My Insurance Policy...

[dsze]

Awhile back I posted about insuring photography equipment. Today, I just got my policy/declarationspage in the mail.

It Says:

Personal Articles Policy

Cameras as Scheduled: $3614.00
(and lists/itemizes all of my equipment in the schedule)


NOTICE: We have the option of repairing or replacing the lost or damaged property at our cost. If we agree to a cash settlement, we will pay you no more than our cost to replace the item.


Thats really all it says. Not Being an insurance expert, can anyone tell me if this sounds like I'm in good shape or should I change anything? The one thing that concerns me right away is that it does not indicate whether or not I am professional. I have shot a wedding and have been hired to shoot one more.... I would assume that this makes me "professional" in their eyes? Do I need to make sure that my policy indicates this?

Sorry to sound so paranoid, but I have a brother in law (almost) who got his whole bag stolen when he was just 10 ft away shooting with a 2nd camera. He was out in the woods and thought he was alone. He lost alot of stuff, uninsured...I don't want to have to worry about this.

Thanks for any advice in advance. BTW, this policy is $42/12 months.

-daniel

[Mitchkitter]

it seems to me like they're CTA about "lost wages"
they're only going to cover the equimpent, they won't reimburse you for "lost wages" or "emotional distress" :P

then again, i dont know.

[PhotosGuy]

I think you should ask your agent instead of promoting useless speculation. We can't read your policy for you, or intrepret it for you.
"pay you no more than our cost"? WTF is that?

I just went through changing companies & what I understand about mine is this: Full replacement value - no "adjustments", no BS. From the amount of your premium, I would GUESS that you don't have that.
-Disclaimer-
I am not an insurance agent, nor do I play one on TV! :wink:

[steven]

I am in the process of getting my equipment insured as well and one thing that came up was "Do you use your equirpment for profit?"
If I did then they told me strait up that I would have to find a different insurance provider, one that provided for "professionals".

So if this is the same insurance company that does your other personal property I would doubt that it covers you if you are making money with you camera.

[robertwgross]

The one thing that concerns me right away is that it does not indicate whether or not I am professional.


What difference does that make?

If a professional's camera is stolen, they pay just the same as if an amateur's camera is stolen.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

...Robert, it does make a difference. An amateur does not typically use his/her camera the same way that a professional does. Most insurance companies will ask you if you are professional and will charge you a higher premium if you are. Several people have already noted this fact in other threads. It does make a difference. Do you think that insuring a personal vehicle would be the same as insuring a limo or a delivery vehicle?

My company did ask me specifically, and I told them the truth. However, my policy doesn't state it anywhere, which is what I am questioning. Should it be stated on the policy or might it be included as part of the policy #, but not actually written out?

PhotosGuy, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from swearing at me. Sorry for wasting your time with my "promotion of useless speculation." I thought I'd ask a question and maybe someone in a similar situation might have something helpful to suggest or a little advice to offer before I called my agent back. If you don't have anything to offer in such a way...please keep your useless comments to yourself and please keep the language a little less crude. I think most people here would agree, there's just no need to imply the F word. If you have a problem with my post....SIMPLY DON'T POST A RESPONSE! :)

-daniel

[robertwgross]

"pay you no more than our cost"? WTF is that?


Suppose the policy holder bought a camera for $5,000. About one year later, the "street price" of the camera is $4,500, and then it is stolen. The policy holder can try to claim $5,000 against the policy, but the insurance company will likely pay only $4,500.

---Bob Gross---

[PhotosGuy]

If you have a problem with my post...

Well, I don't have a problem with you as a person. I have a problem with "pay you no more than our cost"? What does that mean? Their cost for what?

I do have a problem with your sanity! Only a representative of your ins co can answer your questions in a meaningful manner. My father was in the ins business all his life, I my best friend has been in it for 30 years, & I've heard ALL the sad stories. Yours may be one of them if you go by what you hear here!

I would appreciate it if you would refrain from swearing at me.

Did I swear at you? How? In what language?

[dsze]

How? In what language? Why don't you tell me what you meant by, "WTF is that." Exactly what does "WTF" mean? Please explain that to everyone. I just don't see any need for you to type that kind of trash in this forum.

Feel free to Question my sanity all you want, I guess you need something to keep you busy.

-daniel

[Ballen Photo]

How? In what language? Why don't you tell me what you meant by, "WTF is that." Exactly what does "WTF" mean? Please explain that to everyone. I just don't see any need for you to type that kind of trash in this forum.

Feel free to Question my sanity all you want, I guess you need something to keep you busy.

-daniel

OK Guys, Take a deep breath. Daniel, I think the only point that Photosguy was trying to make was consult your insurance agent. There is no way anybody here can give you a better definition of your policy than your agent. :roll:
-Bruce

[Steven M. Anthony]

I have my camera equip covered by insurance-but it's through my business (not a photography business, but I use the camera for work). It costs me $52/yr for about the same $ amount of equipment.

