I self-insure. It’s a very affordable method. It seems like a deductible would make most camera loss claims, whether against homeowner/renter or collectible policy, not worthwhile.How do folks deal with insuring cameras? Has anyone had a loss that they dealt with thru an insurance policy?
Collection is just a bunch of similar stuff. What you described is “investment “.A "collection" implies a component of financial investment, with a hope of financial return.
That hope of return mandates insurance.
A "collection" implies a component of financial investment, with a hope of financial return.
That hope of return mandates insurance.
Nah - just pointing out that insuring a "collection" is different than insuring your hobby cameras which you enjoy and use. A "collection" implies a value to "collectors" - values that are frequently much higher and considerably more difficult to establish than by checking eBay and KEH. The sort of cameras that a specialty auctioneer might be interested in.Matt, you have some silly ideas.
This sounds like the scene from Monty Python Holy Grail.I had this 3 years ago. Insured my cameras separately on policy and 3 months later my house burned down so they had to pay up. That extra premium paid for itself immediately. While the house was empty my village flooded as well (so badly the army had to come in) so even if the house had not burned down it would have been flooded. My experience - pay the extra.
The only "complicated" camera I had was a 1960s chinese panoramic camera but I had sold that a couple of weeks before the fire so I escaped having to argue about that.
haha yes - friends were ripping on me about plagues of locusts next.This sounds like the scene from Monty Python Holy Grail.
In 2008 my home town had a flood of Biblical proportions. People climbing out of 2nd floor windows into rescue boats. I have flood insurance for flash flood/street flooding. I hope I never need it. Money well spent. PS we weren't effected by the flood. I know people who lost everything!
Nah - just pointing out that insuring a "collection" is different than insuring your hobby cameras which you enjoy and use. A "collection" implies a value to "collectors" - values that are frequently much higher and considerably more difficult to establish than by checking eBay and KEH. The sort of cameras that a specialty auctioneer might be interested in.
Now if all the OP was asking about was a bunch of hobby cameras that the OP enjoys and uses, eBay and KEH and the various other used camera retailers would probably be more appropriate.
But if it were up to me, I would talk to an insurance broker and ask them for informed advice.
Craig, I see that you're in the UK. I've been following pistonheads.com, which has numerous posts about problems with insurance of all sorts in the UK. UK insurers behave very differently from US ones and work under very different rules. I'm very aware that US rules and laws stop at the water's edge. The same is true of the UK. The OP is in Texas, which is still part of the US.
All that said, I reported my experience. I'm sorry that yours was brutal, in that you're much like many of the posters on pistonheads.
As for collections, in the original post Tim listed, very broadly, what he has. All pretty pedestrian. The late Charlie Barringer, co-author of The Zeiss Ikon Compendium and one of the founders of Zeiss Historica, was a friend and a neighbor. Charlie had a huge collection, most of which was pretty pedestrian. For example, a display case full of Contax IIs, each with a 50/1.5 Sonnar. He also had some very exotic items that brought astounding prices in Westlicht auctions. For example, his Barry Lyndon lens and Super Q Gigantar. I doubt that Tim has anything like that, congratulate him on good snags if I'm mistaken.
insurances do whatever is in their power not to pay out. In the average case, they make money as they are in business for.Therefore, in the average case, you are better off to treat and store your equipment sensibly and carry the risk yourself.While getting a new homeowners policy, I ran across the issue of the value of my camera collection. Insurance is generally based on replacement value. This works fine for new items that you can go out and buy, but not for antiques or collectibles. The company did offer a "fixed value" option where you could state a specific value for collections and such. The cost of adding a $20K provision for the camera collection tripled the cost of the policy.
Has anyone else run into this issue? How do folks deal with insuring cameras? Has anyone had a loss that they dealt with thru an insurance policy?
insurances do whatever is in their power not to pay out.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?