J_R,
Ok i do stand corrected on the fact that the property owner is primary. And i do keep an open mind also do not want to fight.
But answer this as a modeler will the AMA cover you for a prop strike as i explained earlier. And also keeping in mind that as a American if you allow any one company to become a monopoly the service quality goes straight down hill. No competition means no service. Now as a 23 year model pilot i cant think of one thing i have to show that the AMA did directly for any of the sport modelers. I mean Now tell me why if they are not trying to cut out all the competition would they have in there by-laws that no one person may fly at an AMA approved chartered site unless they are a member of the AMA. And again back to the property owner do you think that he would like it better if every one involved was covered not just his property. This does boils down to one thing and one only freedom of choice and all tell you if you want to cover your on health better look at the UMA. This is for your protection and you family or any one else that is a pilot at your field because the AMA is still secondary for you my friend.

J_R,
Also i will look into the family and or trip and fall coverage because my family are spectators and nothing else. This does concern me but there is no direct exclusion of there coverage. You do have to look at all the rules you have to follow with the AMA to. The lot of the rules is to cover there but only a few are to help the modeler be safe. Next what about another pilots property damage if you hit his truck? what then? Its not covered. Oh well we can talk about this until where blue in the face. They both have good and bad things i feel i need both because the AMA will not cover allot of things the UMA will. And just two more things i will get back to you on the trip fall thing + family. Also the UMA is not none profit and do not claim to be only claim to be helpful to the modeler.

hotrod468

Whew, you have some good questions

The AMA accident/medical insurance is not the same as liability coverage. It also is secondary to any other health coverage you may have. It has a smaller $50 deductible.

I am only going to give you one thing the AMA has done for all modelers. It's old, but still true. The AMA was responsible for securing the frequencies that we fly on. It's the most famous example, but, not the only one by any means.

The AMA bylaws do not exclude anyone from flying at a chartered club field. That choice is made by the AMA chartered club and the landlord, and not dictated by the AMA. In fact, there are clubs that have municipally owned fields where anyone may fly, while the AMA landlord policy protects the municipality for all flyers. Basically, the clubs and their members, as well as the landlord, chose to limit who flys there to protect their own butt.

Finally, you need to keep in mind that the AMA is not an insurance company. Just like an employer, they supply insurance as a benefit of membership. As far as I know, the AMA certainly does not discourage being a member of UMA. If you think about it, it is to the AMA's advantage for you to have a large primary liability policy.

A general liability policy covers much more than property for the landlord. Things like trip and fall accidents are covered. It protects him against a claim that he is liable for things (events, accidents, etc) that occur on his property.

JR

The AMA Safety Code is a list of exclusions to your AMA coverage. It is designed to keep you in a safe environment. Almost all questions new members have can be answered in the AMA by-laws within the 2003 Membership Manual, or in the 2003 club recharter package on the AMA page.

You hit on one that is not. Here are some unanswered questions.
You are not covered if there is a midair, for damage to the other plane. If the debris hits someone or something the AMA coverage is secondary to any other coverage. If you hit the pits and destroy planes and equipment, it is not covered. If you hit a vehicle the AMA coverage is secondary to any other coverage, including the owners vehicle insurance.

JR

look at the line #5 in the charter kit you directed me to right under the table of contents and you can refract the statement about the by-laws.

J_R ,
Also i agree the AMA should not discourage other company's to provide insurance but they do. What input can you ad to this other then a continued push to try to be the only one to do this sort of thing. I mean what do you think your car would run like with no competition. Or if the was only one company to build homes would the quality be good think about it dude. All Ive been saying the whole way threw this is open your eyes before you talk bad about insurance company's cause they all suck really. And I'm not die-hard UMA but the more competition out there the better service we will get as a consumer. See my point hope so got to go crash now but will research tomorrow on the other points you made.

What item 5 says is that all chartered club members must be AMA members. What is does not say, and is referenced later in the document, is that you must be a club member to fly at a club field. That is a club decision. The clubs I belong to insist that you be an AMA member to fly at the club field. Guest's who are not club members, but do have AMA memberships, may fly there. As you can see, it is possible that a club would allow non-AMA members to be guests. It is strictly up to the club.

In order to protect the members of the club and assure that people that fly have the proper insurance, for the sake of the members and the landlord, most clubs have a rule requiring AMA membership.

I hope I have made this clear. It's a subtle difference in words, but a huge difference in meaning.

