Related Links:
Turning Semi-Professional
Insurance Coverage for Camera Equipment: To Insure or Not To Insure
by Kevin C. O'Neil
North American Nature Photographer's
Assoc (new insurance program for members)
Necessary Evil?
Insurance Essentials for Pros by Donna Conrad
rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: mr500cm@pipeline.com (Mr500CM)
[1] Camera Insurance For Working Photographers
Date: Fri Apr 24 1998
I know this doesn't belong here but it's important since it is
photographic. The American Disc Jockey Association ( ADJA) have team up
with R.V. Nuccio & Associates to offer us property, crime and general
liability coverage. Their program is now open to office or home based
Photographers and Videographers. Their rates are extremely cheap, 1/3 of
what I'm paying now! Call 1-800-567-2685 to request an information pack,
or go to http://www.adja.org and search to find the insurance program.
This is a great program and I'm just passing on the info.
Lance
rec.photo.misc
From: see.signature@bottom.com (gary gaugler)
[1] Photo Equip Insurance
Date: Mon May 11 1998
Insurance for photo equipment has come up from time to time
Here is a data point for those looking to insure their photo
equipment.
First off, if you equipment is for personal use, you will need an
"Inland Marine" policy that is attached to your homeowner's policy.
for $30,000 worth of replacement value coverage, the cost will be
about $650 per year. This is for replacement value and covers all
normal risks except nuclear war, riots, earthquakes, and floods.
There is typically a $250 deductible per loss and each item insured
must be scheduled (itemized).
However, if you have a business of any formal nature that uses your photo
equipment, you can obtain a liability policy for about $500 per year and
add $50K worth of on-site equipment with $25K of it offsite for about $650
per year. This too is replacement value and all risk.
The main difference is that if you use your camera items for business,
they will not be covered by a homeowner's Inland Marine rider. The cost
for a full coverage business policy is very close to that of the Inland
Marine Policy but has all of the advantages but not of the disadvantages.
gary g.
Gary Gaugler
rec.photo.misc
From: see.signature@bottom.com (gary gaugler)
[1] Re: Photo Equip Insurance
Date: Tue May 12 1998
"John G. Walter" wrote:
>Could you provide some specifics. Those rates are quite lower than I
have
>seen.
>
>Thanks
what would you like to know? the carrier is Hanover Insurance through
my local insurance broker. If you would like some additional info,
pls contact me via e-mail or telecon.
Gary Gaugler
rec.photo.misc
From: Karen Simmons karen@thedkgallery.com
[1] Re: Photo Equip Insurance
Date: Thu May 14 1998
John,
We have a policy thru Allstate that covers $1 million in general and
property liability and $15k in equipment. I think we pay $650 per year
as well. Of course we're in crime ridden Atlanta, which drives up the
costs, I'm sure.
Karen
From: Don Minton minton2@mindspring.com
Subject: Camera Insurance?
Date: 1998-05-19
I am an amateur photographer who shoots mostly "street" photography. (www.geocities.com/soho/studios/6051, if you must...) I currently use a Yashicamat 124G, which at $200 - $300 is practically disposable. I was considering getting a used Bronica, but I am worried about lugging around $2-3000 worth of equipment in not-always-nice company. I know the pros are probably covered thru company or small business type policies. But can an individual, amateur, get "camera insurance"? Does a homeowners policy cover that sort of thing? If I get mugged? Or what if I just drop it off a bridge or something? (I know I know...call my agent...). Besides, my wife says we could get dropped, or at least a black mark if I make a claim as "small" as $2000 against a homeowners policy w/ a $500 deductible.
Anybody?
From: David Shrader david.shrader@usa.net
Subject: Response to Camera Insurance?
Date: 1998-05-19
My wife works in Insurance.
You can "Schedule" all your equipment on your home owners insurance for about 1.5% of appraised or replacement value. this is an annual fee.
If anything happens to your camera, except for willful negligence, full replacement costs are almost "immediately" paid out. Typically within a week.
I have a full Nikon system with 7 lenses from 24mm through 400mm, and a Mamiya system also with multiple lenses, film backs, prisms, etc "SCHEDULED".
Call your agent (homeowners) and ask for details.
Dave
From: Gene Crumpler Crumpler.gene@epa.gov
Subject: Response to Camera Insurance?
Date: 1998-05-20
This question came up last year on a trip to Italy. Street crime is a
problem
in Rome and my wife was concerned about my taking several Nikons and lenses
with me. I checked with my home owners policy company, at that time Liberty
Mutual. It was explained as follows, if camera equipment is stolen, the
policy
will pay replacement cost up to 1/2 of the replacement cost of the
house. WOW,
1/2 of $162,000!! I took my nikons with total peace of mind. I did however
make a list of all equipment and serial nos. and packed it with passport and
travelers checks.
Camera equipment is not subject to limits such as typically $500 for
unscheduled jewelry or silverware or $1,000 for unscheduled guns, etc.
As in the earlier answer, you can get all risk coverage by scheduling your
equipment. One problem, if the equipment is more that one year old, you have
to have written appraisals to be scheduled. I have not bothered, as I
baby my
equipment and I can now afford to be self-insured. (My wife already has the
policy loaded up with lots of jewelry)
From: jbecket jbecket@lava.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: camera insurance
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998
Like many of you, I imagine, I have a rider on my homeowners policy that
lists and offers additional protection for my camera equipment. Some
companies call this an "inland marine" policy.
At the same time, I do business with an insurance company (Safeware) that
offers a separate policy protecting my computer equipment. This policy
has no connection to my homeowners policy. When I leave the country and
take a portable computer, I can call up and purchase additional
international coverage for three-month increments. The price is not
unreasonable.
Here's the question: Is anyone aware of a company that offers a separate
policy that will cover camera equipment, equivalent to the computer
insurance that I already own? The reason this might be preferable has to
do with the definition of "professional" and the degree to which the
equipment is used in a business. Usually, homeowners policies do not
cover equipment used in a business. I am discovering that they do not
want to cover the equipment, even if it is used, say, only 5% of the time
in connection with a business.
Thanks!
Jan Becket
From: Kevin O'Neil KevinONeil@AOL.Com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: camera insurance
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998
A good primer on insuring camera equipment can be found at:
http://members.aol.com/kevinoneil/insur.html
Hope this helps.
--
Kevin O'Neil
Eastern Light Nature Photography, Ltd.
Images and Articles on Techniques:
http://members.aol.com/kevinoneil
From: mlafly@aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: camera insurance
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998
Recently, I had damage to a camera and was very glad I had insurance. They
paid immediately less the deduction based on the cost from the manufacturer
for repairs and 1 new component. Their payment was the equivalent of 2 years
of premiums. As I said, I'm glad I had it.
This policy is a "commercial" policy and covers any business equipment
(computer, fax, cameras, etc) even though that equipment may be based in the
house. It also has $300,000 worth of liability insurance.
I can email if you want exact breakdown of limits or the agents phone number
(State Farm gave me the name and phone number when they told me that they
would not cover business equipment).
Mike
From: Mark Bergman mb50742@navix.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: camera insurance
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998
This is a very good question. I used to have Inland Marine cover all my
cameras and it covered everything from theft to accidental damage. Now it
barely covers anything especially if it is in connection with a money
transaction (such as a camera club trade show). It has also gotten very
expensive. I dropped it a few years ago when it got around $1 per 100 of
coverage. In 20 years of coverage I had made 1 claim.
I have also been told by two different agents that my homeowners policy
will not cover my camera equipment if it stolened. That's not the way I
read the policy ( there is no exclusion) but it does worry me.
From: "John G. Walter" jgwalter@erols.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: 3 Aug 1998
The term "professional" is what causes problems for home insurance
companies, most of which will add riders to your policy for excess
coverage, much as with jewelry or artwork.
Once you begin using the equipment professionally, you will probably have
to get commercial insurance. I recommend seeing a broker that specializes
in that sort of coverage.
From: Ken Wyatt kenw@col.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998
After discussing this with my insurance agent (including the fact that I
would be using the equipment professionally), I decided to add the rider
to my regular homeowner's policy. It really wasn't that much more
expensive. Also, many professional associations include low-cost
insurance programs as a benefit to membership. For example, the North
American Nature Photographer's Association (NANPA) just came out with a
program. I wouldn't doubt that ASMP and others don't have similar deals
available.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Wyatt WA6TTY
Colorado Springs, CO kenw@col.hp.com
Web: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/KenWyatt/Nature.htm
Member - NANPA (http://www.nanpa.org)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 21:52:31 -0700
From: Jim Stewart jstewart@jkmicro.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Insurance?
christopher.j.skach@exgate.tek.com wrote:
> I am a semi pro and my equipment list is growing. I am now in search of the > best way to > insure all my equipment. I was told that my home insurance will not cover > equipment > used professionally so any comments on this matter will be greatly > appreciated.
Although your homeowner's insurance will not cover your gear, often you can
purchase a "rider" from the same company to
specifically cover your gear at a very reasonable cost. I ran an electronics
company out of my home for a number of years and
had a rider to cover test and computer equipment. I think it was $30-$50 a
year to cover 10 or 20 thousand dollars worth of
equipment.
Jim
From: Joe Marcus jmphotog@itw.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998
Chris Skach wrote:
> > I am a semi pro and my equipment list is growing. I am now in search of > the best way to > insure all my equipment. I was told that my home insurance will not > cover equipment > used professionally so any comments on this matter will be greatly > appreciated. >
Chris --
What you're looking for is Commercial Inland Marine. Erie has a
policy that will cover you. That is what I have and also have business
liability with them. Any Erie agent should be able to sell you the
policy.
--
Joe Marcus
From: see.signature@bottom.com (gary gaugler)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998
Photo equipment used personally and not professionally or as part of
an occupation can be added to a home owner's policy via an Inland
Marine rider. The rate is about .0218*value, or $21.67 per thousand
dollars of coverage.
If used for business, one needs a business liability policy with an
additional on premises, off premises loss policy. This would run
about $500 for the basic policy and an additional $500 for $100,000 on
premises, $40,000 off premises coverage. Be sure that you do have a
registered/licensed business or DBA.
Gary Gaugler
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998
From: Joe McCary - Photo Response mccary@erols.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Insurance?
>>Although your homeowner's insurance will not cover your gear, often you >can >purchase a "rider" from the same company to >>specifically cover your gear at a very reasonable cost. > >This is true, I have the same arrangement with my photo equipment and my >husband's audio production equipment. Although this is often the first step >because it is the most cost effective, there can be limitations with this >kind of coverage. Usually the coverage only works when the equipment is on >the premises. Once out of the house, the coverage is null; or maybe there >is a radius involved (I haven't read the policy in a while). Just ask lots >of questions so you understand the limits of any coverage you end up getting.
Insurance for business equipment is different from insurance coverage by
homeowners policy. My Photo Business insurance covers my camera gear in a
NON-depreciable fashion. Meaning that as the gear gets older and a claim is
made the insurance company pays the amount scheduled not a depreciation
amount. This is very important because as we all know cameras are not
getting cheaper to replace. Also, unlike the policy info listed above it is
covered anywhere in the world for any type of loss (except war and "vermin")
including if I forget and leave it on a park bench (although I don't think
they would renew the policy after such a claim). The rates are high, about
$2.50 per hundred dollars for the first couple thousand and then decreased
to about $1.50 per hundred. I do not choose to cover all of my little odds
and ends it is costly and when one has quite a bit of camera gear it gets to
be quite a big list. This type of insurance is called a Inland Marine
Policy. Contact a business insurance rep to get info in your area.
Joe McCary
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998
From: Joe McCary - Photo Response mccary@erols.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Insurance? -Reply
.A tougher question, one that I pose every so often is "How much should my
negatives be insured for, and who provides this type of insurance?"
