Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [65.33.166.39] (account <marv@lancaironline.net>)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.1.1)
  with HTTP id 2532936 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:30:28 -0400
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Logbooks & insurance companies
To: lml
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.1.1
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:30:28 -0400
Message-ID: <web-2532936@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <sf415b3e.002@asdmngwia.mpls.udlp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Christopher Zavatson" <Christopher.Zavatson@udlp.com>:

<<AVEMCO did this at least once.>>
Avemco only did this in a case where according to the NTSB the
unapproved change actually caused the accident.  The case was discussed
at an Avemco forum at Oshkosh back in '99.  At another Avemco forum
called "Claim Denial"  (Arlington '02) the actual process and criteria
for denial were presented.  The cases that were denied boiled down to
fraud and willful misrepresentation.  FAR violations alone were not
cause for denial.  I don't know how uniform or regulated this denial
criteria is amongst all the insurance companies out there, but I got the
impression that Avemco was more than fair with its customers.  
Chris Zavatson