- Joined
- Jan 20, 2018
- Messages
- 187
- Reaction score
- 90
For the past 2 years, I've carried "Drone Specific" liability insurance primarily because one of my major clients insisted on it. "Drone Specific" coverage is just that - losses cause specifically by a drone. It was well worth it for this one client. That client has since been spooked by the DJI data swiping security controversy and canceled my contract. Today, I received a renewal notice for that same policy (almost $800 for 1 year). Since I don't have that client anymore, I decided not to renew the "Drone Specific" coverage and will just go with my standard "Photography" GL coverage.
While I had my agent on the phone I took advantage of the situation to vent my frustrations to her about what I thought was an unfair assessment by underwriters of the potential risk of using drones on any given mission. This $800/year rate has stayed steady for 3 years in a row now. It seems that there should now be enough loss data for underwriters to lighten up on drone exclusions on GL policies. I also think it's totally unfair for underwriters to quote these rates while withholding the loss data that's used to produce the rates. It quotes seems arbitrary. From a practical side, I haven't heard of one catastrophic accident caused specifically by a drone. That's just me. I understand it's a big world and there are probably some memorable episodes out there.
I understand it's the Underwriters and not the agent who determines pricing, but I think the Underwriters are shoving high-dollar quotes down my throat while holding one hand behind their back and not being forthcoming with loss information to justify the corresponding rate.
Frustrated and venting...
While I had my agent on the phone I took advantage of the situation to vent my frustrations to her about what I thought was an unfair assessment by underwriters of the potential risk of using drones on any given mission. This $800/year rate has stayed steady for 3 years in a row now. It seems that there should now be enough loss data for underwriters to lighten up on drone exclusions on GL policies. I also think it's totally unfair for underwriters to quote these rates while withholding the loss data that's used to produce the rates. It quotes seems arbitrary. From a practical side, I haven't heard of one catastrophic accident caused specifically by a drone. That's just me. I understand it's a big world and there are probably some memorable episodes out there.
I understand it's the Underwriters and not the agent who determines pricing, but I think the Underwriters are shoving high-dollar quotes down my throat while holding one hand behind their back and not being forthcoming with loss information to justify the corresponding rate.
Frustrated and venting...