This can be easily answered by a commercial insurance agent. My business'
negative and other important "papers" are covered to the tune of several
thousand dollars and that insurance cost is low. I also carry liability
coverage so if while shooting I knock over something and cause a fire or
hurt someone they are covered. My agent will (with prior knowledge and a
fee) cover property of others above my policy limit (maybe $5,000 I am not
real sure without checking) so if I were shooting some expensive jewelry and
had it under my care for say a week I could contact the agent BEFORE I
receive the item and add it to the policy for a small fee for a short
period. These little extras are why one has business insurance, my policy
costs me about $1500 per year. Expensive coverage BUT worth every penny if
you have a large claim.
Joe
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998
From: Mamiya645@aol.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Where to have camera's appraised for insurance
purposes?
echampio@Adobe.COM (Erich Champion) writes:
Does anyone have any advice on how to have cameras appraised for
insurance purposes? When I lived in Colorado, I used to take my cameras to
the Focal Point camera store. I've stopped by a few camera stores here in
the San Francisco/San Jose area, but none of them perform this service.
I'd rather not have to pack up all of my equipment and send it somewhere.
=======================================================
Insuring your camera equipment on a personal articles policy along
with jewelry, expensive sporting goods, musical instruments and
collectibles is a good idea. The all risk protection will pay to repair or
replace your equipment if you accidentally drop an insured item into a
lake or on to a concrete sidewalk.
Each article is insured separately on a schedule. Appraisals or
receipts for jewelry are always required. Some companies require an
appraisal if the receipt is more than 2 years old. You can understand the
need for appraisals on jewelry when you consider the lack of serial
numbers and the grading system for gemstones. Jewelry is easy to lose.
Cameras are another matter.
Let's say you pay $1.65 per $100 annually and you insure your 2.8 F for
$2,000. If you drop it into the Pacific Ocean and you can replace it for
$1500, your insurance company is only going to pay you $1,500. If you over
insure your equipment it's not going to matter when you have a loss. You will
have just paid $8.25 too much in insurance premiums.
I would suggest doing the appraisal yourself. Get a copy of McBroom's
Camera Bluebook or a KEH Camera catalog and look up the values of each piece
of equipment you own. Make copies of the applicable pages from McBroom's or
KEH and submit it to your agent with a schedule.
The schedule should read like this :
1) Rolleiflex 2.8F Planar S/N 123456 $1500
2) Rolleinar 2 Bay 3 $80....
I seriously doubt that you will need an independent appraisal. Call your
agent to find out more. If they insist on one, shop around for another agent.
Some insurance companies will insure your stuff on a personal articles policy
if you are a part time professional and use it occasionally to shoot weddings
and portraits. Ask about the policy exlcusions.
R. J. Bender ( A Nikon, Mamiya and Rollei user. ) rjbender@apci.net or
Mamiya645@aol.com
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1998
From: Erich Champion echampio@Adobe.COM
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Where to have camera's appraised for insurance
purposes?
Hi,
Thank you very much for the detailed information on insuring and
documenting my cameras.
Part of my problem is that I don't have receipts for anything that I have.
I've purchased or traded for my equipment with private individuals. The
receipts I did have were rendered into a soggy, moldy mess in a minor, but
annoying flood. My problem is that my expensive, esoteric stuff like
cameras, computers and rare books apparently does seem way out of line
according to the insurance companies I've had. Apparently, they don't
believe anyone with a one bedroom renter's policy could possibly have nice
things (even though a one bedroom apartment here in Silicon Valley is as
expensive as a mansion where I grew up in Colorado).
--
Erich Champion : mailto:echampio@adobe.com : 408.536.6497 Voice
User Education : Adobe Systems Incorporated : 408.537.4040 Fax
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998
From: "Roger M. Wiser" wiserr@cni-usa.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Where to have camera's appraised for insurance
purposes?
Response to Erich Champion
I am an independent/free-lance claim adjuster working claims for
numerous companies. It is true what one respondent indicated ... have
the camera scheduled on a broad peril floater or endorsement to your
policy. In southern Wisconsin there are few, if any. places that would
value equipment for insurance purposes. Appraisers are usually used for
more expensive gems and jewelery. If you can't get an appraisal you
could do this yourself very well and probably obtain the settlement that
you feel is proper.
As a claim adjuster, in event of loss, if coverage is verified and
adequate, I would look to what the normal sale price or cost of the
camera equipment - if I wanted to check the values given by the owner.
In event of loss the owner is to submitt description, condition and
values lost or damaged. By looking ads in Shutterbug. catologues and the
various other publications one could set the values for the amount of
insurance for coverage and for determining the settlement value when the
loss occurs. When placing insurance don't forget to have an amount limit
high enough to take care of inflation. For example if your Rolleiflex F
is worth $295 at time of insurance, you may want to insure it for a
higher amount, say $350, if you anticipate increase in the market or
sale price during the term of the policy.
If the owner/insured has a adequate list of description and copies of
receipts and/or latest price information, the adjuster will usually
honor this report in the submission of a claim. Adjusters have to review
values of many kinds kinds of properties - buildings, machinery,
household property, etc. and, in my opinion, very few adjusters will
question a well documented loss inventory provided by the owner unless
it seems way out of line. It might be a good idea to take phots of your
equipment and have it on file. Most of us in photography know more about
photographic equipment values than the average adjuster. Besides,
appraisal of a loss in not an exact science but subject to variation
based on individual circumstances and negotiation.
This is my first response - sorry to be so long winded in this reply - a
character weakness of insurance technicians.
Roger
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998
From: Susan Walker swalker@highground.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Insurance?
Jim Stewart wrote:
> >Although your homeowner's insurance will not cover your gear, often you can >purchase a "rider" from the same company to >specifically cover your gear at a very reasonable cost.
This is true, I have the same arrangement with my photo equipment and my
husband's audio production equipment. Although this is often the first step
because it is the most cost effective, there can be limitations with this
kind of coverage. Usually the coverage only works when the equipment is on
the premises. Once out of the house, the coverage is null; or maybe there
is a radius involved (I haven't read the policy in a while). Just ask lots
of questions so you understand the limits of any coverage you end up getting.
Good luck -- Susan Walker
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998
From: Bill Grimwood bgrim@garply.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Insurance?
Go to you insurance agent and tell him you need an inland marine floater to
add to your homeowners to cover your camera equipment. You will need to
furnish him a list of each piece that has a serial number and then lump the
other into one category called aaccessories for the above listed equipment.
You will need to state a value for each piece of equipment also. If you
have any further questions let me know.
Bill Grimwood
Independant Insurance Agent
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1998 12:20:56 EDT
From: Mamiya645@aol.com
Reply to: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Where to have camera's appraised for insurance
purposes?
In a message dated 98-08-07 10:41:59 EDT, echampio@Adobe.COM (Erich Champion)
writes:
Thank you very much for the detailed information on insuring and
documenting my cameras.
Part of my problem is that I don't have receipts for anything that I
have. I've purchased or traded for my equipment with private individuals.
The receipts I did have were rendered into a soggy, moldy mess in a minor,
but annoying flood. My problem is that my expensive, esoteric stuff like
cameras, computers and rare books apparently does seem way out of line
according to the insurance companies I've had. Apparently, they don't
believe anyone with a one bedroom renter's policy could possibly have nice
things (even though a one bedroom apartment here in Silicon Valley is as
expensive as a mansion where I grew up in Colorado).
==========================
Erich,
Except for a lap top computer, I don't think you would need the special
coverage. A rare book collection will require an appraisal.
In the meantime, go to KEH
Camera Brokers and print out the pages where your equipment is listed.
Highlight the items on the pages, put together a schedule of your camera
equipment, photograph each piece individually and start shopping for a new
agent.
R. J. Bender ( A Nikon, Mamiya and Rollei user. ) rjbender@apci.net or
Mamiya645@aol.com
From: Deacon Dave Shrader dshrader@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: FYI: Insure your equipment
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998
I also have a 'Schedule' on my homeowners for my 35mm (Nikon with 7
lenses) and MF (Mamiya with 3 lenses) replacement value ~11K. Covers
every conceivable type of loss excluding wilfull neglegence for about
$100 USD/yr.
Contact your insurance agent.
--
From: mr500cm@pipeline.com (Mr500CM)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: FYI: Insure your equipment
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 04:18:24 GMT
The American Disc Jockey Association is introducing another FIRST in the
industry!!
The ADJA, along with FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE, have developed an
insurance program for Photographers and Videographers!
$1,000,000 Liability Coverage for only $200.00/year.
Property Insurance and Crime Insurance are also available at
unbelievable rates!
In addition, you become an affiliate member of the ADJA at NO CHARGE and
can take advantage of our other numerous benefits and network with some
of the finest Disc Jockeys in the United States.
For more Information got to:
Lance
From: Deacon Dave Shrader dshrader@earthlink.net
My camera backs/film packs/inserts are each listed separately on my
Schedule. You might run into "Well thst wasn't scheduled [specifically
defined] so it isn't covered."
Depends on your State's legal requirements.
My wife works in insurance and instructed me to be very specific and
list everything. So my camera bodies, models, serial numbers; lenses,
serial numbers, even my filter packs, connecting cords for studio flash,
etc are listed.
The more detail you provided the higher the likelyhood of coverage.
--
Deacon Dave
From: "Joe McCary - Photo Response" mccary@erols.com
They may wish to know if this is through normal wear and tear (not covered).
They might want to establish if it is through negligence or not (also not
covered).
From: kevinoneil@aol.com (KevinONeil)
Check with your insurance agent (and if there are any questions, have him
talk
with the underwriter's agent), but merely because you are a
"professional," or
are selling images, doesn't necessarily disqualify you from obtaining an
"all-risk" rider for your equipment on your home owner's policy. If your
primary source of income is not photography related, your underwriter will
probably allow the rider.
Be careful, however, because this may come back to haunt you. A friend
of mine
recently went through an IRS audit to determine if the photo expenses he was
deducting were business related. One of the items the IRS asked invovled his
insurance. You can't tell your insurance agent it's not business related and
the IRS it is.
For an article on insuring photo equipment, see:
http://members.aol.com/kevinoneil/insur.html
Hope this helps.
KevinONeil@AOL.Com
From Nikon Digest:
Last trip I took, I got renter's insurance with a specifically rider for
my equipment. Paid for 1st quarter ($70) and then let the insurance
lapse; used State Farm.
John
From Nikon Digest:
My equipment is covered under my homeowners insurance with a
special rider thru Allstate. It was also covered under my
renters insurance with Allstate also. Covered non
professional activities and vacation type trips. Also since
I travel for work it covers them when they follow me around
the world.
Steve
From Medium Format Digest:
I've been a PPA member for 4 years now and I can say the only reason
to join is the indemnity(spelling?) insurance. Basically it's a big
club, but the PPA will not help you build you buisness (I'm a studio
owner and trust me, they don't do much).
My 2 cents worth.
Paul Evans
[Ed. note: see Jeff Albro's Impact Photo Gear
Page for links to PPA clubs, and Photo
Classes for related links]
From Nikon Digest:
Insurance laws and policies vary from location to location. In the US,
they vary from state to state. In Indiana, which is fairly typical, a
homeowners policy will cover photo equipment to the limit specified in the
policy less the deductible for "Named Perils", which are named in the
policy: fire, theft, vandalism, wind, etc. There is an endorsement to the
standard policy for some reason called an "Inland Marine" rider which
covers "all risks". It should be "all but..." risks because it still
doesn't cover willful destruction, neglect, or usual wear & tear.
Generally property scheduled on an inland marine rider is not subject to
the overall deductible on the policy. Examples: You're walking down the
street, your slip and fall and your camera disappears down the sewer - not
a named peril, so no coverage by your regular homeowners' policy - if
covered by an inland marine rider, covered for replacement cost (must be
replaced) less no deductible. Same street - a robber accosts you and takes
your camera - covered for replacement cost less deductible by regular
homeowners, replacement cost less no deductible if covered by inland
marine rider. Your insurance policy is a contract between you and the
company where for the premium they will insure you against certain losses.
