Too risky to flight instruct?

[Lance F]

Numerous thread topics (e.g. the current one of flying after retirement) drift into the concern of not flight instructing due to the potential liability. Perhaps this deserves its own thread.

In our society I agree that anyone can be sued for about anything at any time. It's a legitimate question whether or not it's a great idea to do a time consuming activity with relatively low monetary return that could potentially wipe out all one's assets.

On the other hand do we want our next generation of pilots to only be trained by 20 year olds with basically zero real world flying experience? I know for sure that I would not be the pilot I am today if experienced pilots/flight instructors had not flown with me and taught me and mentored me. Should I ignore the "risk' they took flying with me and say I'm too big, or too important, or too wealthy to give back?

After a lot of years of hard work I do have assets, but I have chosen to use some of my time to do independent flight instruction, including primary students. I feel some obligation to give back to the avocation that has been such a positive part of my life for a long time.

Experienced pilots who say they won't take the risk of getting sued will not see the smile on a student's face after the first solo. They perhaps may not keep their own skills as sharp with basic airmanship skills like slow flight, or steep turns or engine out landings. They certainly won't be taking the newbies beyond the FAA's ACS.

Should we let this potential threat keep us from doing something that is rewarding and very much needed? Or should we just let somebody else do it?

 

[mcmanigle]

In the very circumscribed case of "I'm fully and comfortably retired, with a significant amount of assets, and want to do flight instructing for fun (and a little income maybe) now that everything else in life is sorted out," I would imagine one straightforward answer is to work on transferring all of your (non-aviation) assets into a family trust of some kind to protect them from liability, and then instruct away.

Of course this gets more complicated if you're not otherwise fully retired, don't have enough assets to make a trust sensible, don't have a family to list as additional beneficiaries, etc.

All that being said, I think I would make the same decision you're making (and have thought about doing just that some day).

 

[JEB]

I'm also in the group that would love to instruct, but am being warned by advisors to stay away because of the liability risks. What are some of the strategies that others are using to (at least somewhat) protect themselves?

 

[Rgbeard]

This adds cost, but what about a generic liability umbrella policy?

Last I checked a simple $1mm umbrella was around $300/year. Would it cover this activity?
As I'm typing this I doubt it.
Hmmm. Is there a specific flight instructor liability policy? This MUST exist. No? Cost?
Spending a few dollars to limit/avoid exposure of the family assets sounds good to me.

(Hidden cost on umbrellas: they generally insist you get all your vehicles up to $500k liability first)

 

[Jim K]

It will be a sad day indeed if the only way to get a pilot's license is part 141. I figured I spent about $9k on mine, which is too much, but to do it through the local college program takes 2 semesters at about $10k per semester.

My instructor actually got flight instructor insurance while I was training. I was his first student in a few years, but he is planning to teach more. I think he said or was around $250/ year.... no idea what kind of coverage that buys.

I asked if my umbrella policy excluded aviation, and was told it didn't, but I wasn't asking about instructing. Commercial operations might be more complicated.

 

[kayoh190]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

You probably don't want to drive or own a car.

 

[write-stuff]

Typical risk-matrix stuff. You can probably make it through your flight instructing career without something catastrophic happening. But on the offhand chance that it does, if you have assets worthy of protection, you may well be litigated into financial ruin unless you have a very robust, heavy-duty professional liability insurance policy. So, flip the coin.

 

[RyanB]

Are CFI’s who work under a flight school better protected against personal liability than someone out doing freelance work?

 

[write-stuff]

Are CFI’s who work under a flight school better protected against personal liability than someone out doing freelance work?

Probably not unless they are employees. And the flight school still might not have adequate liability coverage. But don't take my word for it - ask an attorney.

 

[bradg33]

Numerous thread topics (e.g. the current one of flying after retirement) drift into the concern of not flight instructing due to the potential liability. Perhaps this deserves its own thread.

