Any more reliable sources than the Daily Fail, please?
I refuse to give any click count to their disgusting neofascist website, too.
I'll give it a double click in Nutcracker's honour
You may as well give Boris a quick cuddle whilst you're there.
Na, think he is a tad preoccupied with other issues to be messing round with hugs, will skip that one
Any better?: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-47589932Any more reliable sources than the Daily Fail, please?
I refuse to give any click count to their disgusting neofascist website, too.
I once had a civil case that hinged on whether reasonable insurance had been obtained in respect of a light aircraft. I was astonished at the low levels of recommended/compulsory insurance.
All the best
I have a friend who used to fly Austers that had seen service in the Second World War and for that he only needed £1M Public Liability Insurance. I have a friend who's and entomologist and he needs £5M PL Insurance for wandering around nature reserves with an insect net. Which one is going to cause more damage if something goes wrong?
That just about sums it up. You need more insurance to drive a car.
Thanks! So the same case as there was a thread about a few months ago :t:
Regarding insurance, it’s FAR more dangerous to drive a car than to fly an airplane, if you’re considering likelihood of damage and expense. You don’t fly two feet away from thousands of other vehicles operated by mostly barely trained and inattentive people. There is certainly the potential for - unusual - damage in a single private aircraft, but to a much LESS catastrophic degree. Consider the car crashes and pileups and lives lost on the road happening thousands of times a day. Private aircraft incidents are extremely rare, no matter how big the headlines. Insurance is by the numbers.
I’m not defending this jackass or his many, many blatant intentional violations, but he made an astoundingly safe landing in exactly the type of place he was trained to aim for, piling-on headlines aside.
Regarding insurance, it’s FAR more dangerous to drive a car than to fly an airplane, if you’re considering likelihood of damage and expense. You don’t fly two feet away from thousands of other vehicles operated by mostly barely trained and inattentive people. There is certainly the potential for - unusual - damage in a single private aircraft, but to a much LESS catastrophic degree. Consider the car crashes and pileups and lives lost on the road happening thousands of times a day. Private aircraft incidents are extremely rare, no matter how big the headlines. Insurance is by the numbers.
I’m not defending this jackass or his many, many blatant intentional violations, but he made an astoundingly safe landing in exactly the type of place he was trained to aim for, piling-on headlines aside.
Thanks! So the same case as there was a thread about a few months ago :t:
I once had a civil case that hinged on whether reasonable insurance had been obtained in respect of a light aircraft. I was astonished at the low levels of recommended/compulsory insurance.
All the best
Doesn't this come under liabliity / exclusion clauses?