The company will do only what is in the contract. It is not a substitute
for taking care of your equipment. It is not a cheap way to upgrade your
equipment or to convert old junk into cash to pay your light bill. The
insurance companies have seen every scam and do their best to protect
themselves against them. If you suffer a loss, the company will ask for
receipts showing where and when you bought your stuff and what you paid
for it. You can make this process less painful by keeping receipts and an
accurate list of this information including serial numbers. The fact that
I do most of my trading with a local camera store and they keep sales and
inventory records on a computer was a huge help when I had a fire. I now
have a list of all my equipment on file with my agent and a separate list
of what I want scheduled on an inland marine rider. I schedule the stuff I
use daily, but not the old retired favorites I keep at home. I pay
$1.50 per $100 (1.5%per year) of the value of the equipment scheduled. Sorry
for the longwinded post - insurance is a longwinded affair!
From Nikon Digest:
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998
Nick, I also faced this problem recently. I assumed that my homeowners
insurance would cover any loss, you may want to check your (your parents?)
policy. That may be all you need, perhaps a special camera rider on the
policy. Beware though, if you make any money at all from your photography,
homeowners insurance won't cover it, generally speaking. This is what I
came up against. There are some commercial insurance policies out there if
you need business insurance. To cover my equipment I had what is called an
"Inland Marine rider" whatever that means.
There is another option. If you're a member of the North American Nature
Photography Association you can obtain equipment insurance through the Rand
Insurance company. The miminum premium is $250. If you have lots of
equipment, this may be a good way to go for you. You can find out more at
the NANPA web site:
hope this helps.
rod
From Nikon Digest:
Hi Nick,
You should have camera insurance NOW. Things can happen in the US also.
What you want to do is go talk to the company that handles you parents
Home Owners insurance. They will most likely cover your camera
equipment under the existing home owners policy. At the very worst,
you will have to buy a "rider" for their policy which is very
inexpensive.
It is very important to get coverage for "all possible hazards
anywhere you are" (theft, loss, breakage). You will probably have to
ask for this. Many companies exclude coverage in Mexico, but that is
OK.
There will probably be a deductible clause in the policy. The higher
the deductible the cheaper the insurance will be. I would suggest a
$200 or $250 deductible.
Make sure everything is covered. Bodies, lenses, filters, flashed,
bags, etc. for "replacement value" if possible.
Send a post to the group a couple months before you leave and I will
give you some tips for travel in Europe. No book or video can prepare
you for what you are going to see and experience while you are there.
Very Important. Go out immediately and get a simple language course
on cassette. I would suggest something like "Fast and Easy" cassettes
by Living Language. Available at most large book stores for about $10
or $12. You will be treated a lot different when the natives find out
you can peak a little of the language.
One last thing. Save your money. If you are a serious photographer,
you will want to have 8 to 10 rolls of film for each day you are on
the ground in Italy.
Kind regards,
Bill Erfurth
From Medium Format Digest:
You might check out http://www.ppa-world.org/insurance.html.
From Medium Format Digest:
I got my insurance (professional coverage) through Nationwide where
I had my homeowners, and it was considerably cheaper than PPA. It is
declared value (you declare the value of the equipment) and it covers
everything.
They have been extremely good to deal with. All of my Hassy equipment
got damaged in a flood and they were terrific to deal with.
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999
Fred
Be carefull about the home ins. you need to check if the equipment
falls
within the max amount coverage that is offered. you may need to up some of
the coverages to meet your needs.
you also must check what the limits are in your policy for "OFF PREMISES
THEFT". first you must have the coverage & then you need to find out if
it is
enough.
hank
From Medium Format Digest:
Recently, someone was asking about insuring their photo equipment.
The person mentioned he/she was a part time professional and was
considering adding a rider to his/her homeowner's policy. Be
careful! Some homeowner's policies have an exclusion for business
pursuits. This could mean that the policy won't provide coverage if
the photographer is earning income in photographic pursuits. So,
read your policy carefully and speak with your agent.
From Medium Format Digest:
Hello Irving! Several years ago, I went through the
"where do I find insurance for photo gear used in
commercial applications phase." A friends' assistant (a
commercial full-time photog) of mine got held up at gun
point and a bunch of his gear was swiped. His insurance
was with State Farm and they quickly reimbursed him
for the loss. I now have a "floater" thru the same
agent called a "inland marine policy" and it is
specifically for gear used in commerical applications. I
have not needed to make a claim. Yet.
From Medium Format Digest:
I also have business insurance through State Farm, with an Inland
Marine Camera Floater on the policy, and I can vouch for their
service.
In January of '94 I was living in Northridge, CA., and had the
misfortune of residing in one of those apartment buildings that
collapsed and crushed the ground level apartments during the
Northridge Earthquake. I survived, but lost more than $15000 worth of
camera and lighting equipment. Oddly enough, the loss was not due to
the quake itself, but to looters who ransacked the building after the
quake( I was in the hospital at the time ).
State Farm reimbursed me for all the equipment in short order.
Then in January of '98 ( that seems to be a bad month for me!) I had a
case containing my entire 35mm system stolen while I was working on a
sound stage at Universal Studios. The case had a little more than
$10000 worth of gear inside. My State Farm agent told me to go get a
Sales Order from my camera dealer for the items I needed, and in a
little more than a week they issued a check directly to the dealer for
the loss, and I was back in business.
The coverage is not cheap, but I certainly would not have been able to
stay in business without it.
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Mark,
You can schedule cameras on your homeowners policy. The only restriction
being if it is your hobby and not your profession. If the latter then you
really need a commercial policy.
But, if you are just an enthusiast like myself, and I sell insurance for a
living so I do know what I speak, the homeowners is the best way to
insure it.
The basic policy usually covers your cameras without limitation for the
perils of the policy. However, I would recommend scheduling your body and
lenses for one major reason. BREAKAGE. Also if it is scheduled you don't
have to pay a deductible.
Just my two cents.
Scott
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Read your homeowner's policy carefully. Many policies only exclude
personal property to the extent that it is used commercially. If you are
not a pro, your equipment may be covered for full value (minus any
deductable) without the need for a special rider or additional premium.
If in doubt call your agent.
My policy excluded a number of different things above a certain value
(jewelry, furs, etc.) but made no mention of camera equipment. I
contacted my agent and he told me unless it was specifically excluded, all
personal property would be fully covered up to the limit of the policy
minus any deductable. He did mention that some insurance companies do
limit things like cameras and antiques. He also mentioned that it was
very important to keep records (receipts, serial #s, etc.) and to keep a
copy of the record at another location.
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Fred B. wrote:
Many insurance companies will add camera floaters to your homeowners or
tenants policies. Chubb is a good one with broad coverage, but its not
cheap.
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
If you are not using your camera equipment for business then it would be
covered under your homeowners policy. The only advantage in scheduling the
equipment is that the Homeowners deductible will not apply. If it is
business then you should buy a "Camera Floater" in your business name. You
need an inventory list with names, Serial #s, Models, etc. and values.
Courtesy of The Insurance Information Institute, a Nonprofit organization
ec.photo.equipment.35mm
I've been insuring my cameras (hobby now, not professional) for several
years under my "Personal Articles Floater" on my homeowners insurance
(USAA). I don't consider it that expensive because I've had to make a
claim a couple of times (Nikon F3, MD-4 and Action Finder and 20mm got too
close to salt water). No deductible, completely restored to like-new
condition, no hassle. I really recommend insurance because you just don't
have to worry anymore about accidental damage, loss or theft after you
insure it. You're really buying peace of mind. I absolutely wouldn't
think of running around with some of the pricy gear that's out there today
without insurance coverage. Shop around for best rates.
Edgy01@aol.com
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
You have to get a camera repairer or restorer who can give you a written
appraisal as to the worth of the camera's. Unfortunately camera's deprciate
faster than your socks - regardless of how great they work and the great
lenses that they have that are not made anymore. Try getting an appraisal as
an antique! Don't laugh - if you insure them as antiques the company will be
hard pressed to take depreciation if something happens Courtesy of the
Insurance Insformation Institute and a frustrated photographerI
someone@flubnutz.org (Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply) wrote:
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Dear Ron
I had a lot pf my personal photographic equipment stolen from my office at
work. My university would not cover the theft on their insurance because
of a 10K deductible. My homeowners policy covered the loss completely
because I had a replacement policy. This policy covered all the equipment
that I documednted that I had, they replaced all of it or give me a cash
equivalent of the present day replacement cost if they could not find the
item. Talk to your insurance broker about this, the replacement policy
made my disaster more of a nuisance than a tragedy.
Michael Shia
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
On 23 Mar 1999 15:49:40 GMT, lauvone@aol.com (Lauvone) wrote:
-snip-
I was told the same thing on my insurance homeowners policy -
ANYthing that is used to make an income is not covered under my home
policy, so I have a seperate policy.
Althought I seldom make any money from my camera gear, I
listed everything I have under the seperate policy - form darkroom
equipment to cameras. I have full replacement coverage (and I pay
good for it too).
joe
http://www.multiboard.com/~joneil
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
From one who has more than 30 years of insurance experience, including
nearly 10 years in claims, here's the short story. The homeowners policy
usually covers personal property away from the premises (home) for up to 10%
of the personal property limit. So, in the case you described, the
homeowners' insurer is responsible for the stolen equipment. BUT -- and it's
a very big but -- most homeowners policies do not cover photographic
equipment for its full value (whether it's used for business or not). The
auto insurer is not responsible for personal property stolen from the
automobile. The auto insurer IS, however, responsible for paying for any
damage done to the automobile when it was burgled. The best bet, if you have
camera gear you can't afford to lose, is to get a floater attached to your
homeowners (or tenants) policy. Each piece of gear is scheduled, by name,
model, serial #, etc. Coverage is truly "all risk," meaning that even if you
drop your camera down a mountain and lose it forever, it's covered. Be
aware, however, that in all insurance claims, you must PROVE your loss. That
is, you must file with the insurance company what is known as a Proof of
Loss. This is a heady document in which you swear under penalty of
perjury -- and subject to insurance fraud laws, which can be very tough
indeed -- that the equipment was lost or damaged as you describe. Be aware,
also, that most insurance companies will not ever pay you any money for lost
or stolen equipment. Instead, they will replace it if at all possible. So,
if you have a five-year-old Hasselblad stolen, you'll get a brand new
5-year-old Hasselblad. Or maybe, if the insurance company is feeling
generous, you'll get a brand new THREE-year-old Hasselblad. Disclaimer:
policy terms and conditions vary. Do what most people never do: read your
policy. If there is anything you don't understand, ask your agent or broker
to explain it in English (or whatever your native tongue happens to be).
This will be tough on them, but stick with it, and you will get an answer
eventually. Finally, I said this was the "short story," and it's not. It's
long, too long. Insurance stories are always too long. Sorry.
From: dlwood2000@aol.comIndyboy (DLWood2000)
I have been handling insurance claims for 20 years, so I can speak from
the perspective of an insurance professional and a camera owner. I will
say, however, that my claim expertise lies primarily in bodily injury and
workers' compensation, so I don't have a detailed knowledge of the
currently available personal property coverage available under renters'
and homeowners' insurance. I do, however, own a house, have a homeowners'
policy, and I own camera equipment.
This entired discussion is based upon the premises that you are NOT a
professional photographer. If you are, you would likely need special
coverages for your equipment, as noted by some of the other posters (an
inland marine floater, for instance).
I suspect your agent is mistaken about the personal property coverage
under your renter's insurance. I have never heard of a home owners' or
renters' personal property coverage that covers your property only when it
is at the insured location. I'm not saying such a form can't exist, I'm
just saying that it is very limited coverage as compared to what is widely
avaiable. The coverage for property away from the premises is often some
percentage of the total personal property coverage under the policy.
Auto policies, for instance, will routinely exclude coverage for personal
property in the vehicle, because the homeowners'/ renters' policy is where
that coverage is routinely found.
In the case of camera equipment, there will likely be a separate limit for
that equipment, regardless of where it is.
The key thing you need to do is: read the policy. What does the form
say? See if your reading of the policy jibes with what the agent told you.
Ask him/her questions.
Bear in mind that insurance policies are contracts, and although there is
a lot of standardizaton of forms, there is some difference from insurer to
insurer. It's therefore impossible to give you a specific answer to your
question, without actually seeing your policy.
