Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Insurance companies, premiums, exclusions, etc

Our insurance went up as well, to include glider towing (club use) it is now approaching 10% of the hull value of the plane.

Given we’re unlikely to tow a glider for months at least, I’ve brought the cover back to private use only. I might look at 3rd party only in future.

Andreas IOM

Possibly a new thread but just got a quote for the ragwing which shows a 100% plus increase over last year.

Admittedly have enjoyed modest premiums for many years but the quote for next year will make a lot of GA unviable.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

Try Visicover. I know it’s a bit of a controversial topic because their policy has a lot of interesting exclusions which many people will not spot, but their last increase to me (May 2020) was only about 10% I think.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

FlyCovered are another online outfit with a conventional annual policy and they also offer an unusual pay-as-you-fly option, which may help during Covid restrictions. In either case, quotations are particularly competitive; UK only, though.

https://www.flycovered.com/aircraft/

Swanborough Farm (UK), Shoreham EGKA, Soysambu (Kenya), Kenya

I have used Visicover (convenient, competitive) for several years now, including a claim and quibble-free settlement. I have always found them very helpful.

EGCJ, United Kingdom

Peter, can you point out the “interesting exclusions” you found in your Visicover?

I just switched to Visicover this year from Haywards – premium up 50% over last year despite no claims, accidents, enforcements in the almost 20 years i was with them.

can you point out the “interesting exclusions” you found in your Visicover?

If you search, or work back in this recently merged thread, you will find e.g. this.

I have no evidence that these exclusions are being used to reduce payouts, but

  • if I did have it would be by private comms so I would not be able to post details, and even mentioning it would not be possible without authorisation because one is always 100% certain that somebody is reading everything here and will pass any “interesting” info onto the relevant parties if there is an opportunity to cause trouble for EuroGA
  • if somebody didn’t get a payout, they are hardly going to advertise it on a forum
  • it is reasonable to conclude that the exclusions are there for a reason, which is to limit liability in the worst “cowboy pilot” cases (which, sadly, GA is not short of)

I just switched to Visicover this year from Haywards – premium up 50% over last year despite no claims, accidents, enforcements in the almost 20 years i was with them.

I could say almost the same, except it would be about 18 years

OTOH someone has just PMd me saying somebody’s Haywards premium dropped by 1/3… so, obviously, I asked him to post it

I think Haywards are a very good company, but when one is looking at four figures, most people will shop around.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
I have to switch insurance provider also. I used Beta Aviation, but they end their aviation business, so have to switch. I managed to get a quote from “GrECo International AG / HDI Global Specialty SE Sverige filial” , 840 EUR for liability + hull, quite similar that Beta’s was. I also checked with visicover, their online quote was ca 1300-1400 depending on some options.
EETU, Estonia

In light jets, insurance is going through the roof. 100-300% increases. Doesn’t look good for GA. The underwriters are the same.

EGTK Oxford

ivark wrote:

I have to switch insurance provider also. I used Beta Aviation, but they end their aviation business, so have to switch. I managed to get a quote from “GrECo International AG / HDI Global Specialty SE Sverige filial” , 840 EUR for liability + hull, quite similar that Beta’s was.

HDI is a major insurance provider in Sweden and they are well regarded. There was a case five years ago when a club owned PA32R, overloaded with CG out of limits, and on an illegal charter flight (no CPL, no AoC), got airborne in ground effect on takeoff from a 560 m grass runway and then crashed. There were several “interesting” aspects including the fact that the takeoff roll started with a 360° turn on the runway. The pilot claimed that the speed gained during this turn was equivalent to 100-150 m acceleration on the runway!

HDI payed the club in full without discussion but then, of course, went after the pilot. I believe the pilot’s liability was eventually established in court.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top