AIUI, under UK aviation law, passenger liability pivots on the establishment of negligence by the pilot.
In this case I am sure the passenger was insured separately anyway… I mean if you paid 15M for your wife you would have her insured, wouldn’t you 
And I doubt the legality of this flight will affect that payout.
It is a separate matter who the insurer, who pays out the 15M or whatever the insured value was, then goes after to recover the money… They can go after the pilot’s estate only if the pilot was negligent.
Maybe they looked for the body to get his life insurance payed no ? (It must much more than the cost of the search)
Peter wrote:
That’s unless the front was smashed / broken off and he just floated out.
Either that or he still is in there somehow but they could not get to the front or see him. Either way, I fear the only way to be sure would be to recover the plane which imho should be done for the sake of investigating this crash properly. Not to speak of whatever theories would surface if there is no 100% answer to these questions.
Coda wrote:
I watch too many movies.
Yes you do.
the weather wasn’t that bad, why the descent to FL23 instead of a climb
Most likely because the pilot was VFR only and tried to stay out of cloud. Fairly typical
taking the silk elevator down to a waiting ship leaving the passenger to his fate
This is just plain silly. The aircraft has no pilot door, to get in or out the pilot has to squeeze trough the gap between the seats. He would have to incapacitate the passenger and climb past him, too.
Famous people die for completely mundane reasons, too.
They can go after the pilot’s estate only if the pilot was negligent
They can go after his or anyone’s estate who is connected and it is the negligent aspect amongst other things that will be attempted to be shown in court. And I recall that negligence can be shown merely if a defendant’s performance falls below a reasonable threshold.
I will leave it to others to decide if, in this situation, the pilot, flight organiser and football agent performance was adequate in their respective roles…
Cobalt wrote:
This is just plain silly. The aircraft has no pilot door, to get in or out the pilot has to squeeze trough the gap between the seats.
There was this case a few years ago where a banker faked his own death by opening the door of a PA46 and parachuting out, leaving the plane to crash somewhere else.
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2012/08/ponzi-schemer-marcus-schrenkers-stunt.html
quatrelle wrote:
There was this case a few years ago where a banker faked his own death by opening the door of a PA46 and parachuting out, leaving the plane to crash somewhere else.
Well yes but it was still through the same single clamshell door.
It still looks to me that someone opened the door. The cockpit cabin section is strong in the PA46, and the fact they were able to get lots of data on control positions means that the cockpit was attached. It may be that the passenger died or was unconscious and the pilot tried to get out. But without a raft accessible that would not achieve much anyway.
Cobalt wrote:
Yes you do.
It was a tongue in cheek statement, that’s big of to you take the cheap shot.
Cobalt wrote:
This is just plain silly. The aircraft has no pilot door, to get in or out the pilot has to squeeze trough the gap between the seats. He would have to incapacitate the passenger and climb past him, too.
I am aware of that. I did not suggest he got out through a non-existent front door.
Coda wrote:
It was a tongue in cheek statement, that’s big of to you take the cheap shot.
My response was similarly tongue-in-cheeck. Apologies if it came across otherwise.
I apologise too, I’m a bit over-sensitive at the mo.
