ORIGINAL: pattratt
<<Which part of the AMA insurance do you not understand ?>>
The part where you claim they can take "punitive action" against me or my AMA membership as a result of my flying a turbine aircraft without a waiver at a non AMA flying facility, holding a non sanctioned AMA event with a non AMA approved weight and or non AMA approved power to weight ratio size and speed.
Then please feel free call Carl and discuss it with him.
<<Do you think that all AMA members fly only at AMA chartered club sites, or at AMA sanctioned events ? If so, you are seriously mistaken.>>
That was "NOT" what the discussion was about and you know it!!
No, I don’t. Sorry, but I can only read and respond to what you wrote, not what you were thinking about when you wrote it.
<<Many AMA members do not belong to any club, and consequently the AMA insurance is set up to cover you regardless of where you are flying. >>
This is true only if you abide by their Waiver system and saftey rules that govern Turbine activities with the EXPECTATION of having THEIR insurance! The example here was focused on those individuals who were NOT going to abide by those rules, were not going to be flying at a AMA sanctioned event or site, and were NOT EXPECTING to be covered by the AMA insurance in the event of an accident.
Once again, feel free to call Carl and have this discussion with him. I’ve told you what his stated position has been thusfar, so if you have a problem with that position, you are welcome to take it up with him. I don't mind leading the horse to water, but I'm not interested in trying to make it drink.
Gordon
FYI, I enclose a sample email from Carl on this subject: The only change I have made to it, is to set bold on two sentences to highlight them below
From: Carl Maroney
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 2:12 PM
To: Gordon McConnell
Cc: Joyce Hager
Subject: RE: Insurance Question
Just so there is no misunderstanding, the policy does not specifically exclude coverage for any willful violation of the safety code. The "intentional acts" exclusion may come into play if the violation is willful, reckless disregard to the point of almost assuring an accident. We do not want to exclude any and all safety code violations since some are minor and do not deserve denial of coverage.
The opt out term is certainly open to your definition. We are reluctant to use the term since it implies that if an AMA member "ops out" they are free to fly in any manner they choose. We said earlier, insurance is not about safety, and safety is not about insurance. There is never an acceptable excuse for an AMA member to intentionally and recklessly disregard the safety code on the basis that they opted out of AMA insurance coverage. Any member acting in that manner should be suspended or expelled, not just suffer temporary lapse of AMA insurance during the violation period. Reckless disregard for safety should never be tolerated by the club, safety officer or other AMA members. If a serious accident occurs it is much more than a matter of insurance, it is about the image of Aeromodeling and the AMA members who participate in Aeromodeling.
In the sense that participating in an event that is conducted in violation of the safety code or other AMA rules is opting out, we agree that to do so would have the effect of opting out, except that in some instances the opting out may apply only to individual members and not the group as a whole. The policy definition of "aircraft" excludes UAVs unless a special waiver is granted by AMA, and that waiver is granted only for educational research purposes to accredited educational institutions upon application to AMA. And even then, the educational institution has to provide evidence of insurance coverage, so AMA insurance is only secondary, at best.
AMA and MAAC have an agreement that when AMA members fly in Canada, even if they have joined MAAC, they must fly by the AMA safety code. However, as in the US, violation of the safety code in itself does not necessarily mean no AMA coverage. The earlier examples you provide were willful and reckless disregard for safety. That may bring the action within the intentional acts exclusion. Whether the safety code violation is sufficient to result in denial of coverage can only be determined after an accident occurs and the insurer conducts a claim investigation.
While this may seem confusing, we and the insurer, at our request, want to have some flexibility in determining if the violation, or any other aspect of the activity, is reckless and dangerous to the point that denial is justified. The simple answer is: If the member wants to be assured of AMA coverage (subject to the standard policy exclusion and limitations) then all flying should comply with the AMA safety code. If the member chooses to violate the code, AMA insurance may or may not cover the member for potential liability. Unfortunately we cannot make it black and white, it depends on the facts of any given accident..
In summary, regardless of the insurance coverage issues, we cannot condone, and clubs and other AMA members should not tolerate, willful and reckless disregard of the AMA National Safety Code. We hope that such actions will be reported to AMA and that the members engaging in such activity realize they may be subject to membership suspension and possible expulsion.
Carl P. Maroney
Special Services Director