RCU Forums - View Single Post - Something unexpected from the AMA

08-01-2008 | 07:03 PM

#44

pilott28

My Feedback: (27)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 1,175

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

From: Jasper, GA

RE: Something unexpected from the AMA

Quote:

ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc

Quote:

ORIGINAL: bevar

Gordon,
Where does it say you have to have a waiver to fly on private property? I thought you only needed the waiver to fly at AMA fields (for the insurance coverage).

Thanks,

Beave

The subject has been covered quite a few times in this forum. If you search for terms like "opt-out" you can probably find them.

Ultra-brief overview follows ; if you want more details, I suggest you look up the old threads or give the AMA a call… I don't want to re-type everything (plus there are plenty of clueless goons who can't separate the message from the messenger and assume I'm backing the dumb AMA policies just because I explain what the AMA has told me, so why invite more of their nonsense..

)

AMA covers you everywhere you fly, not just at AMA chartered clubs or AMA sanctioned events. This is basically because many AMA members don't fly in organized clubs. As a result, you are always covered by the AMA, and the AMA would supposedly always get dragged into any lawsuit regardless of whether you actually wanted to use your AMA insurance that day or not.

There is widespread misconception about the ability to 'opt out" of AMA insurance, but the big-wigs repeatedly tell us that the common notions such as "I'm flying on private property, so the rules don't apply", or "I'm in the middle of a gazillion acres of desert, so the rules don't apply", or "I have my own insurance, so I'm not relying on AMA insurance today" are all bogus. This is one of the reasons why e.g. we can't curently have a jet speed event such as the one Eddie Weeks was trying to organize.

The AMA has stated several times that they may revoke the membership of anyone who willfully flies outside of the AMA safety code even if that person didn't 'want to be covered by the AMA' at the time they were busting the rules.

Quite why the AMA is so against us being able to sign a doc to allow us to opt-out of AMA insurance for a given period / event, I'm not sure. Maybe they think that if they make it easy for us to choose to ignore the rules on a given day, we'll all become a bunch of totally out of control loonies ?

Personally, I am all for an opt-out policy but sadly wishing it were so doesn't make it happen.

Gordon

Gordon, your points are on target.

The reason there is no "opt out" is that the insurance policy is a contract that has a definition of "member". To allow "opt out", the AMA would need to approach the insurer, modify the contract to put an administrative process in place to allow people to legally "opt out" and make sure it would stand up in the event of a claim. Difficult to do, and as a company exec, I can tell you it would be highly unusual and not very positively received by the insurer. Also, it is unlikely that there would be any premium reduction for it. There are a myriad of smaller issues, but basically in today's insurance world it would be an administrative burden, highly unusual and not viewed as practical.

I am aware of one situation where an individual with the AMA discussed revocation of membership for violation of the saftey code, but I don't believe this would be representative of the current leadership. My personal opinion, though I do work closely with them on the insurance committee and I have been involved in a few specific conversations around this point.

Reply Like