In our society I agree that anyone can be sued for about anything at any time. It's a legitimate question whether or not it's a great idea to do a time consuming activity with relatively low monetary return that could potentially wipe out all one's assets.

On the other hand do we want our next generation of pilots to only be trained by 20 year olds with basically zero real world flying experience? I know for sure that I would not be the pilot I am today if experienced pilots/flight instructors had not flown with me and taught me and mentored me. Should I ignore the "risk' they took flying with me and say I'm too big, or too important, or too wealthy to give back?

After a lot of years of hard work I do have assets, but I have chosen to use some of my time to do independent flight instruction, including primary students. I feel some obligation to give back to the avocation that has been such a positive part of my life for a long time.

Experienced pilots who say they won't take the risk of getting sued will not see the smile on a student's face after the first solo. They perhaps may not keep their own skills as sharp with basic airmanship skills like slow flight, or steep turns or engine out landings. They certainly won't be taking the newbies beyond the FAA's ACS.

Should we let this potential threat keep us from doing something that is rewarding and very much needed? Or should we just let somebody else do it?

IMHO, the risk is pretty minimal. A lot of states don't permit claims for "educational malpractice," which typically include inadequate instruction claims made against CFIs. There are several law review articles out there on the subject. Get a CFI insurance policy, which will also include a duty to defend (Read: hire and pay an attorney for you). Personally, I don't let remote liability fears dictate whether I participate in an activity that I find rewarding.

 

[bradg33]

In the very circumscribed case of "I'm fully and comfortably retired, with a significant amount of assets, and want to do flight instructing for fun (and a little income maybe) now that everything else in life is sorted out," I would imagine one straightforward answer is to work on transferring all of your (non-aviation) assets into a family trust of some kind to protect them from liability, and then instruct away.

Of course this gets more complicated if you're not otherwise fully retired, don't have enough assets to make a trust sensible, don't have a family to list as additional beneficiaries, etc.

All that being said, I think I would make the same decision you're making (and have thought about doing just that some day).

Transferring assets like that can be quite problematic (read up on the concept of fraudulent transfers) and can lead to expensive litigation.

 

[steingar]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student.

Haven't been able to find anything with a quick Google search. In 2017 an aircraft went down, the widow is actually suing the CFI. All I could find.

 

[dbahn]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

No matter how high or low the level of risk it's still boils down to a risk/benefit ratio, which itself has many components besides simple costs. As Lance has suggested the benefit part of that ratio is often intangible, and includes things such as the level of satisfaction in teaching as well as improving the safety of General Aviation as a whole.

Much of the risk part of the ratio is also intangible. Defending yourself against an accusation of wrongdoing is emotionally draining and very time consuming, regardless of the expense and regardless of the outcome of litigation. And a little bit of fault can go a long way when the plaintiffs insist that their relative couldn't have been at fault in the accident. No one wants to be determined to be guilty of causing someone else's death or injuries.

With respect to degree of risk look at the risk of mid-air collisions. It's very low, but look at the efforts we take to manage that risk, and look how it can be completely eliminated by not participating. I don't think that there are many actual judgments against instructors in liability cases, although there may be a much more significant number of suits filed and either settled or withdrawn. But if you see yourself at risk for being the target of one of those, the easiest and safest management strategy is to opt out. That's unfortunate but true.

 

[jsstevens]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

I know of one. My primary flight instructor was in the midst of a lawsuit because a former instrument student of his (instrument rated) flew into a thunderstorm which tore his plane apart killing him & a passenger (IIRC). He was sued by the families.

 

[schmookeeg]

Are CFI’s who work under a flight school better protected against personal liability than someone out doing freelance work?

In 7 years and dozens of CFIs at our flight school, there was not one who had sufficient assets to name in a suit. A few lacked sufficient assets for a big mac due to suffocating student loans.

That said, in theory, our commercial policy provided $1MM for their defense. A freelancer without a policy would not have that benefit, unless the plane owner's policy provided it.

