Aviation Museum Public Liability Insurance – a List

Wise words, Mustang.

I crave your sympathy – I have spent most of my working life in the trade:o

Business Interruption/Loss of Profits cover is often the cheapest section of a policy, so do not stint. This will provide funds to keep your museum running when you have no (or reduced) income from gate money or other sources.

I would recommend that you insure 3 years loss of income.

If your buildings are Grade II (or higher) Listed, you may need to stretch this out further. English Heritage or their equivalent will make suggestions/impose requirements that may mean you will not re-open as quickly as you think you ought…

Ask your Insurer or Broker to add an “Additional Increased Costs of Working” item. This is tedious insurance geekery for others to read, but quite important. PM me if you would like an explanation.

It is important not only to think about price when buying insurance but the cover your policy provides.

You should really consider what cover your insurer provides for things like business interuption/Increased cost of working, should you have a major fire forinstance. What if your most prestigous exhibit was stolen or damaged the insurer may well pay out but what if it cannot be easily replaced? Does this mean your visitor numbers are lower and if so would your insurance compensate you for this? I would very carefully consider the the insurance i buy, the cheapest is not always the best!

Shaun

No problem Pongo – I sometimes struggle to get my head round the complexities of ‘the hobby’.

An unfortunate effect of the valuation requirement of SORP is that with a large collection ‘sat’ on the balance sheet, charities start to appear as being ‘wealthy’ organisations. Yet the reality is far from that appearance, especially as the airframes perhaps ought to be considered a ‘liability’, when you start to consider maintenance requirements, restoration, etc.

I have started to loose count of the times I’ve been involved in trying to persuade grant giving bodies, council departments of the additional need for funding – this is especially so when you take into account Accreditation, which makes it difficult to dispose of accessed items!

As for the USAF airframes I personally believe that the current trend is likely to force some museums to start making difficult decisions! 🙁

Thanks for the explanation TW, as usual I simplified the problem without understanding the full scale of the problem. The issue of the US loaned items is interesting.

Richard

Its just a thought, I kow you cannot avoid the public liability thing, and building insurance but is cover for the individual exhibits really needed, it can only be for loss due to fire or building collapse as theft is unlikely for the big things. Consequently insurance cover would pay out on loss but if the item is unique or unobtainable, why insure it as you cannot buy another?

Richard

I appreciate your comments / point of view and to some extent I agree with you; however let me try and add some context this can of worms!

Individual valuations were a dual need to satisfy both the insurance company requirements and the SORP accounting requirements of being a Registered Charity. As far as the insurance goes including an annotated listing of the aircraft as part of the policy schedule has helped maintain a ‘relative cap’ on premiums.

Also some NAM aircraft are on loan and the individual owners place different requirements on the museum for taking an airframe or object on loan e.g. during the last few years the USAF loaned airframes have seen their values increased at the request of the powers that be in the USA.

Going back to the days of NAM taking RAFM airframes like the Oxford and Harvard on loan, a condition in the loan agreements stated ‘sum-insured’ values for the airframes – so this is nothing new.

An interesting aside of the independent valuation process (effectively a detailed market assessment of the aviation sector) is that you have an inbuilt metric to help assess an airframes worth when considering further loans or purchases. The NAM lists have been used as a reference point by the trustees when considering both types of acquisition.

On several occasions’ potential loans have been declined due to high valuations and subsequent increases in insurance premiums being considered to be not economically worthwhile for the collection!

Equally it helps assess the ‘market price’ when considering outright purchases.

The Jet Age Museum uses these guys….

http://www.jelfgroup.com/cms_files/documents/office_locations_feb2013.pdf

Hi, thanks to everyone for their input, I have some phone calls to make then, good see the company we are currently using has been used by others.

Re outdoor exhibits & insurance, thankfully we do not have anything displayed outside. When we had our Devon on the flight line at Redhill luckily no one vandalised her, the temptation to swipe the control yoke might have appealed to some, or draining the tanks for the fuel! but I guess the active flight line would have put off a lot of the low life.

Well for exhibits outside im sure people sadly suffer from mindless vandals now and again, so would insure against that?

Please be aware that one recent change from an insurance perspective was a request for individual valuations on all of the key exhibits – no mean feat for 70 plus aircraft and cockpit sections; plus many other significant items. As you will appreciate this is reflected in the annual policy fee! 😮

Its just a thought, I kow you cannot avoid the public liability thing, and building insurance but is cover for the individual exhibits really needed, it can only be for loss due to fire or building collapse as theft is unlikely for the big things. Consequently insurance cover would pay out on loss but if the item is unique or unobtainable, why insure it as you cannot buy another?

Richard

For many years The Aeroplane Collection was looked after by ‘Mr Miles’ Peter Amos when Peter retired his interests went to Hayward Aviation Ltd and we have been pleased with the level of cover and service from them. Address is Harling House, 47/51 Great Suffolk Street, London, SE1 0BS tel 020 7902 7800

Sparky.

Ditto Towergate for us!

TT

We have XS186 insured, and the policy includes public liability, with Towergate Insurance. They were excellent (we’ll see if that continues at renewal!).

Chap I spoke to was Mike on 0191 229 2508, very knowledgable.

Again sourced through a broker but you could try Ecclesiastical Insurance as they provide this type of cover for our museum.

For many years Newark Air Museum has found it advantageous to work through a broker with regard to its various insurance policies. Until autumn 2012 this was Windsor Insurance, who I believe were taken over by Howden Insurance Brokers.

The actual policies for PLI; the exhibits etc. is currently provided by Aviva.

Please be aware that one recent change from an insurance perspective was a request for individual valuations on all of the key exhibits – no mean feat for 70 plus aircraft and cockpit sections; plus many other significant items. As you will appreciate this is reflected in the annual policy fee! 😮