You'll need to ask you agent if coverage can be purchased that will do
what you want. There may be another, more expensive (and let's hope more
extensive) renters' form available, or it may be possible to "endorse (add
coverage to)" your policy. This is what other posters refer to when they
speak of having an inland marine floater or a "rider."
You'll need to know exactly which pieces of equipment you need the
additional insurance for (serial numbers, etc) and what the costs was when
you purchased it. If you have receipts, good. Hang on to them in a safe
place.
You should also "shop" your insurance. Call several personal lines agents
(indpendent or "company" agents, like Nationwide). Tell them what you
want to insure. Find out what the price will be. Typcially, you will be
looking to replace your existing renters' form with a policy that will
have the additional coverage you need for your camera equipment.
After you have this information, it's decision time. You have several
options available to you:
1. Retain the risk. I don't think this is the choice you are likely to
make, because I think you can find coverage at a reasonable price, but you
need to understand it is an option. Insurance is not the only risk
management technique available to you.
You'll need see if paying the price for the additional coverage is cost
effective, in light of how much you can lose if you have a loss and don't
have coverage.
For instance, if you own $2000 worth of camera equipment, and it would
cost you $100 additionally a year to insure your equipment with a $500
deductable, and the policy will only pay Actual Cash Value (ACV) of the
equipment, this may not be a good buy.
It works like this:
$2000 new = $1200 ACV (what it is worth on the market now). How ACV is
established is a tale for another time.
Maximum pay out of the policy is ACV less deductable, so the most you can
collect is $700, and you are paying an addl $100 a year for this. Is this
worth it to you? How likely is it that you will loss the equipment to an
insured peril? Those are the questions you face when you decide to retain
the risk. It's like deciding if you need collision insurance on an old
car.
2. Protecting your equipment better (which can be combined with
insurance). It's unlikely that will work for you, but it's worth
mentioning, like retaining the risk.
Is there somewhere safer than your place to keep your equipment, but yet
where it would be readily available if needed?
Perhaps a relative with a home and an alarm system who would be willing to
allow you to leave your stuff there, something like that.
3. Insurance. Unless you go with a relatively expensive floater, you
will not have coverage for accidental damage (dropping the camera into a
lake, for instance). Most personal property coverages are "specified
peril" coverages. The policy lists what type of loss is covered under the
policy (fire, theft, etc) and what is excluded. You'll see some of this
as you read your current form.
Accidental damage is usually excluded and/or not an insured peril. For
instance, my homeowners policy provides coverage to personal property
damaged by a falling object, but not for damage to the object itself. So
don't drop your camera on your table. The damage to the table is covered,
but the damage to the camera isn't.
If you bought some (or all) of the equipment with a credit card, there may
be some limited coverages for accidental damage available to card owners.
You could look into that, for coverage for accidental loss, but I suspect
it would be limited in scope, either in terms of how long after the
purchase the coverage applies, how much ($) coverage is available, or
both.
As far as renters' policies are concerned, you need to be careful in
shopping. Get a few quotes. Know what you are willing to pay
additionally for this coverage and know exactly what you are getting.
Think of likely contingencies and ask questions.
Obviously, one question for you is: is there coverage under the policy
when my property is elsewhere, such as in my car, or when I am carrying
it?
Look into the availability of "replacement cost" coverage. This type of
insurance pays what it would cost to REPLACE the property with "like kind
and quality," in the event of a loss. This coverage is widely available
under homeowners' polices, but I don't know about renters' forms. Been
too long since I had one, or handled a claim under one.
Any enhancement to the coverage, aside from scheduling your camera
equipment (a "rider"), will ehance coverage for ALL of your property,
subject to the other terms of the policy. So, if you get replacement
costs coverage, it will apply to all of your property, except as otherwise
specified in the policy. If you get a form that covers property away from
the premises, it will apply to all property, except as otherwise
specified.
Bear in mind, in the event of covered loss, the policy will pay to REPAIR
damaged equipment, instead of replacing it, if the repair is reasonably
priced in light of the replacement costs of the equipment, even if you
have replacement cost coverage. If you have ACV coverage, the policy will
never pay more than the ACV of the equipment, regardless of the cost of
the repair or the replacement cost of the equipment.
Here's my example. I won't give property values for privacy reasons.
My homeowners' policy provides up to A $ worth of coveage for personal
property. The coverage under the policy for property in transit is 10% of
A, or $(limit), whichever is more. The separate limit for cameras was B$
worth of coverage. I have a $500 deductable on the policy for property
losses. I have replacement cost coverage.
I realized one day that my camera equipment was worth more than the
policy's specified limit, so I contacted my agent. He told me I didn't
need a "rider (formally known as scheduled property)" on my policy,
because I don't own any single piece of equipment worth more than
$(limit). So, he increased my camera property limit under the policy to X
$ worth of coverage, which adequately covered all of my camera equpment.
This costs me $20 extra per year in homeowners premiums, which I thougth
was worth it, given the difference between $B and X $.
I hope this information is of some use to you. If you care to email me with
some questions, please feel free to. This posting is very long, as it is.
Dennis
[Ed. note: this is only one side of the story, but provided here to
caution about warranty insurance, which is usually not as good a protection
as more comprehensive insurance coverage such as those noted herein...]
When I purchased my Canon A2E about 2 years ago, from Abe's of Maine, I
also purchased an extended warranty. The warranty cost me $90 dollars and
is with Mack Camera & Video Service in New Jersey. Well the main control
dial failed on the camera so I sent it off to Mack to be repaired under
warranty.
Today I got a form from Mack stating that the camera suffered impact
and that the top and bottom plates were cracked, and the repair bill would
be $185 dollars. I can assure you that there was no impact and no cracks
either.
It appears that I was conned out of the $90 dollars for the warranty and
now they want $185 for the repair. If I refuse I can take the camera back
and bring it to an authorized Canon dealer. That is if Mack didn't actually
cause the cracks that they say are there.
What I am hoping is that the cracks are not there and that I can get the
camera repaired locally for $185.
Does anyone know how much the repair of the main control dial usually
costs?
The moral of this story! Don't buy the offered warranty when you
purchase a cameral.
Burned in Boston
From Bronica Mailing List:
You need what they call an inland marine policy (business) and make sure
it has
the lowest deductible possible. I would also make sure it is for replacement
value for cameras become more expensive every year. I don't use the PPA
insurance because I have always found that my local agent could do better.
I have roughly 25,000 in camera and accessory insurance that covers my
equipment anywhere from dropage to theft for around $135 per year.
Hope this helps
Phil
From Bronica List:
Karen,
I sent my (insurance) post to you this morning when I
had to run. I've just seen some of the posts since.
I've had PPA insurance on my equipment, and it was
priced VERY right (I was not in business at the time)
and didn't need business insurance. I think they
(PPA) also have something more for business (not
sure); as I got insurance with a policy thru my state
assoc. (PP/California)...who's insurance was thru the
YA Tittl insurance agency...yes football fans 'THE' YA
TITTL of quarterback fame back in the 60's.
Karen, and others, when shopping for the equipment
part of the insurance, you definitely want full
REPLACEMENT COVERAGE...."pay the two bucks". If it's
totalled, stolen, burned, etc. it's replaced NEW. If a
newer model replaces yours, I think you can list that,
since the older model is no longer available. Without
it (unless things have changed) they take the new
price less a proportion for the age of the
piece(s)....You could have an $800. camera body, less
60% because it's several years old, less your
deductible (if you have one). With full replacement,
you get paid whatever it costs you to do just that
(less deductible..if). Some require that you actually
buy the piece and they reimburse up to whatever you
insured for, some will pay whatever you insured for
without having to actually purchase. Always insure
for the 'local (higher) prices knowing you can at
least get them from NYC cheaper. Be careful not to go
crazy...you pay premium as percentage of the total of
your equipment. Consider shipping, taxes, etc. in the
equip. values...whatever it would cost you....I think
renting a replacement "might" be included in your
business insurance. I'm sure I'll think of something
else the instant after I click send...but I'll do it
anyway.
Budd.........OK here goes.
PS- By the way...among others I insure my Bronicas
(most of my equipment)...and that's why this can be on
the list.
From Leica Mailing List:
regarding the issue of insurance for camera gear (or pretty much all other
professional gear) i have this very illustrative example from an inurance
adjustor:
you drop your camera in a pond.
options:
1.- fish it out, insurance may or may not pay for repair/replacement
2.- keep on rowing to the next camera store and buy a new
camera. insurance
will cover replacement cost.
now, it is all a judgement call for you, the owner if you want to wade
through
the pond, ruin your clothes and end up with a lousy camera, or
you choose the path of least resistance and get new gear.
andre
Austin Franklin wrote:
From Rollei Mailing List:
Beth Delson wrote:
Supplementing Terry Price's Shutterbug comments, you might also go to
eBay and look at "completed items" in the specific category of your
Rollei 35. For example using a 35S model, ..eBay shows about 12 -
35S's sold with a predominant range in the $300's +/-. One recent
completed sale shows $76 but in looking at the underlying bid summary
the highest bid $170 and at that price it did not sell because it was
short of the reserve.
The are also other sources on the internet such as Ritz Collectibles
(not Ritz Stores), that show prices. In submitting the claim give the
details and serial of the equipment if you have it. Most policies have
provisions that on a theft you must report it to the police so be sure
that you do that. But as Terry mentioned, give your self the benefit of
the doubt and use those sources that give a "adequate cost".
Most claims people are not intricacies familiar with specialized
equipment and if you provide them documented information on the current
costs, you have made their job easier. Unless you have a special
equipment rider on your policy , most policies state that replacement
cost is only paid when the item is replaced ... otherwise ACV (
replacement less depreciation) is paid. Many companies do not enforce
that but if they you do (and it is covered) just go out and buy
yourself a another nice Rollei 35.
Roger
Date: 25 Oct 1999
William Wiseman
elox@earthlink.net writes:
Before you ask for a rider (insurance companies will happily sell you one
whether you need it or not) read your policy carefully. Some policies
exclude or limit coverage on certain types of property. Some do not. My
policy is for replacement cost on all of my personal property. The only
limitation called out in my policy is $5,000 for furs and jewelry. My
camera equipment (which I do not use professionally) is my personal
property and it is not jeweled or fur covered. My agent says my gear is
covered without a rider.
From: huggy52@aol.com (Huggy52)
Check out the new issue of Photo District News (PDN). There is a complete
article on camera insurance. Or check out their web site
www.pdn-pix.com. I am
not sure what area you are in, so you may try calling some your local
photography businesses as they will have lots of insurance.
Good Shooting
Mark
rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
I have the rider on my house policy that you mention and I think its a
great thing. I am covered in my house and anywhere I go with the
equipment. So when I am on holiday or a photo trip I am also covered for
hotel theft. I am also covered if anything goes from my car. All
worldwide coverage for about $300 per year covering equipment equal to the
price of a very nice new car. So my advice would be to get a household
policy rider - its a relatively small price to pay for piece of mind.
From: JMc trimil@my-deja.com
Larry,
You can buy a rider to your home owner's policy for $75-100 per year
that will cover home office and other items that normally are excluded.
My policy is through Safeco, and it covers $30,000 at home, and $5000 of
property away from the residence (car, hotel, etc.). They required a
list of all the items I wanted covered, so I put all the scope stuff
down as "photographic equipment". There is an exclusion for rare or
irreplaceable items, so that 8" Alvan Clark objective probably wouldn't
qualify ;-)
Call your insurance company and see if they offer a similar plan.
Jim McSheehy
From: rob hunt robhuntro@goes.com
homeowner's or renter's insurance is not sufficient to protect
against everything that could happen but you can usually buy
additional coverage under those policies. in my case, i
submitted a list of items i wanted "scheduled coverage" for and
they charge me about 1 percent of the replacement value per year
for any stupid loss whatsoever including leaving it on the hood
of your car and driving away. they considered it as "camera
equipment" and the only stipulation is that the gear not be put
to professional use (they needn't worry.)
rob hunt
From Leica Mailing List:
Arthur Leyenberger larthurl@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm paying an extra $52.80/yr to cover $3700 worth of Leica. Works
out to be about the same.