We had several claims, and lost one pilot who we had trained at the very end. The FAA Inspector only peeked at our training CFI's logbook, nodded, and then left to hassle our mechanics. The plaintiff attorneys didn't even inquire after our instructor, they were looking for assets to attach. (Flight Schools are also not honeypots of wealth -- so they took the million and left)

===

All that said, I don't teach primary, because those dudes scare the bejeezus out of me. I do enjoy IFR training a lot, though, and try to impart what I can from those I learned it from.

 

[bobmrg]

I was better able to anticipate student actions as I accumulated experience as an instructor. During the first few hours I kept my hands in my lap, ready to grab the yoke or throttle as soon as saw the student's hands move in a direction that experience told me would lead to something unpleasant. Next step was to sit with arms folded as my confidence in the student's ability grew; last step was with my left arm casually draped across the back of the student's seat. Never had any kind of liability insurance...my only brush with the legal system was when I pilot to whom I had given a checkride was involved in a midair, and I had to give a deposition on how I had evaluated his scan for traffic.

Bob

 

[N1120A]

Aren't there CFI insurance policies? Also, this is why you get waivers.

Are CFI’s who work under a flight school better protected against personal liability than someone out doing freelance work?

If they are employees, or should be, then most states would require indemnification of any personal liability for work done in the course and scope of their employment.

 

[mryan75]

I read stuff like this and I wonder, what do people who sit around worried about getting sued all day do for fun?

if you want to instruct, go for it. If you don't, don't. Stop worrying so much.

 

[kayoh190]

No matter how high or low the level of risk it's still boils down to a risk/benefit ratio, which itself has many components besides simple costs.

Right, I agree completely. But I'm having a hard time determining exactly how much risk we're talking about here. Kind of hard to fit something into your personal risk profile if you can't first quantify how much risk there is to begin with.

 

[dbahn]

Right, I agree completely. But I'm having a hard time determining exactly how much risk we're talking about here. Kind of hard to fit something into your personal risk profile if you can't first quantify how much risk there is to begin with.

I think you'll find that it's low (as you suggested) based on general aviation related claims, but whatever number you come up with it's still a risk with potential huge impact, particularly if you have assets that are endangered. So in a way that risk is much more manageable to the young CFI who's barely (or not even) out of debt, but not so much for someone nearing retirement with a nest egg that is his or her only remaining source of financial security.

 

[bradg33]

Aren't there CFI insurance policies? Also, this is why you get waivers.

If they are employees, or should be, then most states would require indemnification of any personal liability for work done in the course and scope of their employment.

Waivers are basically useless if the family sues you (you can't waive other's rights). Also, indemnification is great only if the person indemnifying you (a) can afford to do so and (b) actually does so.

 

[write-stuff]

To some degree that's almost like asking a barber if you need a haircut.

That's kind of like saying you shouldn't ask a physician about chest pains.

 

[1RTK1]

Transferring assets like that can be quite problematic (read up on the concept of fraudulent transfers) and can lead to expensive litigation.

Not an attorney, if not done after the fact of being sued I can't see how that would be considered a fraudulent transfer. If that were the fact all trust would be subject.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

Yeah, this.

 

[N1120A]

Waivers are basically useless if the family sues you (you can't waive other's rights). Also, indemnification is great only if the person indemnifying you (a) can afford to do so and (b) actually does so.

Laws make indemnification mandatory.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

I have been sued by one former student. It was a strategy employed by his attorney to put pressure on the insurance company to cease their efforts to subrogate and get damages from the student after a total hull loss.
They sued everyone that touched him during training.
It worked. Insurance dropped their action and he dropped all of his.

insurance company attorney was representing all of us he went after.

 

[Shuswap BC]

The answer is...

 

[Shuswap BC]

Also remember that being named in a law suit is really nothing, unless you were extremely negligent, they will lose, and you can file counter suit for your legal fees. Twice an idiot has attempted to sue me, its fairly common as a Physician to be sued. End result both times, were me winning my legal costs, they got zero. Instead of being upset, I found it funny when served. I knew that I had done nothing wrong, and judges are not idiots who are easily baffled by BS some lawyers spew out.

