AOPA or Avemco

[DesertNomad]

I am getting quotes for a 182, $50K hull, 1m/100K liability.

AOPA (AIG) quoted $950 and Avemco quoted $1775. This seems like a huge difference for what is listed as the same coverage.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[N747JB]

Verify coverage is the same and go with the cheaper one. Airplane insurance is a strange market, sometimes the prices are within dollars from one company to the next and sometimes they are double! I've seen my quotes range from $4100-7500 with a couple companies declining to quote my Conquest. My 182 is different, it's about $1500.00 with my 19 year old son as a named pilot and he hasn't gotten his PPL yet.

I am getting quotes for a 182, $50K hull, 1m/100K liability.

AOPA (AIG) quoted $950 and Avemco quoted $1775. This seems like a huge difference for what is listed as the same coverage.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[frfly172]

Just switched from avemco,to AOPA,after being with avemco for at least 8 years. Saved 575.00 on my policy with 57k more hull value at AOPA. Avemco seems to be pricing themselves out of the market. Both give you a baseball cap.

 

[poadeleted21]

I am getting quotes for a 182, $50K hull, 1m/100K liability.

AOPA (AIG) quoted $950 and Avemco quoted $1775. This seems like a huge difference for what is listed as the same coverage.

Any thoughts on this?

You don't need a math degree for this one. 50K hull on a fixed gear for $1775? That's Avemco's way of telling you that they don't want to do business with you. $950 is the going rate.

 

[Clark1961]

You don't need a math degree for this one. 50K hull on a fixed gear for $1775? That's Avemco's way of telling you that they don't want to do business with you. $950 is the going rate.

950 may be the going rate but it's more than 200 too high - shop around - there are many more brokers than AOPA and they all want your business.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

I am getting quotes for a 182, $50K hull, 1m/100K liability.

AOPA (AIG) quoted $950 and Avemco quoted $1775. This seems like a huge difference for what is listed as the same coverage.

Any thoughts on this?

Yes. Call both and ask them to send you very specific coverage details. By doing this plus the ability to cancel, say two bad winter months and have only hull insurance provided the airplane was in hangar, not flown during this time, ( reducing the annual policy considerably) plus excellent rapport and service I insured with Avemco for over fourty years. Be very careful of what they cover and do not cover. Ie: are you covered if you fly and land at a fly in? Be very cautious. Then remember AIG had to be bailed out for billions by the American taxpayer for poor management. To each his own. ( your total time and accident history naturally will enter into the rate they charge. )

 

[James331]

Avemco is good, but they quoted be double what airpower quoted for the same policy for my 185.

Agree with the others, compare apples to apples and pick the cheapest.

 

[weilke]

In one aspect, AIG provides you better coverage than Avemco: Avemco has a 'per person' sublimit, AIG has a 'per passenger' sublimit. So if you hurt someone outside of your plane with a Avemco policy, you are pretty much on your own.

If you can swing a 1700 premium, consider upping your coverage to one without sublimits.

Call Avemco and tell them that you have a competing quote for coverage through a broker. It has been my experience that they will discount their rate by 30-40% to keep your business. The first quote from them is just an opening offer hoping that you are one of the suckers who just pays.

Ask your rep at AOPAIA to give you a written list of all the companies he shopped your policy with. They seem to be married to AIG, an independent broker may come back with something even more competitive. Read the policies though, some have goofy exlusions hidden in the multiple endorsements attached to them. That is one good thing about Avemco, the policy is written in plain language and structured in an understandable way.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Try Travers Aviation Insurance (St. Louis, MO) and get a quote for Phoenix/Old Republic. Will depend a bit on your time-in-type, but they can probably beat that $950 by a little.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

BTW, be sure not to under-insure your hull value. It is pretty cheap (~1% of hull value), and not worth saving a few bucks. Aircraft insurance is "stated value" so it whatever number you can get the insurance company to agree to.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

BTW, did you give a tail number when looking for quotes, or just generic quotes? If you gave a tail #, you may be locked into dealing with that broker for that policy - the underwriter won't quote the same policy (tail#) to multiple brokers.

 

[weilke]

BTW, did you give a tail number when looking for quotes, or just generic quotes? If you gave a tail #, you may be locked into dealing with that broker for that policy - the underwriter won't quote the same policy (tail#) to multiple brokers.

According to a broker I spoke to, that does not apply to run of the mill policies that they run through the automated underwriting system. If they talk to an underwriter for a more complicated quote, the insurance may not quote that n-number through a different broker.