JR

There was a war at one time with another model organization. Currently, I have never seen a bad word said or published by the AMA about any other organization.

We are getting off onto opinions here and away from facts. That's OK with me. I will give you my thoughts. Would you expect Toyota to do anything to help Suzuki cut into Toyota's sales? Would you expect any homebuilder to help a competitor? There is nothing stopping anyone from forming a new modeling organization. It might be expensive, but, that is the nature of this country.

Also, you are not old enough to remember when there was one telephone company. Many of us would debate the value of having many telephone companies and question the pricing and service they now offer. Some of us would say the split up was bad, some would say it is good. I think most of us do not want the government involved with models like it was with phone companies.

JR

According to page 4, every person who 'participates in club flying activities' has to be an AMA member, Period, or you fall back to
Jon

Wouldn't it be cool if the only vehicle in America was the same color (yellow) Volkswagon beetle. Parts would be easy to get, never have to match paint in case of an accident, very cheap to buy of course <vgb> and of course, only 1 place to buy gas. I'm sure the price for gas would stay low <lol> and 1 kind of plane (slowpoke, yellow of course) JR radio, OS 35...............

Jon

page 14, 2003 charter club renewal kit

"4. Acts voiding coverage by any other insured do not apply to site owners. Should an AMA member or club
either do something, or fail to do something that voids coverage for that member or club, the site owner still
has coverage under this policy."

Letting non-AMA members fly at a club field may leave individuals and clubs uncovered. That is why most clubs require an AMA membership to fly. The landlord remains covered.

If you read the package, do not read the word "should" as "must". If you don't want to read the package, that is your choice... remain uninformed or misinformed.

JR

So according to that, anyone can fly at a 'club' field and the landowner will be covered. My point was that If the individual flies in any club flying activities the club charter can be revoked!

PS:

I just re-read page 14. This is speaking of ama members and clubs, not non-members. 'ama (they have a comma here which appears to be a misprint) members and clubs'

Per this quote, this document once again specifically addresses damage from 'club activities', not non club or club member activities.

#4 implies then that 'any other insured' meaning ama insured as this document specifically deals with 'insuring AMA, members and clubs for liability' (head quote) "Should an AMA member or club" once again deals with ama members, not non ama members!


Jon

Jon

It's apparent that you are reading the document. I apologize for the comment.

If you are looking for a line that says that it is ok for non-members to fly at an AMA chartered club field, it is not going to happen. We can sit and debate what the documents say. I have, in the past, written to Carl Maroney to find out what the correct interpretation is. If you still have doubts about what is says, write or call Carl. It's not something they would prefer to advertise. If the AMA told the clubs that they could not allow anyone other than AMA members to fly at chartered club fields, there would probably be a lawsuit.

From an individual, or club, point of view, it does not make sense to let someone fly at the field that might cause legal claims and does not have insurance to cover YOU and YOUR club for non modeling related claims. Coverage of themselves for liability is only part of the story. Remember that half of the claims the AMA has are non-modeling related.

JR

Why not. If the landowner is going to be covered just like a member, why not let them fly. They'll be covered just like an ama member from the landowner perspective then. Jon

Suppose that the non-AMA member sets up a chair and some unsuspecting wife of a member trips over it and breaks her back. She sues the landlord, and the club for neglience. The landlord is covered, the club is not. If there is a judgement, you, as a club member must shell out. Forget whether it is fair, the tort system makes it possible. Are you willing to put everything you own on the line to let a non-AMA member fly? Most clubs answer with a resounding NO.

JR

go away fer 6 hours and 2 pages of stuff springs up<G>

jr, the ancedotal stuff i have posted about ins requirements were related to me by the city attourney.
in his opinion, the ama ins was severly deficient to protect the city, based on research he did into events at other municipalities in the southwest and their experiences. requiring it would cost the city much money in legal defense of an indefensable position at sopme later point. so form his point of view, and therefore the city's, free and unregulated unorganised citizen flying activity would be allowed on city park property, just the same as free and unregulated unorganised baseball, softball, and basketball activitys were allowed. now as soon as a club is mentioned, organization, then rental/lease arangements must be made and the city's general liability package no longer will cover, just like with organised sports. then each group must provide their own ins ackage.
this arangerment has worked well for the past 5 years, for us non club memebers, howerve it has been hell for the local club. they have shrunk to a paid membership of 25 now, where they had 75 3 years ago. this is in a city of just under 100,000.
just in the past 5 years, i have seen 5 of nine clubs within a 1.5 hour drive from where i sit, fold up cards and die. and more are heading that way , in this part of the world, anyway.

edit added, i did not ask the city attourney for details of his reasons for rejecting the ama ins.