From Leica Mailing List:
Replacement value? Read the actual polilcy form. All too many agents
think that scheduling items on a marine form means replacement cost as a
pay off. Not necessarily so...Your pay off may well be only "ACV" or
actual cash value and is always subject to a max of the scheduled
amount. A good homeowners policy avaolable in most parts of the
country already provides coverage for the perils you indicated subject
to the deductible on a replacement cost basis.
....
From Leica Mailnig List:
It covers all accidental damage that renders the lens unusable as judged
by an insurance adjuster with no photographic experience. I have never
heard of an insurance company replacing a lens because of a front element
scratch. This is why the common thing done, by those with little or no
conscience, seems to be dropping the lens into a lake, river or ocean.
Great for ripping off the insurance company and acquiring a massive karma
debt.
John Collier
From: zeitgeist blkhatwhtdog@yahoo.com
Black Diamond wrote:
Someone recommended Usher-Hill to a roundtable conversation, they are
sponsors or sponsored by WPPI and have insurance plans targeted for
working wedding photographers. Our association pres had noticed that
his insurance only covered $25K and when he takes his digital stuff to
an event he's got almost 75K. some insurance plans don't cover for
stuff 'while in transit' which is when it is most vulerable. Oh, the
big thing, U-H also covers rented gear, something that many folks do and
many policies will only cover listed items.
z-prophoto@egroups.com
From: Karen Simmons klsimmons@mindspring.com
I've been quite pleased with Hill & Usher (http://www.hillusher.com).
After filling out their online quote form, I received email from Taylor
Usher himself ... we negotiated the policy completely via email and I
received my bound policy less than a week later. They have a particular
policy designed for photographers they call "The Package".
As someone else noted, they do cover equipment off site, which some
companies don't, and they cover rental equipment in increments of
$10,000.
My annual policy which includes 1 million general liability; $35k in
errors and omissions; $50k in business property; 1 million in hired
auto; plus the following:
My annual premium is around $660. I haven't had to file a claim with
them, so I can't tell you how their claim service is, but their new
customer service is outstanding.
Karen
From Nikon Mailing List:
I picked up Personal Property Insurance through State Farm that covers all
my camera equipment if damaged/lost by anything other than theft. Theft,
even when it happens out of the home is usually handled through your home
owners policy. The PPI costs only $46 a year for about $3000 of coverage.
Earl
From Nikon Mailing List:
Paul,
You could try a Home "All contents" insurance which I have in Hong KOng.
It is not specific for cameras merely one for home contents. The maximum
value of goods claimable if lost when outside the house is US$2500 which
is also claimable if you drop it and break it. Some policies however limit
the maximum value of any one item.
howie
From Nikon Mailing List;
Since State Farm comes up quite often in this discussion: My camera was
stolen from my truck, along with a laptop computer at a Hampton Inn, in
Ohio last year. A police report was filed - very important. I did not have
receipts, so State Farm accepted copies of the cover page of the various
manuals as documentation of what was lost. By the time we went through a
complete spec by spec comparison, my Minotla Maxxum was replaced by a
Nikon N-90, which I then upgraded to a F-100. The current value of the
Minolta is the 150.00 - 200.00 range. The story demonstrates the value of
replacement coverage from the homeowners, and the value of going through
every single specification to qualify the replacement. The process did
take a couple of months so be prepared for that. State Farm has a
"Shopping" service that will procure the items for you (at their cost)
unless you can make a case of immediate need, and make a small compromise
on the dollar value.
From Nikon MF Mailing LIst;
I saw the new S3/2000 in a shop for the first time on Sunday.
I was not able to handle it, but the chrome finish was very nice and it
certainly looks like its worth the price.
Not that I could afford one.
Some of you might remember seeing it on CNN, but there was a flood this
summer in the southern part of the city of Nagoya (Japan) where I live.
Last week I found a 400/3.5 lens standing on the floor by the door of a
2nd-hand camera shop and was curious as to why it seemed to be so
neglected. On picking it up I found that it was filled with dirty water.
It had been submerged in the flood. The owner said I could have it for
5000yen ( a little less than 50 USD). She said the former owner had gotten
a new one from Nikon at a 40% discount. I don't know the specifics, but
the camera companies seem to have certain resale policies to replace
products destroyed beyond repair in natural disasters etc.
Shin
From Hasselblad Mailing List:
My policy is with State Farm. It is what they call a "Personal Articles
Policy." It notes that I use my gear for pay. I think it is about $2 or
$3 per hundred.
....
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Two weeks ago I renewed my homeowner's policy and inquired about this.
My agent confirmed the equipment is *not* for professional use, then
quoted me $0.41 per $100 of equipment. For that price, I am absolutely
buying the coverage. By the way, this is with State Farm and I'm in San
Diego county, California.
Mike
From Rollei Mailing List:
Very sorry to hear that.
After filing the police report, call Leitz at 201 767 7500 and report the
Leitz serial numbers to them. They keep an international stolen equipment
log in case any one of them comes in for service. If one does they notify
you immediately
BTW: where do you keep the tools?
Javier
...
From Hasselblad Mailing List:
What sort of premiums are you paying for loss coverage on your HB
cameras and lenses?
WRT equipment insurance, I pay approximately %1 of stated value. This is
a full replacement policy. I have all my equipment listed individually,
then a $10k misc. addition. I am covered for any damage or loss. I have
stated $20k for equipment outside the studio, cost is the same.
From Minolta Mailing List:
If you are looking for insurance coverage check out the North American
Nature Photograhpers Association (NANPA). You have to be a member
($75/yr), but they offer thru a carrier World Wide all risk coverage for
approximately $1.75/ 100.
I have had no claims but the agent is very open and invoices for premiums
by email.
Ron
From Minolta Mailing List:
A few weeks ago I posted here regarding the "Personal Articles Policy"
that I had purchased from my local State Farm agent which is covering
almost $7,000 worth of equipment for a mere $111.00 per year. Well, I
have already had to use it and thought I'd post the results...
Monday night I accidentally dropped my 150mm Bronica portrait lens onto
the asphalt, shattering the front element and severely distorting the
lens barrel (nothing like hearing $1700 worth of glass hit the
pavement!). Tuesday morning I called my insurance agent and reported the
damage. Tuesday afternoon I picked up a check for a replacement lens and
gave them the broken one to turn in. This morning I received my
replacement via FedEx. Not too shabby I'd say! (Of course I *could* have
had my replacement Tuesday afternoon *IF* my local pro shop carried
Bronica... but to him only Nikon and Hasselblad cameras exist!)
For anyone else in the United States and Canada who have access to State
Farm insurance, I'd urge you to check out this coverage if you have many
$$$ tied up in equipment!
Later,
Date: 21 Jun 2001
After some serious searching, I found a company that writes insurance
on photo equipment for reasonable primiums. For example $2,000 worth
of coverage for $30 US per year, $10,000 of coverage is $150 per year
and $20,000 worth of gear can be covered for $270 a year. No, I don't
work for them, just enjoy the peace of mind they provide when I'm
traveling with a ton of gear.
The company is IPG and you can reach them at (888)678-4096 or
(760)674-9655. I don't have a clue if they will insure our friends out
of the U.S. but a phone call should resolve that question.
An acquaintence of mine did submit a claim to them for some flooded
underwater camera gear and they paid up with no hassle. The coverage
is pretty broad and worth the price IMHO.
Happy shootin'
Ed
From Minolta Mailing List;
I've been meaning to post this and keep forgetting, so finally here is
some information that you guys really may want to think about!
Most homeowners policies have pretty low limits on covering expensive
items such as camera equipment, firearms, etc., and it goes even lower
if you use your cameras professionally (according to the insurance
company, that means getting paid for ANY of your photography... whether
you do it as a profession or not!).
I recently discovered that State Farm Insurance, available in USA and
some (most (?)) parts of Canada, has a special insurance called
"Personal Articles Policy" that is perfect for your camera gear! It is
very low cost, covers *replacement* cost or full repair cost, and has NO
deductible! If you get paid for ANY of your photo work, you need to take
the "professional" coverage which is only $2.07 per $100 of coverage
annually. I have coverage for $7,000 worth of listed gear for a mere
$144.90 per year, or only $12.08 per month!
This insurance covers all loses of equipment due to theft, accidental
damage, etc. I questioned the insurance agent heavily with various
scenarios before getting my coverage, and even if I do something stupid
like leave my lens on top of the car and drive off, the lens is covered.
If I'm switching lenses and drop on on the ground, it's covered. If I
leave my camera bag loaded with gear unattended while shooting something
and somebody walks off with it, it's covered!
The one thing you should be aware of regarding damage claims is this;
they want the equipment sent to a repair facility for a quote before
deciding whether to pay for repairs or replacement, but I believe this
is certainly a fair policy.
Another thing I asked specifically about is your premiums do NOT
increase every time you have a claim! Only if you have "excessive"
claims do they start questioning your coverage.
Anyway, I just got this coverage on all of my gear at the beginning of
May and thought others on these two lists may find this information
helpful. I am in no way associated with State Farm Insurance... I'm only
a customer!
Later,
From hasselblad mailing list;
Surely this is covered on your house contents insurance. Mine certainly
is, up to a single article limit of o1,750 (and a body, lens, finder etc.
are each classed as separate items, regardless if they are joined together
when the equipment is lost or stolen). I have found it much cheaper to
add a supplement to my house insurane for any articles that are over
o1,750, and the cover includes items that are with me when travelling
anywhere in the world.
Simon
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:21:35 -0400 I enjoy the peace of mind that this policy offers so much that I am having Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 An Errors and Omissions policy would cover me if, for example, I failed to load
From: "Mark Morgan" mmorgan2@san.rr.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002
"Ryan Forman" gte230h@prism.gatech.edu wrote
> Anyone know anything about insuring camera equipment?
>
I'm insuring about $16,000 worth of gear (including a laptop, camera
equipment, and other electronics) for about $225 per year. That's with ZERO
deductible, and it covers absolutely everything--from
loss...breakeage...theft...dropping it off a cliff...baby puking on
it...etc.
This is an optional add-on to my home-owner's insurance coverage.
They've had to cover two thefts with a total of over (gulp) 10,000 dollars.
Ouch for them... :(
...But they covered me with excellent and speedy service. -Lucky I was
covered.
Needless to say, I'll happily continue paying my yearly premiums--seeing how
it will take about 40+ years for them to break even. I feel bad that
they've lost money on me...but that's the way insurance works when bad
things happen. Hopefully, I'll never have to make another claim.
They replaced two two thefts which included two laptops, and my 100-400
Canon L IS lens.
:(
From: mceowen@aol.com (McEowen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: 17 Jul 2002
Subject: Re: Insuring your equipment. Reccomendations?
I bought an inland marine rider to my homeowners insurance. Supposedly it
covers everything but war and nuclear disasters -- and it assumes professional
use. I insured $7,000 worth of Leica gear. I believe it cost me $120 a year.
From: Michael Stevens bigmike@bigmikes.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Inland Marine policy through NPPA
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002
Melissa,
"We insure for accidental direct physical loss to peropery described
in Coverage B caused by the following perils, except as provided in
Section 1 - Losses Not Insured:
1. Fire or lightning.
2. Windstorm or hail
3. Explosion
4. Riot or civil commotion
5. Aircraft
6. Vehicles, meaning impact by a vehicle
7. Smoke
8. Vandalism or malicious mischief
9. Theft
10. Falling objects
11. Weight of ice, snow or sleet that causes damage to property
contained in a building.
12. Sudden and accidental discharge or overflow of water or steam from
within a plumbing, heating, air conditioning or automatic fire
protective sprinkler system, or from within a household appliance.
13. Sudden and accidental tearing asunder, cracking, burning or
bulging of a steam or hot water heating systems, an air conditioning
or automatice fire protective sprinkler system, or an appliance for
heating water.
14. Freezing of a plumbing, heating, air conditioning or automatic
fire protective sprinkler system, or of a household appliance.