The terms sound pretty standard: You lose a used camera (even though you bought it new, by the time you lose it it will be a "used" camera) they replace it with a used camera. Now, you don't have to replace the camera to get the insurance benefit. In that case, the insurance company will give you the cash they WOULD HAVE spent buying you a replacement used camera. This option lets you "trade up" if you want to by taking their cash and paying the difference for upgraded equipment!

Anyway, if you are shooting 1 or 2 weddings per year I don't think you need to consider yourself a "professional" for insurance purposes--unless it is your primary source of income, have a business set up for it, etc.

[BrettWho?]

Is this insurance through your home owners insurance?

What if you don't own a home (live with parents), how could I get a camera covered?

[HJMinard]

Is this insurance through your home owners insurance?

What if you don't own a home (live with parents), how could I get a camera covered?
_________________
-Brett

No, these policies (Personal Articles or Personal Effects) are separate and not related to a Homeowners policy. You could get them from the same insurer, of course, but it's not required.

I don't see any reason you couldn't get your own personal articles policy if you're 18 or older.

[BrettWho?]

No, these policies (Personal Articles or Personal Effects) are separate and not related to a Homeowners policy. You could get them from the same insurer, of course, but it's not required.

I don't see any reason you couldn't get your own personal articles policy if you're 18 or older.

Ah ok, I'll have to call around before I go buy a 20D, thanks for the reply.

[dsze]

Ballen, point taken. I assure you I wasn't hoping that the Canon forum folks would answer all my insurance needs! :) As already stated, I was asking a question in hopes of getting some advice PRIOR to calling my agent back. I am teaching from 7:30am till 5:00 or later and I typically don't get a lunch break or even time to take a leak all day long...so, before I made a special effort/time to call my agent back, I thought I'd seek some advice and get the most out of my call to him. I have no issue with Photosguy's point. My issue was with the way he conveyed his point. I don't see the need for the language & the nasty tone.

Photosguy, if I mis-read your tone, then I appologize.


Steven, I agree with you. A few weddings/year doesn't qualify me as a professional photographer IMO and photography is NOT my main source of income by far. I am a teacher. However, I do make a little money from these weddings and I have been advised by some, that the moment I start making ANY money using my camera, I become a professional in the eyes of the insurer. I'll let you know what I find out whenever I get a free 5 minutes to call my agent.

thanks for the help,
daniel

[JZaun]

dsze

Your policy sounds standard. The ins co will cover replacement. If the cost of the camera is 1/2 of what you paid for it when it is stolen, you get a new camers. They only have to pay half your original cost. Thats ok, you get it replaced. Unless you ask for original cost coverage that is what you normally get. Should be no problem. Your agent will tell you how much and what kind of use is professional use. That would mean you use it more often making it more likely to be stollen or dropped. Your price looks good also.

JZ

[PhotosGuy]

Let's just drop it, shall we?

[Belmondo]

Let's just drop it, shall we?

Good plan.

We all know what the F stands for in WTF and RTFM. I've never really liked it, but it's one of those things that's probably better just to ignore than to bring attention to.

Bearing in mind that we have a few kids and a lot of women here, not to mention adult males of widely differing temperments, it's probably more appropriate not to use such references.

That is only my personal opinion, and not a statement of policy for the forum, although we moderators do try to stay on top of the occasional bit of adult language that pops up from time to time.

[dsze]

We shall drop it. :) Belmondo, I fully agree. I have several students who also use this forum and as much effort as I put into modeling descency for them, I would appreciate the same here, thats all. If that brands me as being a temperamental male and/or insane, then I am perfectly ok with that. :)


UPDATE:

Photosguy, you'll be happy to know that I talked with my agent this morning. Here is what he had to say.

"Shooting a few weddings/year technically DOES qualify me as a professional in the eyes of the insurer and would normally have a higher premium. However, since I called and he now knows my situation AND it is NOT my main source of income, I should just stay with my current policy and everything will be covered." He said that if I happen to be shooting a wedding and something happens that I just need to say that I was there taking pictures for personal use and he'll know my situation.

So, it seems that a friendly agent whos been with the family for years, and with whom I also have ALL of my other policies is a beneficial thing to have. :)

-daniel

[2new]

Thanks for the post I was just thinking I need to insure my equipment and my home owners company will not write a Personal Articles or Personal Effects policy.

Michael

[dsze]

This personal articles policy is through the same company that my home-owners and auto, boat insurance is through...it is a seperate policy though

-daniel

[Vinny454]

dsze.

Just to let you know, I AM an insurance broker. This thread seems to have gone a little off track. If want some clarification for your peace of mind, PM me and I can you some insight.

IF everyone else would like some insight as well I can reply to this thread, but to cover everyone's questions, it may be a bit long.