Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,396
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
$700,000 insurance claims because someone bumped into your airplane don't make for affordable insurance rates.
Piper making Arrows again
- Thread starter ZeroPapaGolf
- Start date
$700,000 insurance claims because someone bumped into your airplane don't make for affordable insurance rates.
A drop in the bucket compared to when the fuel truck backs into a big shiny jet, or gets someone hurt. Remember, this is FBO liability, not aircraft hull coverage. They would have likely done the same with a 10 hour old Bonanza.
I have flown composite aircraft that had the entire tail put back on after a ground-loop and part of a wing replaced after bowling over a row of fenceposts.
Story sounds at the very least incomplete.
ChrisK
En-Route
Actually, BB still has a network that is way, way more secure when compared to other consumer brands. Consumers just don't care about that level of security.
dukeblue219
Line Up and Wait
Businesses don't use it anymore. The federal government has mostly transitioned away. iOS and Android can be "secure enough" for daily use since most folks just use their work phone for their schedule, email, and contact list. Any work with sensitive or personally-identifying information has to be encrypted anyway and the devices can be "remote killed" very easily by IT if necessary.
I'm sure there are some people still using BB obviously, but the company is finished as a mainstream device manufacturer at this point. The myth that federal employees use BB needs to die off.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Okay, I'll clarify .....the DoD (a large part of the Federal Govt) is still buying BBs in bulk. And that is no myth.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,396
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Nope thats the full story. I also have experienced this from behind the wrench working at an approved cirrus service center. There are repair procedures in the maintenance manual for composite damage. If the specific damage you are trying to fix is not included in the manual then it all gets documented and sent off to cirrus. They develop a repair procedure to be followed to return the aircraft to service. In my buddies case they said no repair available and it was totaled.
I used to have a few pictures floating around of the damage on the wing but can't seem to find them, unfortunately.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,396
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
You are correct. His insurance rate still went up after it was all said and done. Loss history is loss history. They don't care who paid it out in my experience. Not saying its always that way. It is how it worked out for him unfortunately.
Still loves his Cirrus and wouldn't trade it for anything. Just something to consider, in my opinion, if looking to buy.
Correct, many factors go into these decisions, salvage value being a major one. The insurance companies know exactly what each part will salvage for and what the demand is because they run pools that sell wrecks. If the numbers crunch out to replacing the aircraft and salvaging out the old as the least costly (or potentially profitable even since the parts are worth more than the whole) way to go, that is what they will do. The other driving factor is not having an open claim across multiple quarters, they like seeing claims closed quickly and a chunk of a file manager's performance review is how long claims take to get resolved.
It's often that way, you can get around it sometimes by working out the settlement with the other insurer before reporting to yours, especially if you have a savvy agent and report through them, but not always.
I have nothing against Cirrus or against an insurance company that wants to replace my previously undamaged equipment for new.