15. Sudden and accidental damage to electrical appliances, devices,
fixtures and wiring from an increase or decrease of artificially
generated electrical current.
16. Breakage of glass, meaning damage to personal property caused by
breakage of glass which is part of a building on the residence
premises.
There are a sh*tload of loopholes in several of those "perils" so I
would encourage you to read your policy carefully before you get
screwed like me. I got hit to the tune of $7000. I can understand why
people go on shooting sprees.
Mike
"Melissa" honeybee1959@hotmail.com woke me from my slumber by saying:
>Alan:
>I never considered a separate camera coverage, but once I start to get a
>collection of decent glass I may look into it. Like you I have State Farm
>and am very pleased with their coverage. Only once did I have a problem
>with an agent who did all but call me a liar when I turned in a list of
>record albums that were stolen. (yeah, that was about 21 years ago) He was
>so blatant about it that I was taken aback. The jerk thought he was yanking
>the chain of a young, lowly renter, but in the process lost the coverage on
>my car, my sister's car, my parents two cars, my sister's house, my parents
>house and my house (which I still rent from my parents).
>
>I am curious about the 16 insured clauses that Mike had to deal with. I
>guess we should all know more about the details of our insurance policies.
>
>Melissa
>
>Michael Stevens bigmike@bigmikes.org wrote...
>> When the boat I was in sank I thought "no problem" because I had them
>> insured through my homeowners policy, which happens to be State Farm.
>> They pretty much told me to go f*ck myself since it wasn't lost due to
>> one of their 16 insured "causes."
>> That has led to the realization that a homeowners policy on my camera
>> gear is completely worthless. That's why I'm looking into an Inland
>> Marine policy for my remaining gear, as well as the $4300 worth of
>> gear I just bought to replace what was lost.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> "Alan Justice"
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002
From: Bob Sull w8imo@kellnet.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Steve wrote:
>
> General question...
>
> I'm looking into possibly picking up an Olympus E-20. This is a
> pricey piece of equipment and wondered what people did (if anything)
> to insure the camera against damage, loss or theft.
Talk to the agent that you have your homeowner's or tenant's insurance
with.
You want an "all risk floater". This will cover you against anything
that happens. Like the time my wife took my OM-1 to a bridal shower and
a couple of days later the lens wouldn't come off. She said she got
"watermelon juice" on it. The camera nd lens went to Olympus, the bill
went to my insurance company. The check came to me.....
Bob
From: Chris Maddock abuse1@btinternet.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance?
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002
Steve wrote:
>
> General question...
>
> I'm looking into possibly picking up an Olympus E-20. This is a
> pricey piece of equipment and wondered what people did (if anything)
> to insure the camera against damage, loss or theft.
My gear is down as specified (for the really expensive bits) and
unspecified to a total value (for the rest) on my home contents
insurance. Cheaper then the combined cost of home contents and seperate
camera cover, and less restrictive conditions.
--
Chris
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002
From: Daniel Lee Daniel@DKLImages.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: [HUG] Photography Insurance through PPA
Does anyone here have photo Insuranc through PPA?
I had to claim a loss of about 12,000 and I just got a check for half
because:
Not everything I bought matches up exactly with what I claimed as a loss...
WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ALL ABOUT??????The coverage is also for "replacement
cost" and they didn't even cover that...for example I bought one item for
750 and now it runs $1125. They only paid $750.
Doesn't "replacement cost" mean replacing this thing at the amount it
currently runs to buy it???
Anyone????
Daniel
Postscript:
And when I say "bought" I mean the equipment I had to purchase to replace
some of the lost items - checked into an airline - NWA and it never came out
the other end!
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002
From: Charles Carstensen ccarstensen@gwe.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: RE: [HUG] Photography Insurance through PPA
Daniel, sounds like a very inexperienced adjuster/clerk. You know, the good
insurance company usually assigns these claims to a trainee and all are
office handled. I would get in touch with a PPA person who has some
authority with the insurance company. I would not get into a match with the
adjuster, go immediately to his/her claim manager after speaking with the
PPA. PPA will probably pass the buck, but they need to be put on notice.
You do need to confirm your original itemized list of exactly what was
stolen. If you replaced something different like make and model upgrade, the
do not owe you for the upgrade. They only owe you for replacing like kind
and quality. If it is not available used in the same condition, they owe you
new cost.
Put it all in writing. Do not compare apples with oranges. They still owe
you actual cash value for any item stolen/claimed which was not replaced.
Did you sign a Proof Of Loss form? Or, was the claim check stamped with
wording on the back that you accept the adjustment by cashing the check? Did
you have telephone conversations with the adjuster prior to receiving the
check? Did you document the times and dates, if so? Did you keep copies of
your receipts? They owe tax and shipping, by the way.
Not knowing exact itemizations of claimed v. your replacement cost it is
hard to tell who is correct. Advertised retail price has nothing to do with
it.
If none of the above gets you satisfaction, you always have the insurance
commissioner in your state to fall back on. Notify them in writing of your
complaint, if that becomes necessary (only as a last resort).
Chuck Carstensen
Photographer
Montrose, Colorado
WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ALL ABOUT??????The coverage is also for "replacement
cost" and they didn't even cover that...for example I bought one item for
750 and now it runs $1125. They only paid $750.
Doesn't "replacement cost" mean replacing this thing at the amount it
currently runs to buy it???
Anyone????
From nikon mailing list:
From: "arttie gonzo" gonzoj_98@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [Nikon] re:camera insurance
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002
I have insurance with State Farm.� I have not had to do a claim with them
but they have been very good/excellent with any other claims involving
other policies I have with them.� It covers all non-pro-type use (where
you are under contract or getting paid, as a business) and the coverage
is worldwide for travellers.� My agent is very flexible and when I rent a
camera related item I have them add it to my policy and fax a letter on
Corporate stationary to the rental agency.� This is nice because they
will not charge me a huge deposit (check, credit card, etc.).� If the
rental is for just a weekend or a couple of days they will hold the
paperwork and only file it (and charge a premium) if I must make a
claim.� Otherwise I call them when it has been returned and it is removed
from my policy.
Just my 2 cents
...
From: Bruce Murphy pack-news@rattus.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: National Geographic Rates Film 400% better than latest Nikon D1X Digital
Date: 04 Jan 2003
John Halliwell john@photopia.demon.co.uk writes:
> Yep, that's what I meant, everything had to go in the hold. The guy in
> front of me complained for 10 minutes about his laptop going in the
> hold, in the end he was told to either check it in or move out of the
> queue and not fly. I saw it (or at least its case) come out the other
> end on the conveyor but have no idea if the rightful owner got it in the
> end.
I hope the airlines were sued appropriately for violating the various
international airline conventions. Of course, you realise that most
travel insurance policies *do not cover* laptops or cameras that
are checked.
From minolta mailing list:
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004
From: "Larry Ellis" saycheese@wave.net
Subject: Re: WARNING TO ALL CAMERA USERS REGARDING WARRANTY-UPDATE
Ahh it looks like I'm getting somewhere thanks to the help from you
nice Minolta people. Today at 9:30 AM pacific time I spoke with a
service technician, Leila, in New Jersey and gave her my case I.D.
number. For a while the computer systems were down and she had
nothing on record regarding the 30% discount. Then several minutes
into the conversation, the notes popped up stating there was a
notation of a 30% discount. However she could only authorize the
original repair of $158.00, but could not authorize the repair with
the 30% discount of $110.00.
I applaud Minolta's professionalism regarding this matter. I'm sure
when the newspaper's publisher or editor calls the service number and
gives the case I.D. number regarding an authorization for repair, he
will be happy to know that he will not be able to authorize the
repair which I spoke to him about yesteday (Jan 29th), but will be
even more delighted to know that he can pay the original amount to
repair the unit.
I also have taken my camera bag, turned it upside down and looked for
contamination. Although I found none, am happy to know I can use the
camera bag in the future now that I have done so. There could have
been a grain of sand in there that fell out which I was unaware of or
did not see.
Anyway, I would like to publically thank all the techs involved and
the senior techs for their help in helping me understand how to
better care for my dearly loved Minolta products. Without their aid
and assistance I would have never thought I could have actually been
at fault, thusly voiding the warranty. I just think this poor boy's
ego needed an attitude adjustment.I t just makes me want to care for
and treasure the Maxxum 7 even more now than ever before. So thank-
you all for your help. I just want everyone to rest, knowing their
equipment is in more than capable hands in the facility in New
Jersey.
Most sincerely,
Larry
--- In Minolta@yahoogroups.com, "Larry Ellis" saycheese@w... wrote:
> I have my Maxxum 7 in for repair as we speak. Just a warning for
> anyone. If they find ONE grain of sand, or ANY evidence of ANY dirt
> on or in the camera, they will void the warranty as they did with my
> camera. I know it's silly to talk about because I'm sure you all
> know about this anyway. So if a piece of lint (it's ubiquitous is it
> not?) or dust(also ubiquitous) should happend to settle in or on your
> camera your warranty will be voided just as was the rheum from Senor
> Antonio upon Shylock's bierd.
>
> The technician also bargains with you. I was given an original
> estimate of $158.00 to do what ever it took to fix the problem. Then
> upon talking, the service writer offered me a 15% discount. After
> further talking, the technician offered me an additional 30%
> discount, bringing the cost of the total repair to $110.00. I
> authorized the repair and said I could pay by money order. But the
> technician would only accept a major credit card with money paid up
> front in full before the repair could take place. I was also told
> that my warranty was now void but they would guarantee the repair for
> 6 months.
>
> THUS SPOKE ZARAKONICAMINOLTA
>
> L.E.
From: leica-bounce@freelists.org on behalf of Jim Brick
Sent: Wed 3/31/2004
To: leica@freelists.
Subject: Re: Beware of using Fedex
Jimmy Wong wrote:
>My understanding with Fedex is that even if you buy insurance for the
>replacement amount. If lost, they'll only pay up to their limit which
>apparently is $100. In other words, if you're shipping an M7 back to NJ for
>service and purchase insurance for $2000; if the shipment is lost, all you'll
>get from Fedex is $100.
http://fedex.com/us/services/express/termsandconditions/us/liabilitylimits.html
Under (F), there is a list of items that cannot be insured for over $100.
Cameras are not on the list. But antiques are. If your camera is an
antique, meaning a replacement is not available from ordinary photo
outlets, it's $100 max. Rolleis are current products. As are Leicas. If you
are shipping an M2 or LTM, you might have to be careful of how the invoice
is worded. So it's not classed as an antique.
Jim
From: leica-bounce@freelists.org on behalf of Jim Brick
Sent: Wed 3/31/2004
To: leica@freelists.org
Subject: Re: Beware of using Fedex (NOT!)
You are not missing anything. Many folks don't want to pay for the extra
insurance so they let it ride at $100. And guess what... that's all you
will get when that $1000 Rollei, Leica, or whatever is lost.
I always pay the insurance for obvious reasons. But there is a not so
obvious reason. When FedEx sees $1000 or $2000 insurance on a package, it's
a red flag to make sure the package doesn't get lost.
I shipped a large pallet crate of stuff to Photokina one year. I displayed
it there then shipped it home (all via airline freight), but it didn't
arrive home. They could not find it. Nearly a year went by, me calling them
every few weeks, still not found.
Then I filed the insurance claim of several thousand dollars. It was found
and delivered within two weeks. Turns out it was mistakenly parked in an
airline warehouse in Argentina! They were just too lazy to look hard for it.
But dollars out of pocket seems to get their attention every time.
I ship a lot of FedEx stuff. It's my choice shipper. They do not X-ray
packages so film is safe. They also pay insurance claims without too much
hassle. FedEx ground, to me, is easier to use than UPS ground. And FedEx's
web interface is stellar.
Jim
Akhil Lal wrote:
>I don't understand this. When shipping packages do you not declare a
>value and pay extra for insurance? The usual insurance is $ 100 but one
>can buy extra insurance.
>
>What am I missing?