Please do as that would be valuable information for many to have. It is also possible that the wrong questions were asked of the wrong parties or the wrong conclusions were reached. There has been action elsewhere in the last year where a party with a vested interest took action to cause serious grief to long time active flying activities. A little careful communications seems to have corrected the misunderstandings.

5 years ago jim.
different city attourney now, and i am not interested in rocking the boat.

Wonder why your DVP was unable to help. The issue should have been right down his alley. I know that in some areas where there was question, the AMA has faxed answers or even called officials to answer direct questions. Oh well, better luck next time. Maybe a different DVP would be a start. . .

there is something wrong when 90% of flying sites in the us force
you to be a ama member to fly there even using the buddy box.
i think it only a matter of time before this becomes a problem
and more people start doing there own thing.



Ira d

The AMA does not go out and start clubs. The AMA does not dictate to clubs who may fly on thier fields. The members of a group must apply to the AMA to become a chartered club and spend money to do it. Why do you suppose that a large number of these groups choose to be AMA affiliated? Why would you, as a modeler, choose to be associated with a bunch of guys that want to be an AMA club if you don't want to? Would you prefer to pay, say, $25 or $50 a day to fly at a commercial field where you would not have to deal with the AMA? Is it that you do not like AMA members? What is the problem?

Purely out of curiosity, what does that mean: "do your own thing"?

JR

Someone being hurt at a club field, ie step in a hole, fall out of a chair, etc, spectator or... is a lot different than a non member flying at the site and hurting someone, etc. The claim would have to based on the person doing something allowed at the club property. Someone couldn't come on the property with 2 cars, play demolition derby on purpose, then put a claim against the ama since it was on a club field!!! A spectator setting in a chair watching (is invited by the club) and having a mishap I can understand being covered. A non member flying (not given permission by the club) and having an accident has no basesa for a claim as they were doing something not allowed!! I have a very hard time believing that the ama would cover this.

That's simple <g> For the insurance!!!! That is really the main reason. Jon

JR i just had to jump in with my 2 cents on this The AMA DOES dictate who can fly at a clubs fields just by the fact that if you are not a member of AMA then the insurance wont cover. Now I am not sure on this so I pose this to ya. IF a non AMA member was flying at a chartered site and had an accident and say the property owner and club were sued would they pay? I rather doubt it since the person flying was not an AMA member thus not covered.

As in my club they constantly spout the AMA says they can and cannot do this or that now whether what the club officers are saying is true or not is not the main point, what the main point is is that there are a lot of clubs out there whaere the officers are in the mentality of THINKING that the AMA is forcing them to abide my this or that and really do not know the whole story. I know there are places where the AMA states that some of their rules are just a set of guidelines and not hard set rules required by the AMA but the way they put the info out to the clubs is where all the problems start. You constantly state that it is the club not the AMA that makes the rules but in fact to me at least it seems that the way they are presented to the clubs a lot of mis/un-informed club officers take it as fact. there in lies all the problems. they use lawyer speak rather than plain english by throwing all sorts of unecessary suggestions in. where as they should just say here is the AMA rules in plain enlish
ex
rule 1:
rule2:
rule:
if it isnt in these above rules it is not a requirement of the AMA. instead they hide the rules inside of a bunch of suggestions that get mis read and misunderstood by club officers and thats where most of the problems with the AMA come in.

I really only see a couple problems with the AMA the increasing dues each year for undisclosed or bogus reasons and the fact they need a major overhaul in their political system of nominations and voting etc so that we few that like to get iunvolved in voting etc can try and get new blood in that will bring the AMA out of the dark ages thinking and into the 21st century.

The main problems I see is with local clubs and the way they are operating which causes a lot of the people to put the blame on the AMA rightly or wrongly deserved it is still the responsability of the AMA to make sure that their rules and requirements are easily understood by all and unfortunately they are not. why else would local goverment agencies and clubs think that it is a requirement to have AMA insurance just to fly your plane be it at a chartered club or not.

Just my thoughts

Joe

i have the ama membership but one thing i like the look of....on the uma website the first thing you see is "Let us know how we can
serve you
contact us
Guy Maiorka and the staff of UMA "

sounds like they at least want to hear what you have to say. kinda refreshing really.