Sorry not "allied threats" but "allied perils" Look at the e-mail sent to your customers. That's where I see it. I guess there is no where to go with this. Insurance companies didn't become the riches organizations in the world by accident.

N9657 wrote:Insurance companies didn't become the riches organizations in the world by accident.

Nope...they did it by insuring them.

N9657 wrote:Sorry not "allied threats" but "allied perils" Look at the e-mail sent to your customers.

Oh...sorry about that, I should have made that connection.

Allied perils is a general industry term referring to perils resulting from malicious actions of "allies" instead of as a result of war or terrorism. It is a general term for things like strike, riot, civil commotion, labour disturbances, etc. The allied perils are "defined" (specifically listed) on the aforementioned exclusion.

I would say the two cases i put forward
That the insurance probably didnt/would not
pay! The case in austin tx where Mr Stacks
Dived bombed the IRS site is real and
Law suits filed on his wife/estate etc. Dont
Know how that will play out.

I would say the two cases i put forward
That the insurance probably didnt/would not
pay! The case in austin tx where Mr Stacks
Dived bombed the IRS site is real and
Law suits filed on his wife/estate etc. Dont
Know how that will play out.

cs409 wrote:I would say the two cases i put forward That the insurance probably didnt/would not pay! The case in austin tx where Mr Stacks Dived bombed the IRS site is real and Law suits filed on his wife/estate etc. Dont Know how that will play out.

You are mixing scenarios in your examples. Your first examples include theft but Mr. Stacks owned his airplane. In his case none of his insurance companies are obligates to pay. He intentionally set fire to his house so the homeowners policy will not respond, he intentionally crashed his airplane so his aircraft policy will not respond, and he left a suicide note so his life insurance company (most likely) will not respond. He left his family with nothing but heartache and lawsuits that they must face on their own.

In your other examples theft was involved.

cs409 wrote: If your plane is stolen and later its in a crash and kills the person that stole it and a family watching TV and its discovered the Thief is a known terrorist but his actions where not terrorist connected but just a joy ride

As I mentioned previously, it is not the person that determines the coverage, but the intent of the actions. If this was nothing more than a simple theft and crash then it should be covered regardless of the thief being a known terrorist. A good example of this would be the Barefoot Bandit. However, if the crash were determined by the Federal Government to be an act of terrorism then it would only be covered if terrorism coverage was purchased.

cs409 wrote: What if someone steals your plane flys it into the IRS building due to a tax issue would The insurance co. PAY. Whats the difference with this person and a terrorist? Both actions intended to inflict fear, death and make a statement.

The short answer is that it depends. In both cases it should be covered UNLESS the government deemed either one to be a political or terrorist action in which case it would depend on if the owner purchased war or terrorism coverage to that effect. Again, it does not depend on the person, but the intent of the action.

Hopefully that clears things up more than it confuses.

With stacks cut an dry that he gave the
IRS his plane and himself and that was his
Intention. Oh he also burned his home then flew his plane into the building
Just a ball park figure to include the extra
Coverage for war terr etc 10 20 percent

cs409 wrote: Just a ball park figure to include the extra Coverage for war terr etc 10 20 percent

Depends on the company. It ranges from .02 - .20 per $1,000 on the hull value and some comanies include the Liablity portion while others charge for it. I quoted one for a P-210 with Aerospace yesterday on a $220,000 value and it was a total of $420 for both hull & liability.