>
>Regards,
>Akhil
From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Survey: "protective" lens filters
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004
Gordon Moat moat@attglobal.net wrote:
> Bob Salomon wrote:
> > "William Graham" weg9@comcast.net wrote:
> >
> > > If insurance paid the full cost, or slightly more than the full cost,
> >
> > They do, if you have a full replacement policy which costs you more for
> > their higher exposure.
> >
> > Having had our car opened and robbed in a parking gargage in France and
> > having everything stolen which included:
> > two Rollei 6006 cameras with 30, 40, 50, 80, 150 and 250mm lenses. Two
> > Rollei 3003 cameras with 16, 18, 25, 35mm 1.4, 50mm 80mm 1.4, 200mm
> > lenses plus extra backs, filters, hoods, screens, flash units, etc. A
> > Linhof 612 with 65mm and 135mm lenses. I received FULL value restitution
> > in cash from the insurance company. Took a few months to pry it out of
> > them but they paid off on a full replacement policy.
> >
> > If you don't have a full replacement policy they will deduct for
> > depreciation, wear/tear/deductibles, etc.
>
> Care to share the name of the insurance company?
>
> >
> >
> > As the Linhof distributor we deal with insurance companies who are
> > replacing Technikas on a fairly regular basis for policy holder with
> > full replacement policies. We regularly supply them with new Master
> > Technika outfits to replace lost/damaged or stolen ones. The old ones
> > are quite frequently the very old Technika III models with Rollex backs
> > and old lenses that are replaced with current versions.
> >
> > We can not stress the importance of having and paying for a full
> > replacement policy.
>
> Does that only work for new gear purchases, or can older gear be placed on
> such a policy? Thanks for any details.
>
> Ciao!
>
> Gordon Moat
> A G Studio
> http://www.allgstudio.com
You should check with your insurance agent.
From some of the replacement camera orders we have received from the
insurance industry some may cover used equipment. There are a surprising
number of 40 to 50 year old cameras that have been replaced and not all
could have been purchased new.
But these replacements were purchased by the insurance companies to
replace stolen/damaged/lost older versions. In these cases the insurance
company did not send cash. They sent a replacement.
--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Survey: "protective" lens filters
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004
"William Graham" weg9@comcast.net wrote:
> If insurance paid the full cost, or slightly more than the full cost,
They do, if you have a full replacement policy which costs you more for
their higher exposure.
Having had our car opened and robbed in a parking gargage in France and
having everything stolen which included:
two Rollei 6006 cameras with 30, 40, 50, 80, 150 and 250mm lenses. Two
Rollei 3003 cameras with 16, 18, 25, 35mm 1.4, 50mm 80mm 1.4, 200mm
lenses plus extra backs, filters, hoods, screens, flash units, etc. A
Linhof 612 with 65mm and 135mm lenses. I received FULL value restitution
in cash from the insurance company. Took a few months to pry it out of
them but they paid off on a full replacement policy.
If you don't have a full replacement policy they will deduct for
depreciation, wear/tear/deductibles, etc.
As the Linhof distributor we deal with insurance companies who are
replacing Technikas on a fairly regular basis for policy holder with
full replacement policies. We regularly supply them with new Master
Technika outfits to replace lost/damaged or stolen ones. The old ones
are quite frequently the very old Technika III models with Rollex backs
and old lenses that are replaced with current versions.
We can not stress the importance of having and paying for a full
replacement policy.
--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Camera insurance claims?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998
Benjamin A Maclaren wrote:
> I had a Mamiya back damaged from a fall. The camera was insured against
> accidental damage or theft. ...
...
> My question is: What kinds of excuses might an insurer use to get out
> of replacing a camera back?...
In the Love and Mercy of Jesus,
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Camera insurance claims?
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: camera insurance
Date: 24 Aug 1998
Nature Images and Articles on Techniques at:
http://members.aol.com/kevinoneil
Date: 18 Sep 1998
From: John Overton overton@cs.uchicago.edu
Subject: RE: Camera insurance
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:03:49 -0400
> From: "Susan S. Cotti" suecotti@cybernex.net
> Subject: Camera Insurance
>
> Does anyone know of any insurance company that will insure camera
> equipment for a short trip? The trip is by car, no airline involved.
>
> Susan
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998
From: "Steven M. Wirtz" swirtz@uswest.net
Subject: Camera Insurance
From: Paul Evans evstudio@earthlink.net
Subject: Response to Is PPA a valuable membership group
Date: 1998-10-15
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998
From: BUSCHMANN7@aol.com
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance [v04.n161/21] [v04.n164/8]
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998
From: "Rod Barbee" rwbarbee@gte.net
Subject: Re: Camera insurance [v04.n162/22]
> From: "Nicholas S. Rubenstein" nrubenstein@bayside.net
> Subject: Camera Insurance [v04.n159/12]
> Message: 12
>
> I will be visiting Italy this spring, and am rather nervous about taking my
> system there. It seems that an N90s and an F4 along with lenses and other
> accessories might be tempting targets.
>
> What options would everyone recommend in order to protect my substantial
> investment? What companies out there provide good policies with low
> deductibles? How is the value of the equipment set? Arbitrarily, by the
> consumer; replacement cost; mfg. suggested retail?
>
> As a high school student, I put nearly all of my income into photography,
> and it would take me years to reconstitute my system as it is now. Even so,
> I would hate to just leave my equipment at home, and miss the opportunity to
> photograph such a beuatiful country.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998
From: Bill Erfurth m6rf@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance [v04.n161/21]
mm6rf@yahoo.com
From: Crisstopher Michael Crisstopher@Crisstopher.com
Subject: Response to Insurance Policy
Date: 1999-01-10
From: James Steele jdsteele@erols.com
Subject: Response to Insurance Policy
Date: 1999-01-13
From: GarlooEnt@aol.com
To: pallazzodelamore@rocketmail.com, fred.klauber@bea.doc.gov,
techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: Re: Equipment insurance
From: Irving Greines papyg@aol.com
Subject: Camera Insurance
Date: 1999-01-16
From: Richard Stum info@KinesisGear.com
Subject: Response to Camera Insurance
Date: 1999-01-18
From: Moses Sparks moses.sparks@unistudios.com
Subject: Response to Camera Insurance
Date: 1999-01-20
From: lenslad@aol.com (LensLad)
[1] Re: Camera Insurance...
Date: Mon Feb 08 21:27:10 CST 1999
From: eosman@aol.com (Eosman)
[1] Re: Camera Insurance...
Date: Wed Feb 10 08:39:01 CST 1999
From: jEdD Jedd@interport.net
[1] Re: Camera Insurance...
Date: Wed Feb 10 21:17:57 CST 1999
> "Mark" madone@home.com said-
>
> **Someone in another thread brought this topic up and I felt it was
> worthy
> **enough for its own, so here it is....
> **
> **- I was wondering how many people insure their camera equipment ?
> **- How do you go about it (are there special policies,
> homeowners...etc.) ?
> **- Are there special companies that do this?
From: consumer@iii.org
[1] Re: Camera Insurance...
Date: Fri Feb 12 13:18:08 CST 1999
From: edgy01@aol.com (EDGY01)
[1] Re: Camera Insurance...
Date: Fri Feb 12 21:27:25 CST 1999
> **- I was wondering how many people insure their camera equipment ?
> **- How do you go about it (are there special policies,
> homeowners...etc.) ?
> **- Are there special companies that do this?
> **- And Finally, how many people have luckily had it, but
> unfortunately had to
> **use it ?
From: consumer@iii.org
[1] Re: Insurance question
Date: Mon Mar 22 13:51:13 CST 1999
> We just bought a house (actually a mini-farm, very scenic, you can see it at
> http://www.clubvb.com/hart if you'd like), and have homeowners insurance. The
> insurance company wants us to document our camera equipment and rifles. The two
> items I'm most concerned about are our B&J Grover (5x7) which is "new" (i.e.,
> box is very shopworn, camera is never-used, but is somewhat less than pristine)
> and our 150mm Apo Lanthar (in Compur) in Crown Graphic lensboard. I don't
> figure the CG has much value, as it's pretty beat up (it's a "working
> camera"
From: shia@bu.edu (Michael A. Shia)
[1] Re: Insurance question
Date: Tue Mar 23 09:38:29 CST 1999
shia@bu.edu
From: joneil@multiboard.com (Joseph O'Neil)
[1] Re: Insurance question
Date: Tue Mar 23 18:17:55 CST 1999
>I was told that my homeowners would not cover mine because I did weddings and
>fine art photography.
Large Format Images From Southern Ontario
From: "Reclaim" wbarber1@concentric.net
[1] Re: Insurance question
Date: Tue Mar 23 21:14:43 CST 1999
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance
Date: 26 May 1999
>Is there anyone that carries camera insurance? When I called my about my
>renters insurance, my agent tild me that the camera was only covered
when at
>our house. What about a stolen camera on vacation, or an accidental drop?
>
> Thanks in
>advance,
>
> Roger
>
From: "William Wilson" wilson.w@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Mack Camera warranty
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999
From: Phil Vouers gooch@tznet.com
Subject: RE: [BRONICA] Re: Karen's Earlier Post...
Phil Vouers
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999
From: budd gottesman dophotography@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000
From: Andre Calciu a.calciu@anent.com
Subject: [Leica] camera insurance
> It's called INSURANCE.... ;-)
>
> [Austin] I've been through this...they only consider damage that can be
> proven to impair the FUNCTION of the insured item to be covered. Cosmetics
> are not covered. One of our photographers dropped a Nikon, it had a dent
> the size of Kentucky...but didn't impair its function at all...they said it
> wasn't covered. The resale value of the camera was severely reduced by
> this damage..but that's was just too bad for us.
>
> Let's see... A Noctilux with no damage to the glass, or a Noctilux with a
> scratch in the front element....would you pay the same for both? Even
> though, you KNOW it has no effect on the actual image... Cheap insurance,
> in my book, is a filter...
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000
From: "Roger M. Wiser" wiserr@cni-usa.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] determine value of old Rollei camera
> I recently had my Rollei 35 mm
> stolen on a trip to Costa Rica.
>
> Does anyone know where
> I can find a price-list for to determine
> a replacement cost (for insurance purposes?)
>
> Or any idea on how to put a value on an old Rollei?
> thanks,
>
> Beth
Whitewater, WI
From: eosman@aol.com (Eosman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance
>If it is for non-commercial use you can get a rider on your main
>homeowners/renters policy. I have $6000 on mine (for replacement cost)
>which cost me $75 a year.
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Camera Insurance
Date: 29 May 1999
From: Colin Monteith monteith1@sympatico.ca
[1] Re: insurance
Date: Wed Apr 19 21:51:38 CDT 2000
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000
Subject: Re: Insuring telescopes
> stedman@binghamton.edu wrote:
>
> Given the sad event at RTMC (theft of Teleport 10" scope), I'm curious
> what people do about insuring their scopes and accessories. Do you just
> leave them covered by your standard home owners'? Or do you take out an
> additional "personal articles" policy that can mean the stuff is covered
> even if it is dropped, and can eliminate the deductible that applies
> generally?
>
> Anyone had to deal with an insurance company to replace a stolen or fire
> damaged scope? How tough was it to get replacement cost? I can just see
> trying to explain to an adjustor that the Oak Classic was one with Zambuto
> optics, that the scope is no longer made, and that the equivalent on
> today's market is the 8" Starsplitter with Zambuto option (or Tom's 7"
> teleport--okay, okay, that would be stretching things a bit). He or she
> likely wouldn't know the market at all.
>
> Larry Stedman
> Vestal, NY
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Subject: Re: Insuring telescopes
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000
From: Brougham brougham3@yahoo.com
Subject: [Leica] Leica camera & insurance
> I just checked with my insurance agaent. To get specific coverage for
> my Leica equipment, he quoted me $1.49 per $100 of value. So it would
> cost approx. $75 to cover my $5000 worth of Leica equipment. This
> coverage includes theft, robbery, accidental loss, breakage. No
> deductible, replacement value.
>
> Is this reasonable????