If one wishes to change brokers, they can give the broker a letter that appoints them as their new 'broker of record'. With that letter in hand, the new broker can get quotes from companies that may decline to quote due to the multiple broker issue.

 

[Fearless Tower]

BTW, be sure not to under-insure your hull value. It is pretty cheap (~1% of hull value), and not worth saving a few bucks. Aircraft insurance is "stated value" so it whatever number you can get the insurance company to agree to.

That is a strange recommendation. Hull value has always been the substantially largest part of my premiums on every airplane I have owned. I haven't needed to do it, but reducing the hull value would significantly reduce my insurance bill.

 

[weilke]

That is a strange recommendation. Hull value has always been the substantially largest part of my premiums on every airplane I have owned. I haven't needed to do it, but reducing the hull value would significantly reduce my insurance bill.

Depends on what level of liability you obtain. For our partnership plane, hull insurance is a small percentage of the total bill.

 

[NoHeat]

. Aircraft insurance is "stated value" so it whatever number you can get the insurance company to agree to.

There's a downside for insuring a stated value that is too much. The only way the insurance company will pay more than the repair cost is if they total it, and they keep the plane. So basically, you can choose a stated value that's too high, but this choice is equivalent to deciding that you prefer to give the plane to the insurance company. If you want better choices after a mishap, insure exactly for the value of the plane.

Article by Mike Busch explaining this

http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/category/authors/mike-busch/

 

[Stewartb]

Alaska's a different market but two coverages are critical for me and not all bargain insurers provide it. First and foremost for me is off airport ops. Avemco has no limitations for where I fly or land including on tires and skis. Floats require an additional coverage. The other item that I require is "Personal Business". If I use my plane for a non-revenue flight that has something to do with my business I'm covered. Some insurers require a rider to add personal business and some refuse to include that coverage.

Little things add up.

 

[Bill Watson]

Try Travers Aviation Insurance (St. Louis, MO) and get a quote for Phoenix/Old Republic. Will depend a bit on your time-in-type, but they can probably beat that $950 by a little.

That's the broker I've used for a number of years. Been thru several - AOPA nor Avemco were ever lowest price players though I've had policies with AIG more than once.

It's worth re-quoting every year and not worrying about 'staying with the same folks' year after year. There is zero loyalty valuation in this market. Find the coverage you want at the lowest price, repeat.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

There's a downside for insuring a stated value that is too much.

I didn't say go for "too much", I just said under insured. Saving a few bucks now but then finding you can't replace your plane with an equivalent type for the insured amount would be unfortunate.

 

[Clark1961]

Just another data point.

I have never received a competitive quote from Avemco vs AOPA Insurance Agency. I did however once get a nice cap from Avemco for at least letting them have a chance. I tried to get a quote from them again this year, but I was placed on extended hold repeatedly which tells me, "we don't want your business." Still, they dutifully send out the little quote flyer right on time every year.

I thought their hat was cheap/low quality and assumed their insurance would be poor quality also.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Just another data point.

I have never received a competitive quote from Avemco vs AOPA Insurance Agency. I did however once get a nice cap from Avemco for at least letting them have a chance. I tried to get a quote from them again this year, but I was placed on extended hold repeatedly which tells me, "we don't want your business." Still, they dutifully send out the little quote flyer right on time every year.

I have received competitive Avemco quotes, but only when I was a new/low-time pilot looking at a first purchase.

Ever since then, Avemco has always been higher.

 

[Fearless Tower]

All this talk about hats..... Someone must not like me. I've never gotten a hat from either a AOPA or Avemco

 

[Clark1961]

All this talk about hats..... Someone must not like me. I've never gotten a hat from either a AOPA or Avemco

Can you blame them?

 

[DesertNomad]

In one aspect, AIG provides you better coverage than Avemco: Avemco has a 'per person' sublimit, AIG has a 'per passenger' sublimit. So if you hurt someone outside of your plane with a Avemco policy, you are pretty much on your own.

Did you get that backwards? A per-person limit seems better than a per-passenger limit.

 

[weilke]

Did you get that backwards? A per-person limit seems better than a per-passenger limit.

Oh no. If you land on a road and hurt a motorist, you want your million available to pay his medical bills, not 100k. Per passenger applies to people in your aircraftor 'alighting from it'.
In the 'model into prop' accident there was litigation about her status as a passenger. They settled in the end but it was a question of 200k vs 2mil for someone who lost an eye and parts of her pretty face.