Insurance for Occasional Pond Hops (Atlantic crossings)

The cover does not stop in Greenland if it is “Worldwide except Canada , USA and US Territories”, it stops at wherever Canada starts, which presumably are the territorial waters of Canada (12 miles from the shore)

Hmm… Beware. I think my broker told me that the interpretation of the geographic coverage may be that only flights fully in the area are covered. That is, if you take off within the coverage area with destination outside of the coverage area, you are not covered from take off already (and if you take off outside of the coverage area with destination the coverage area, you are not covered until after landing).

While I would hate to be in a situation where I would have to argue that in court, this would be a stretch. It says “coverage – worldwide except USA and Canada”, not “worldwide, except for flight departing from or intending to land in the USA and Canada”, if the insurer intended that they should have written that.

I agree.

Under UK insurance law, everything not excluded is included – according to an insurance guy who was a business associate many years ago

I agree the insurance does not cover landing in Canada or US (where insurance is not even mandatory), but it should cover Greenland takeoff and and climb up to some airspace boundary?

High likely the answer depends how you word the question: it’s valid as long as the present crash point is valid past/future flight path is irrelevant? also discussing insurance validity outside the scope of accident location/time of impact and type of allowed operation is rather moot

I doubt it’s like a whole FPL that fails to validate when when you drop out of coverage ?

Here is another interesting cutoff: insurance start a 2359UTC you depart at 2200UTC you crash at 0100UTC, I am sure you are covered, for avoidance of doubts and let’s remind all pilots that they should not fly without valid insurance , the scenario I describe is done by everybody each year, when they get a new policy or change the underwriter, no one will land in a middle of flight to insure (pun intended) it’s covered by two overlapping policies

Ibra wrote:

but it should cover Greenland takeoff and and climb up to some airspace boundary

Not an airspace boundary, but the edge of the 12 mile zone. Article 2 of the ICAO convention is crystal clear: “For the purposes of this Convention the territory of a State shall be deemed to be the land areas and territorial waters adjacent thereto under the sovereignty, suzerainty, protection or mandate of such State”. The “territorial waters” of the USA and Canada extend 12 miles from the coastline.

But what is the wording in a US / Canadian insurance? How is the coverage area defined in a standard US policy? Can any of the US-based forumites advice, @Silvaire perhaps?

I have been flying over war zones and through countries which were excluded on the insurance policy. Think of places like Yemen or some countries in Africa or Syria (during the war). So, I would just call up the insurance company and discuss it with them. They would then issue a new insurance policy and take out the excluded countries and they often did so without any extra costs.

G-SLOT wrote:

The current state of the market seems to preclude such “reasonable” extensions.

The current state of the market is potentially very worrying for GA owners in general by the looks of it.

It appears as if many of the insurers are getting out of the aviation business altogether as they consider it bad risks. The remaining few can then do with the premiums what they wish, as always with close monopolies.

Recent renewals see premium spikes of up to know unknown proportions, I managed to get mine “down” to about 10% this year when renewing from the original offer of close to 30% for the exact same conditions. I hear from folks from the US who can’t get insurance at all, either for lack of experience, age or whatever reason is quoted. Which is funny, as in the US the covers are much smaller anyhow, I hear figures up to one million $ for liability, which personally I would take as a much too low sum to cover any claims particularly in the US.

Folks I know over there tell me they are not worried about much in terms of FAA regulation or gas prices but they are seriously worried about the prospect of having to pack up flying because they can not get insurance anymore or insurance premiums skyrocketing leaving them outpriced. Most of those are not “new” pilots with less than 1k hrs but people who have been flying for decades with reasonable experience and no past claims.

My current broker here hints that my current 3 year policy may well be the last time I can do any insurance other than third party liability at all as more and more insurers rid themselves of aviation insurance entirely, not only GA but also airliners. Similar woes are reported out of that sector as well consequently, quoting the Boeing Max scandal as a reason. One wonders where this is headed.

Mooney_Driver wrote:

My current broker here hints that my current 3 year policy may well be the last time I can do any insurance other than third party liability at all as more and more insurers rid themselves of aviation insurance entirely, not only GA but also airliners. Similar woes are reported out of that sector as well consequently, quoting the Boeing Max scandal as a reason. One wonders where this is headed.

I am wondering why especially the lower end side of the GA market is seemingly such a bad business compared to boating. A few years ago I was part of a small owner group of a 10m yacht we paid AFAIK around 1500-1700/y with Pantaenius for 3rd party liability + 130k agreed hull value (and new-for-old replacement when necessary); the numbers and situation seem comparable to our part of GA with a less dire outlook …