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000
From: Mike Leitheiser flyh2o@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica camera & insurance
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000
From: John Collier jbcollier@home.com
Subject: Re: [Leica] WAS; UV filter and 21mm now 15 mm!
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.people
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000
Subject: Re: Insurance Equipment
> Has anyone ever heard of and had to use Gilbert-Magill Company
> (Insurance) recommend by National Press Photographers Assoc for its'
> members? Or any other insurance carrier?
>
> Since my interest in photography has grown ($$$) so much I'm looking
> for a suitable insurance carrier for my gear.
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.people
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000
Subject: Re: Insurance Equipment
> > Has anyone ever heard of and had to use Gilbert-Magill Company
> > (Insurance) recommend by National Press Photographers Assoc for its'
> > members? Or any other insurance carrier?
> >
> > Since my interest in photography has grown ($$$) so much I'm looking
> > for a suitable insurance carrier for my gear.
Valuable Papers (Film) - $25,000
Money Orders/ Counterfeit Currency - $10,000
Accounts Receivable - $25,000
Computers/Media - $10,000
Back up of Sewers - $25,000
Personal Property Off Premises/In Transit - $25,000
Personal Effects - $2,500
Employee Dishonesty - $10,000
Personal Property of Others (Rental Equipment) - $20,000
Temperature Change - $10,000
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000
From: "Nikon Lover Earl" nikon_lover@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [NIKON] need insurance for photo gear
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000
From: howard_kh_wong@afcd.gcn.gov.hk
Subject: Re: [NIKON] need insurance for photo gear
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000
From: "JWhite" jwhite@pov.net
Subject: Re: [NIKON] Insurance for my Nikon Gear
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000
From: Shin SUGIYAMA ssugiya@biol1.bio.nagoya-u.ac.jp
Subject: Re: Re: Nikon F body serial numbers
>Sover wrote:-
>
>*** You are only as old as the Nikon you are using - Sover Wong 2000 ***
>
>So even when I'm shooting with my S3 Rangefinder that makes me feel young!!
>
>Rgds.,
>
>Oliver.
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001
From: Peter Klosky Peter.Klosky@trw.com
Subject: Re: Camera Jam
Date: Thu May 03 2001
From: Mike Simanyi mikes@redsand.com
Subject: Re: Equipment Insurance?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001
From: Javier Perez summarex@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Stolen Leicas from Northern California
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001
From: Austin Franklin darkroom@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: In Sewer Ants
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001
From: branjer@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: RE: Camera Insurance...
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001
From: Bill Rainey wrainey@hiwaay.net
Subject: OT: Camera Insurance...
--
Bill Rainey
wrainey@hiwaay.net
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~wrainey/
From: hotsleuth@msn.com (Ed Kelly)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: question about insurance
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001
From: Bill Rainey wrainey@hiwaay.net
Subject: Camera Insurance...
--
Bill Rainey
wrainey@hiwaay.net
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~wrainey/
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001
From: Simon Lamb simon@sclamb.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: UK insurance
From: "Daniel K. Lee" <daniel@dklimages.com>
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Photographic iNsurance...
I'm paying $650/year for photographic insurance - equipment replacement only
with a $500.00 deductible and coverage of up to $6,000.00 in rental
equipment...Anybody have a better place?
From: Waldo Berry <WBERRY@dce.ksu.edu>
Reply to: hasselblad@kelvin.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Photographic iNsurance...
I pay 850.00 per year, 250 deductable, insures 43,000.00 equipment, plus on
site of 30,000.00 , plus business insurance for the studio 1 mil, and medical
and liability. I use the Hartford.
Waldo
From: Peter Klosky <peter.klosky@marcgs.com>
Reply to: hasselblad@kelvin.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Photographic iNsurance...
I pay about $3 per $100, plus or minus. For that, I get zero deductible.
This is the "scheduled item" coverage that State Farm offers as a rider on
my homeowners. It has been a great policy, with easy to file claims. I am
not at all ashamed to say that they paid me for a camera that fell and broke
in my 35mm system, which I was able to replace with a less expensive model.
State Farm even refused to take the broken camera, and had no problem with
me disposing of it myself, which I did on eBay, being quite clear about the
impact damage.
difficulty converting to the policy that I really need, which is "errors and
omissions" as offered by PPA and WPPI.
Peter
From: Peter Klosky <peter.klosky@marcgs.com>
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: Photographic iNsurance...
any film in the camera at a wedding job, or failed to arrive at the job due to
wrecking my car on the way or misplacing my appointment book. If the client
claimed that this caused me to fail to deliver the promised result, the
insurance firm would negotiate a settlement with her. This is similar to
"malpractice" insurance, more or less.
> Why do you need or want an "errors and omissions" policy?
From: notarealaddress@aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Photo equipment insurance
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001
I got an additional "rider" on top of my regular homeowner's insurance
for all my camera gear. It is $71 (US) per year to cover my stuff
which at cost was about $4,200. It insures me against my two biggest
fears:
1. Accidental damage from, say, dropping stuff.
2. Equipment stolen from car.
BTW, my insurance company is USAA for what it's worth.
"W" osiris@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
>Your homeowners insurance should be able to cover your equipment.
>They can list your equipment you want insured on the policy, I put my camera
>and several expensive lenses on my policy for about $40 for the year. It
>covers replacement if it is stolen and repair if it is broken.
>
>
>
>"Ago" ago@aol.com> wrote
>| Hello,
>|
>| can anybody recommend insurance companies that insure photographic
>equipment,
>| either on a per-trip or on an annual basis?
>|
>| Thanks!
>|
>| ---Ago
>
From: David Meiland remove.david@meiland.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Photo equipment insurance
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001
I have my equipment insured through State Farm. They would not cover
it as part of our homeowner's policy because there is some
professional use of the gear (otherwise it would automatically be
covered). They must never get applications like mine because it took
them a while to figure out where to fit me in. Anyway, they insure
against all risks (except theft from an unattended vehicle) and it
costs me $16 per year per thousand insured. I did not shop around, as
I have had tremendous service from State Farm over the past 10 years.
Chip Zempel czempel@mindspring.com> wrote:
>I'm not sure about this, but I think some homeowner's insurance
>companies WON'T cover equipment like this if the equipment is used
>professionally. Be sure to ask!
>
>Chip
>
>In article 9saa4s$10h$1@bob.news.rcn.net>,
> "W" osiris@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
>
>> Your homeowners insurance should be able to cover your equipment.
>> They can list your equipment you want insured on the policy, I put my camera
>> and several expensive lenses on my policy for about $40 for the year. It
>> covers replacement if it is stolen and repair if it is broken.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Ago" ago@aol.com> wrote...
>> | Hello,
>> |
>> | can anybody recommend insurance companies that insure photographic
>> equipment,
>> | either on a per-trip or on an annual basis?
>> |
>> | Thanks!
>> |
>> | ---Ago
---
David Meiland
Oakland, CA
**Check the reply address before sending mail
From: "R&D;" youandme@cheerful.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Photo equipment insurance
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001
I did until I went to make a claim. They paid for the major stuff and
refused to pay for all the accesories, like filters, tripods, batterires
etc. (which can add up to a lot) State farm nickles and dimes you, I know
I'll never get insurance with them again. Also, if you shop around, they
are expensive.
"David Meiland" remove.david@meiland.com> wrote
> I have my equipment insured through State Farm. They would not cover
> it as part of our homeowner's policy because there is some
> professional use of the gear (otherwise it would automatically be
> covered). They must never get applications like mine because it took
> them a while to figure out where to fit me in. Anyway, they insure
> against all risks (except theft from an unattended vehicle) and it
> costs me $16 per year per thousand insured. I did not shop around, as
> I have had tremendous service from State Farm over the past 10 years.
>
> Chip Zempel czempel@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm not sure about this, but I think some homeowner's insurance
> >companies WON'T cover equipment like this if the equipment is used
> >professionally. Be sure to ask!
> >
> >Chip
> >
> > "W" osiris@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Your homeowners insurance should be able to cover your equipment.
> >> They can list your equipment you want insured on the policy, I put my camera
> >> and several expensive lenses on my policy for about $40 for the year.
It
> >> covers replacement if it is stolen and repair if it is broken.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Ago" ago@aol.com> wrote...
> >> | Hello,
> >> |
> >> | can anybody recommend insurance companies that insure photographic
> >> equipment,
> >> | either on a per-trip or on an annual basis?
> >> |
> >> | Thanks!
> >> |
> >> | ---Ago
> >>
> >>
>
> ---
> David Meiland
> Oakland, CA
>
> **Check the reply address before sending mail
From: "Peter Klosky" peter.klosky@marcgs.com>
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net>
Subject: Re: [HUG] PHotographic insurance
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001
Two other are PPA (Professional Photographers of America) and "Hill & Usher Insurance" as offered by WPPI "Wedding and Portrait
Photographers International". These offer "E&O;" aka "Errors and Omissions" for mistakes the photographer makes, such as using a
camera that does not have correct flash sync or the shutter does not open. They do not tend to cover errors by shippers such as
FedEx or processing labs. In general, their idea is that those folks are liable for their own failures.
> Waldo, I know this is an old email...but I"m still looking for decent photo
> insurance...can you email me the contact information for your photography
> insurance...does anyone else have insurance that covers (I was just asked
> this) liability if say I'm doing a wedding and the lab screws up and I lose
> all the photos?
>
>
> DKL
>
>
> --- Waldo Berry WBERRY@dce.ksu.edu> wrote:
> > I pay 850.00 per year, 250 deductable, insures
> > 43,000.00 equipment, plus on site of 30,000.00 ,
> > plus business insurance for the studio 1 mil, and
> > medical and liability. I use the Hartford.
> >
> > Waldo
From: BLADHASS@aol.com
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001
Subject: Re: [HUG] PHotographic insurance
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
In a message dated 12/3/2001 11:19:24 AM Pacific Standard Time,
daniel@dklimages.com writes:
> OK...here's another Q...what's the consensus on belonging to PPA or WPPI?
> IN general do people think that it's worth it?
>
> Gracias,
>
WPPI at a cost of under $100 per year is worth it. PPA at over $300 maybe
not, I dropped out and now belong to WPPI only. It may have to do with
sending a print in for competition and not getting it back or my $70
shipping case for almost one year. Plus they said that my print took a 2nd
place and I would get certificate Neil Enterprise's. This was for there
Special Event Print Competition.
Peter
From minolta mailing list:
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001
From: Bill wrainey@hiwaay.net
Subject: Re: OT: Camera Insurance
kcbauer2000 wrote:
>
> I remember some time back someone (I think Bill R.) talking about
> insurance for camera equipment that would cover everything. Most
> homeowners policies cover theft, etc. even if the equipment is not in
> your home.
> I recall a discussion about insurance that would cover things like
> dropping, or any other accident that could happen.
>
> Is this "Scheduled Propery" insurance or something else. I looked
> into scheduled property and it looks like it will cost about $1.60 per
> hundred.
The insurance I have is called the "Personal Articles Policy" from State
Farm. It is a totally independent stand-alone policy I have on my
equipment that covers it under all situations and alleviates some of the
problems with letting it be covered under my homeowner's policy.
For one thing, under homeowner's insurance, you better not get caught
accepting money for any of your work or you'll get zapped for being a
"professional", and that is not covered under homeowner's insurance! I
can't remember specifics at the moment, but there were some other
situations where the equipment would not be covered, or you had to pay a
deductible, or something like that.
This policy I have covers my equipment for 100% replacement value with
no deductible. I had to use it once already when my 150mm f/4 Bronica
portrait lens rolled off the top of my car onto the pavement (don't
ask...) and shattered. I took it to my insurance agent that morning
around 10:00 and had a check in hand that afternoon before 4:00 to cover
the replacement I had already ordered from KEH! No major questions
asked, and zero hassles... just money in my hand! And no, my rates
didn't go up for making the claim... the rates are based on coverage
amounts only!
For less than $12 a month I have around $7,000 worth of gear covered for
professional use, and I no longer worry about my stuff getting stolen or
broken. That is well worth the money spent!
--
Bill Rainey
Minolta@YahooGroups Co-Owner/Moderator