Shantz Insurance - It is official, and sad

[Sky Drifters Ballooning]

Hi All,

I had heard rumor of this but now it is official. Schantz Insurance has lost their primary carrier for balloon insurance.

I really enjoyed working with Rob and John, they always got back to me quickly. They never charged us to add someone to our policy for doing a tether event and always got back to us quickly. The customer service I have experienced has been exceptional.

I am lucky that I recently renewed so I will get to enjoy working with them this year. I hope that they can find a new carrier and be able to continue taking the exceptional care of their customers I have grown accustomed to.

Thanks Rob and John, I wish you the best of luck in hunting down a new carrier.

[Great Eastern Balloon Association (GEBA)]

Please keep in mind that they had 2 carriers and have only lost 1. Many people are not affected by the change and those that are will likely have other carrier options by the time their policy is up for renewal. This is NOT the time to jump ship...

[Sky Drifters Ballooning]

I never suggested jumping ship. In fact quite the opposite. Now is the time to show support for the fine folks at Schantz.

Perhaps only us ride guys got the email this morning.......... Either way I really like Rob and John and am convinced that if anyone can keep the ball rolling it is them.

The post was not intended to cause people to jump ship. In fact it was intended to get people to show their support for them.

The policies that are currently in effect are NOT canceled! They remain so until they are due to expire. My apologies if it came off any other way.

[SunKiss Ballooning]

I have talked to them as well and what I understand is that they are talking to a carrier and I have high hopes in that they will seal the deal!!! I agree in that they have been great to work with, helped out a great deal and have gotten back to me in a more timely manner then most of my family do when I call them!

LETS GO SCHANTZ; I am pulling for you!

[Patt Hansen]

Indeed this is unsettling news for all of the ballooning community. Rob was at the SEMBA safety seminar yesterday and there was a very good discussion about this topic. Though yes they are talking with another underwriter, nothing has been signed so those policies which expire 3-1 or later will not be renewed. They will however continue on through their current expiration date. The question was posed by one pilot if he could re-write a different/new policy effective before 3-1 and thus have coverage for another year, even thoough his current policy didn't end until some time in April. He was willing to have and pay for over lapping coverage for this. Ron's answer was "Unfortuately, no."

Bottom line is this will probably cause two things. 1) A substaintial increase in everyone's premiums and 2) IF they can't find an underwriter and we are left with basically only one other good proviider (IMC) then eventually IMC may find themselves in the same position soon. WHY? Because of claims. So we as a group need to improve our "driving record" and hopefully not kill off our sport due to all the liability issues out there.

SO what can we do? First perhaps support our insurers? Perhaps become self-insured, which is not cheap folks.. Or would a letter writing campaign to the underwriters help? I don't know just putting out some ideas. But I sure hate to think this could be the another and substantial nail in the coffin of our shrinking sport.

[Kevin Kamp]

The email that I received stated that the losses that the underwriter experienced was disproportionate to the premiums collected. Does anyone have a feel for whether those losses were lots of little property damage type claims, or whether they were major medical claims related to any of the serious accidents that happened this past year. This was one of the worst years in recent memory for nasty accidents. I know that there are some additional things that my friends with IMC are required to do that Schantz has not required. Also I know that IMC has more stringent rules regarding number of hours in type etc.

[Sky Drifters Ballooning]

My "Feel" is that there were excessive injury claims. Best to ask Rob or John directly though as my opinion is based solely on "feel".

In dealing with Rob and John I have been incredibly happy. I can honestly say I think of the chance they take with me being a solid and safe pilot every time I fly. Flying balloons for profit takes a tremendous amount of self discipline. It is truly difficult to cancel a "marginal conditions" flight when facing a bunch of bills. However it is our best interests as Professional Pilots to do a solid risk analysis before each and every flight. Sure, we all have insurance in case the day goes South, but for how much longer is anybody's guess................

This is not car insurance folks, it only takes a couple of big hits to make insuring balloons a bad idea.

I am a relative newbie to flying balloons for a living and what is happening with Schantz scares the @#$% out of me.

[Patt Hansen]

Kevin, Rob stated at our Safety Seminar that paid settlements for the last 4 yrs were approx 4 million dollars while incoming premiums were about 1 million dollars. The math alone makes it obvious why the underwriter has choosen to not continue to underwrite this group. It was also stated most (if not all) of those involved the serious accidents were insured by Schantz. That is why they are experiencing this and not IMC.... YET..

[Kevin Kamp]

This is interesting. I wonder what the numbers are long term. I mean obviously the math on the last 4 years would make anyone want to quit insuring balloons. But over a longer period of say 10 years or more I wonder what the numbers would be. I also have to wonder why it happens that many of the folks with accidents were with Rob & John. I mean I don't think IMC has some magic bullet that allows them to avoid people that take too many risks. Was it just a weird coincidence that these hit the Schantz agency more than IMC or is there something inherent that caused this. If it is coincidence then the law of averages should work in Rob & John's favor at some point.

I sure hope this gets fixed because even IMC customers benefit by having another carrier in the business. For the moment I am not too worried but if we go a couple of years without a 2nd option, it can only mean prices going up even if we don't have the kind of payouts that Shantz experienced.

[Layne Wolters]

The reason more were with rob is because IMC wont cover anything over a 210 so if you are a big ride guy you had to use Rob. Also I was at a Safety Siminar over the weekend and Beth Miller was there And gave a little talk, from what I gather IMC has already raised there rates.

[Kevin Kamp]

Well I like Beth having met her on several occasions, but that is why I distrust insurance companies in general. Though I suspect they are just reacting to new rates that their underwrites have put into effect.

[Patt Hansen]

Thanks for clarifying this Layne as I was unsure of the answer.

[Damien Mahony]

It's the other way around. Imc will cover even a 315. Rob would not cover for more than 10 passengers.