A post no photographer ever wants to make....

[480sparky]

...... so I errantly claimed the cost of the original purchase, not the cost of replacement, therefore when I went to replace the chainsaws and hedge trimmer, I paid nearly twice what I got from the insurance company. ..........

You probably came out ahead. Typically, insurance will cover the current value of an item at the time it was stolen, regardless of what you paid for it originally, and certainly with no consideration as to replacement cost.

If you purchased a chain saw for $500 10 years ago, and it's replacement sells for $750 today, those numbers are not relevant. What you usually would get is the current market value of a used, 10-year-old chain saw. $200 if you're lucky.

Insurance is designed to make you whole. You had a chain saw worth $200. They pay you $200. You are whole again. Any policy that claims they will reimburse you for either the purchase price or replacement cost will merely raise the premiums in order to do so. So the net result is you end up buying a new chain saw on an installment plan.

 

[ThroughTheIris]

From what I read, the amount you can claim is basically the amount youd spend to buy that item off Craigslist.

Some BS.

 

[Designer]

Any policy that claims they will reimburse you for either the purchase price or replacement cost will merely raise the premiums ..

Yes, that is what the policy was. I feel used and abused.

 

[bribrius]

Don't do insurance unless it is for higher dollars i cant cover. Insurance companies make money playing the odds. If you can afford to do the same you save money.

 

[Mr. Innuendo]

From what I read, the amount you can claim is basically the amount youd spend to buy that item off Craigslist.

Some BS.

You need better things to read.

My gear is insured for the replacement cost. If my 5D gets jacked, the insurance company pays me the amount needed to purchase whatever model is closest in terms of features, etc.

Craig's List? No, I don't think so...

 

[photoguy99]

Policies vary.

 

[tirediron]

From what I read, the amount you can claim is basically the amount youd spend to buy that item off Craigslist.

Some BS.

You need better things to read.

My gear is insured for the replacement cost. If my 5D gets jacked, the insurance company pays me the amount needed to purchase whatever model is closest in terms of features, etc.

Craig's List? No, I don't think so...

This is the difference between professional photographer's insurance and a home-owner's policy rider or similar. I pay $750/year on just shy of $30K worth of gear through a company that ONLY deals in professional business insurance. If anything is lost, stolen, spindled, folded or mutilated, aside from deductible, I get brand-new gear; in other words, a D700 would magically turn into a D800; a D3 to a D4s, etc.

 

[MSnowy]

[/QUOTE]
I get brand-new gear; in other words, a D700 would magically turn into a D800; a D3 to a D4s, etc.[/QUOTE]

Now this is why insurance is so expensive for the rest of us. With my insurance company I have to list what I own and proof of ownership (pictures and serial numbers) of whats being insured.

 

[tirediron]

Now this is why insurance is so expensive for the rest of us. With my insurance company I have to list what I own and proof of ownership (pictures and serial numbers) of whats being insured.

As do I. My company has a complete record of everything I own, down to light-stands and spare flash tubes. I'm not sure I understand why my insurance premiums make insurance more expensive for you however.

 

[KmH]

What logic do you use to come to the conclusion that someone paying for 'replacement cost' insurance makes insurance more expensive for everyone else?

After all, John is the one paying the $750 a year in premiums.

All insurance companies are going to require a proof of ownership and serial numbers.

 

[photoguy99]

Replacement cost policies will in general cost more than actual cash value policies, unless the insured assets are expected to appreciate.

I suppose it's possible that someone in business would not know that both sorts of policies exist, but I find it surprising. You ought to, if you're in business, and you ought to have the right mix of policies for your needs.

This is basic.

 

[tirediron]

Replacement cost policies will in general cost more than actual cash value policies, unless the insured assets are expected to appreciate.

I suppose it's possible that someone in business would not know that both sorts of policies exist, but I find it surprising. You ought to, if you're in business, and you ought to have the right mix of policies for your needs.

This is basic.

Yep, and this is the 'right' plan for me. Based on the age of some of my gear, it wouldn't be worth very much on a 'depreciated value' policy since like my vehicles, I tend to wring every last bit of work out of any piece of gear.

 

[photoguy99]

Consult your accountant but there are likely tax implications if you've depreciated some item, and it gets destroyed, and replaced.

I am not an accountant, but that feels a lot like taxable income.

Anyways.

 

[bribrius]

From what I read, the amount you can claim is basically the amount youd spend to buy that item off Craigslist.

Some BS.

You need better things to read.

My gear is insured for the replacement cost. If my 5D gets jacked, the insurance company pays me the amount needed to purchase whatever model is closest in terms of features, etc.

Craig's List? No, I don't think so...

This is the difference between professional photographer's insurance and a home-owner's policy rider or similar. I pay $750/year on just shy of $30K worth of gear through a company that ONLY deals in professional business insurance. If anything is lost, stolen, spindled, folded or mutilated, aside from deductible, I get brand-new gear; in other words, a D700 would magically turn into a D800; a D3 to a D4s, etc.

Deleted. Realized it was too far off subject from camera gear after posting.

 

[tirediron]

Consult your accountant but there are likely tax implications if you've depreciated some item, and it gets destroyed, and replaced.

I am not an accountant, but that feels a lot like taxable income.

Anyways.

Interesting point; I hadn't thought of that. Hopefully I never need to find out, but I will definitely check on that. Thanks!