 

[dbahn]

Also remember that being named in a law suit is really nothing, unless you were extremely negligent, they will lose, and you can file counter suit for your legal fees. Twice an idiot has attempted to sue me, its fairly common as a Physician to be sued. End result both times, were me winning my legal costs, they got zero. Instead of being upset, I found it funny when served. I knew that I had done nothing wrong, and judges are not idiots who are easily baffled by BS some lawyers spew out.

My only experience being sued in the past 45 years as an orthopedic surgeon was a claim by a personal friend of mine (a lawyer) who had no life insurance because of a childhood tumor. I was devastated when I was served with papers, claiming I had missed a tumor on X-ray (solitary plasmacytoma in the scapula). I did miss it, because it was nearly invisible and came to light only on subsequent MRI. (Three radiologists missed it on plain films as well.) The deposition with both of us present was painful. He died before it went to trial, but it was actually the treatment that caused his death (leukemia), and ironically he would likely have lived much longer if he had not even known about the tumor in the first place. The delay of a month or two in the diagnosis had zero impact on the outcome. I knew his wife well and coached both of his children in hockey. If it had been my fault I would have been relieved to have a million dollar settlement (requested by his lawyer) go to the family. As it was I agreed to a $5,000 payout under the condition that 100% of it went to the family and none to the lawyers. (To the lawyer's credit I found out later from her that they did honor that condition.) My point is that the experience was not a real financial threat to me, but the lawsuit was a horrible and time consuming experience nonetheless.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Also remember that being named in a law suit is really nothing, unless you were extremely negligent, they will lose, and you can file counter suit for your legal fees..

The ability to recover legal fees depends on the jurisdiction and the nature of the suit. In most states in the US, the “American rule” applies and both parties pay their own fees. Very different than the UK.

Some exceptions are if you can show the suit was completely without merit or in some states if the suit arises out of a contract dispute (such as AZ).

 

[sarangan]

Numerous thread topics (e.g. the current one of flying after retirement) drift into the concern of not flight instructing due to the potential liability. Perhaps this deserves its own thread.

In our society I agree that anyone can be sued for about anything at any time. It's a legitimate question whether or not it's a great idea to do a time consuming activity with relatively low monetary return that could potentially wipe out all one's assets.

On the other hand do we want our next generation of pilots to only be trained by 20 year olds with basically zero real world flying experience? I know for sure that I would not be the pilot I am today if experienced pilots/flight instructors had not flown with me and taught me and mentored me. Should I ignore the "risk' they took flying with me and say I'm too big, or too important, or too wealthy to give back?

After a lot of years of hard work I do have assets, but I have chosen to use some of my time to do independent flight instruction, including primary students. I feel some obligation to give back to the avocation that has been such a positive part of my life for a long time.

Experienced pilots who say they won't take the risk of getting sued will not see the smile on a student's face after the first solo. They perhaps may not keep their own skills as sharp with basic airmanship skills like slow flight, or steep turns or engine out landings. They certainly won't be taking the newbies beyond the FAA's ACS.

Should we let this potential threat keep us from doing something that is rewarding and very much needed? Or should we just let somebody else do it?

Once you accept the risks that come with Part 91 flying, I don't believe CFI liability is any greater than the overall liability in flying. The risks of losing an engine and crashing into someone's property is probably greater than an ex-student suing you. Just like you can be a better pilot through better training, you can also reduce CFI liability by keeping thorough training records and a detailed syllabus. Be conservative in who you sign off. Develop a reputation of being tough, and be selective in who you accept as students. I doubt there are many CFIs who gave up instructing due to fear or litigation, but continued to fly on their own. But I do know pilots who gave up flying altogether due to the liability and risks.

