you the "flight plan" for the next few years while you build to make you as desirable a risk as possible then we are earning our pay as well even if we don't sell you anything. We flight plan everything else why not how to make ourselves less of a risk to the Insurance Underwriters if we can?

If you are way off, say zero time in type, building an 8 taildragger with no tail time and all you've flown is 150's or 172's the only one that can probably help you is yourself by getting time in tails and then in type if possible. If not you have to bite the bullet and pay higher rates until you build a track record of experience that the Underwriters can live with and will give you discounts for.

As JT has said before we Agents don't set the rates, and we all get the same price from the same companies, it's what we do ahead of time, as well as while we are your Agent representing you and with the things we can affect that seperates a good agent from the others. If you have an Agent you trust or like or know and he knows the aircraft by all means go with him or her. The companies we place you with are all going to be the same ones. I have the same ones as everyone else.

Just my two cents worth. Hope it helps now I'm going back to the dungeon (basement) to pound some rivets.

jthav8r · #12 02-12-2005, 01:42 PM

As for the builders risk, sure there are fewer exposures to risk, but the premiums are lower than in-flight coverage as well. With all the builders risks we've written, we've had very few claims. We have had avionics theft claims, and one repetitive vandalism claim, and then we've had one engine theft which was a $30,000 claim. It takes a lot of $400 policies (that was Phoenix minimum premium and what most of their builders risks cost) to make up for one $30,000 claim and then make money too. That claim was another reason I think Phoenix stopped writing coverage for RVs. They, too, felt like the builders risks were not all that great of a risk until that time.

The reason Phoenix and some other companies place a minimum premium on those policies is that it just doesn't make economic sense for them to write a policy below a certain premium. Also, with insurance the underwriters have to worry about what might happen. They are taking in premiums in anticipation of what claims they think will come in for a certain class of business.

As for the liability being attached to the builders risk, Phoenix and AIG won't write policies without some liability being attached. Global's EAA program will. It's a matter of each companies individual preference. If you ask Global to add it, they charge more for it. Some folks need it due to a hangar lease requirement.

JT