Insurance... best approach?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

The events of the past 2 weeks have made me "re-think" the value of my equipment. Luckily, the last boo-boo that I made only resulted in a bent rewind knob. Maybe I won't be so lucky the next time (like we're talking outright theft at gunpoint). I foresee alot of travelling with my Ms and prime lenses and was wondering if anyone on the board insures their equipment. And if so... what is the best type of insurance for cameras (I want something that at least includes theft, and all realistically potential methods of damage abroad). Also, would anyone care to share stories of bogus insurance policies/ companies who have taken your $$$$ and been reluctant to honor a claim?

Thanks for sharing,

John.

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 01, 2002

Answers

insurance is vital for any kit worth more than you can afford to loose. i got broken into my flat a year ago. those bastards took my whole equipment. six cameras, twelve lenses. but i had a household insurance, which payed my claim minus 10 per cent.

now for my new leica kit i got a special camera insurance with Photoguard. they probably only do the UK. for my $10.000 gear i pay about $150 a year. that is a lot of money if nothing happens, but in case of a theft definitely worth it. i take my camera everywhere without thinking about risks. they claim to pay the full new price for any loss.

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), January 01, 2002.


In my own experience you are covered by your home insurance or things like theft and fire, but of course only in the home. Same thing for your equipment while it is in the car. A customer of mine in the insurance biz (also a Leica owner) once joked that if you have a lot of Leica equipment and it gets damaged or stolen (and this only works if you have an older used vehicle) to abandon the vehicle somewhere, claim it was stolen with all your equipment in it. But seriously I have a camera ryder on my house insurance (to the tune of $25 per $1000 worth of equipment per year - an extra $300 per year) that covers me for anything, anywhere. Literally!! A while back through my own carelessness I dropped a Pentax 6X7 into a lake and it was covered - and I told the whole truth as to what happened. Most companies have these sorts of ryders and you should be sure to check what is really covered in your policy. Another of my passions is books and I have as much money invested in them as my cameras. Found out that most home policies only cover a limited amount of books and CDs and that sort of thing - they consider them the same as jewelry after a point (with our policy it was $300 worth of books).

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), January 01, 2002.

I own a home and the homeowner's insurance covers the home and its entire contents, including whatever is taken from you if you are robbed away from home. So your camera is part of the contents of your residence and is therefore covered, minus any deductible. The only thing that is covered up to a limit is cash. Please read your homeowner's insurance policy and if unclear, talk to your agent. Most homeowners in the US have homeowner's insurance.

One key point that people in the US are guilty of is OVER-insurance. Most people are over-insured, beyond any logical sense. There is no point in having double or triple coverage if one will suffice.

Please let us know what you end up doing.

On a different note, I was taking a picture of a friend in New York City and an elderly couple walked by with their dog. The woman offered to take a picture of the two of us, but I declined. Later, I felt bad because I would have liked that shot, but I didn't want some stranger to accidently drop $3,500 worth of equipment. (She wasn't going to run away with it but there was a non-zero probability of her dropping it. I suppose I could have put the camera strap over her neck, but I didn't think of it at the moment.) Maybe it's because this is my first Leica and I feel overly cautious, after all I saved up for quite some time to buy this camera. How do other people feel about letting strangers take such shots? From a legal standpoint, if they drop your camera there is no liability on their part. Am I being too careful? Or am I just not rich enough?

Thanks.

-- Sikaan (Sikaan4@aol.com), January 01, 2002.


I'm situated in Canada and deal primarily with Allstate Insurance. I have found them to be very helpful in the odd instances that you do have to file a claim. They have always been "no questions asked" kinduv cordial. Maybe I'll get coverage through them. In Canada (probably in the States and abroad too) there are also alot of jerkwater, mickey mouse insurance outfits. I have a friend who got into Harleys and he also gets homeowner's through Allstate. Unfortunately, Allstate doesn't do Harley Davidsons (because of the high rate of theft) and he was left with no choice but to go to an independent small insurance co. We'll he trashed his bike and is now in a legal battle with this insurance co. over certain clauses that are ambiguous at best (but up to their interpretation) that exclude their commitment in the policy. Definitely NOT what I want to deal with.

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 01, 2002.

John,

I suggest you read the following photo.net article, which explains all:

http://www.photo.net/learn/insurance.html

David

-- David Enzel (dhenzel@vei.net), January 01, 2002.



Here's my two cents: whatever you do, make sure things are clear with respect to "off-site" coverage. Back in '99, shortly after I switched policies, I had an assignment in northern Tigray, Ethiopia, along the Eritrean border during the conflict there. Safety and security were definite issues. To cut to the chase, when I returned, I found that my two M-6's, R-8, R-6, and a bunch of lenses weren't actually covered, even though I had been led to believe that they were. As a postscript, the cameras survived, and, in all fairness to Ethiopians, who are some of the most wonderful folks in the world, I feel safer working over there than I do in many parts of the U.S.

-- John Layton (john.layton@valley.net), January 01, 2002.

When it comes to insurance, be careful and don't make assumptions. Most home owner insurance has a very low limit on jewelry and things like camera equipment, so if you got broken into and $8000 worth of Leica M cameras and lenses disapeared, you're not going to collect hardly anything. I needed to put a "rider" on mine and spend a few more bucks a year to cover my camera stuff. The insurance fee is based on the market value of the equipment.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), January 01, 2002.

Try: http://www.chubb.com/individuals/vac.html

I've heard good things about them.

If you have a lot of camera gear and tend to travel or use it in dangerous situations DO NOT insure it under your homeowners policy. I purchased a seperate "all risk floater" from state farm for all my camera gear, and because of 2 losses in three years they dropped my homeowners policy completely. Not just the aditional floater, but the entire homeowners policy. Now I have to spend at least three years with a sub-prime insurance company paying double my previous rates before I can get one of the big-boys to insure me again (because of having been refused insurance). Mind you, I never had a claim on the house policy itself, just on the camera floater. I hate State Farm, stay away from those assholes. I got SCREWED because I had claims on that policy (lost leica +voigt lens & one year later lost cell phone). My local agent told me it was okay to make the claims, I made them. And then when it came time to renew my homowners policy 2 months later, State Farm said, "Sorry, we're denying you homeowners coverage because you had too many losses on your policy" Even though it was on a completely SEPERATE policy (the floater, NOT my homeowners policy). You are basically throwing your money away by insuring with State Farm, they will jerk you around.

This is a conglomeration of two diferent posts I made in a related thread. So some things got repeated

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), January 02, 2002.


Thanks all for your valuable input. I've decided to go with my standard homeowner's insurance policy. I found out it covers up to $140 000 damages to photoequipment on the property and 20% offsite ($28 000). It has the same terms as the "all perils" floater policy BUT with a $500 deductible tacked onto it. Since I own about $12 000 worth of Leica equipment and usually carry a minimum of $4500 at any one time the $500 deductible seems pretty reasonable... that and it doesn't cost me an extra penny to do.

Once again, thank you for helping me explore this important (but often overlooked) aspect of photography.

John.

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 02, 2002.


Sikaan, when it comes to having strangers take a photo, my experience has been that while I popped the strap around the woman's neck, who so kindly offered to take the picture, she was unused to a weighty camera, and couldn't keep it still. The picture was blurred, so perhaps you didn't miss anything, after all.

-- Margaret (fitz@neptune.fr), January 03, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