 

[Snowmass]

Given our rotten to the core tort laws I won't even carry passengers any more unless the are in my will let alone engage is something as risky as flight instructing. I million? Maybe for broken finger. You can get millions for spilling hot coffee on yourself.

 

[bradg33]

Not an attorney, if not done after the fact of being sued I can't see how that would be considered a fraudulent transfer. If that were the fact all trust would be subject.

Transfers can be fraudulent as to future creditors. Many trusts are either not true asset protective trusts (and the assets, as a matter of law, may be subject to the creditors of the settlor) and many "asset protection" trusts, if tested, could be clawed back as fraudulent transfers under the right circumstances. The guys selling you asset protection trusts tend to downplay the risks, but they're there.

 

[bradg33]

Laws make indemnification mandatory.

So what? If the indemnitor refuses to do it, all you've got is essentially a breach of contract claim, you can sue him. But you're still subject to the main lawsuit. Further, if the indemnitor doesn't have the funds to indeminfy you (or to defend you), are you just going to go without counsel? No, you're going to hire your own, out of your own pocket, and you're likely never going to get reimbursed. The law can "require" indemnification all day long, but as a practical matter, that's only useful against a broke or unwilling indemnitor if you can front the cost of defense and then sue later to recover (and hope you can collect).

 

[midlifeflyer]

Also remember that being named in a law suit is really nothing, unless you were extremely negligent, they will lose, and you can file counter suit for your legal fees. Twice an idiot has attempted to sue me, its fairly common as a Physician to be sued. End result both times, were me winning my legal costs, they got zero. Instead of being upset, I found it funny when served. I knew that I had done nothing wrong, and judges are not idiots who are easily baffled by BS some lawyers spew out.

Problem is, in the American system unless there is a statutory or applicable contractual provision for awarding fees to the winner, or you ate able to convince a judge there was absolutely no basis for a suit. The basic rule us, each party pays it's own attorneys fees.

 

[bradg33]

Also remember that being named in a law suit is really nothing, unless you were extremely negligent, they will lose, and you can file counter suit for your legal fees. Twice an idiot has attempted to sue me, its fairly common as a Physician to be sued. End result both times, were me winning my legal costs, they got zero. Instead of being upset, I found it funny when served. I knew that I had done nothing wrong, and judges are not idiots who are easily baffled by BS some lawyers spew out.

Being named in wrongful death lawsuit, even if you have a good defense, can bankrupt most people. The cost of defense can be staggering.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I'm curious to see actual cases of instructors getting sued down the line if something happens to their former student. We talk about this kind of thing all the time as though it's a common occurrence, but other than one or two cases, I still haven't seen any evidence of the purported high risk. Perhaps what needs to be done is look at all the GA accidents where pilot error has been given as the cause, and see what percentage an insurance company or family went after the pilot's various instructors.

It's extremely rare, very difficult and expensive to prove, and some states don't even recognize "instructor malpractice" as a legit claim.

My answer to the main question is that I am comfortable accepting the liability risk, do my best to do a good job, and do not worry about it. Others are not comfortable and do worry.

 

[James331]

Just live your life.

Bad stuff can and will always happen, do you want to live your life and take risk as/if it comes, or live like a scared broken animal and probably still have more or less the same amount of risk?

 

[Clip4]

Waivers are basically useless if the family sues you (you can't waive other's rights). Also, indemnification is great only if the person indemnifying you (a) can afford to do so and (b) actually does so.

Sign a waiver in Florida and try to prevail in a lawsuit for anything other than gross negligence. That state protected those who obtain waivers rather well. So have other states.

There are six states (Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas) that have a no dollar cap on the homestead exemption, which means that your primary home in these six states, regardless of value, cannot be taken by a judgment creditorand is thus protected from lawsuits by state law. Other states have lower limits that are usually multiplied by 2 if you are married.

Retirement accounts and defined pensions are also off limits from creditors nationwide. Retirees don’t make the best targets for lawsuits.