Stolen In Atlanta Georgia

Hog Leg · February 23, 2011

Please make sure that your camera equipment is covered by your home owners policy and if they tell you yes, get it in writing. My camera equipment was stolen in Atlanta Georgia on the 15 of January 2011 and was not covered by my homeowner policy because I have a website that you can buy a photograph from. I am listing my equipment below. If you see any of this equipment listed I would appreciate if you would contact me . tony@optilink.us

Nikon D3s Serial #2027921
Nikon D3 Serial # 2033127
Nikon 70-200mm f/ 2.8 Serial #417896
Nikon 24-70mm f/ 2.8 Serial #240902
Nikon 14-24mm f/ 2.8 Serial #278886
Nikon 85mm f/ 1.4 Serial #423783
Nikon 50mm f/ 1.4 Serial #6136903
Nikon sb-900 Serial #2253815

kdog · February 23, 2011

OMG, what terrible news. A tragedy. I would be devastated. I hope the police will take this seriously enough to track down the thieves and recover your equipment. I absolutely hate thieves. In Arizona we can shoot them, which is as it should be as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for the heads-up on the home-owner insurance issue. I'm assuming you had an extra rider for your gear as most homeowner polices don't cover anywhere near the value of your equipment. I had one for a few years and finally dropped it when I came to the same conclusion that the minute you sell a print, you're considered a professional and disqualified from being able to make claims. That certainly doesn't stop them from collecting your premiums meanwhile though. Legalized thievery is what it is.

Best of luck, Tony. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you.

-joel

JimKarczewski · February 23, 2011

That SUCKS.

If you have any decent amount of equipment, TALK TO YOUR AGENT. I have an Inland Marine policy through State Farm. I think it's 20k worth of coverage for around $30/month. Covers cameras, computer, etc. no matter where I am in the US/Canada at least. $100 deductible. It's paid off for me 3 times now, when someone walked away with a bag containing a flash ($500) and 2 pocket wizards, when I broke my 17-40 after slipping on ice, and finally my knocking over a tripod with camera, lens, flash... $450 in repairs.

Hog Leg · February 23, 2011

Get it in writing
Unfortunately, It was not covered by my home owner. I did not have a separate rider because I didn't think I needed one.

I had State Farm also and had e-mailed my agent back in May of 2010 with a list of my equipment. My conversations with his assistant was all verbal but I was lead to believe that my homeowners was sufficient to cover my equipment. Now I don't have a leg to stand on according to my lawyer because of how my policy is worded. I'm not crying about it, it was my stupidly.

As far as the law officials are concerned. This is just another theft to them and although I have explained my situation in depth, they seem unaffected. I lost $23000.00 that day. Like Arizona, it is a good thing that I did not walk out while the theft was in progress or really bad things would have happened.

I was sick about this for weeks as you might imagine and I feel like former insurance agent has some ownership in this. All I am saying, is make sure your equipment is covered if you sell photos, regardless of what you are being told . Get it in writing.

Daddy0 · February 23, 2011

I own an independent insurance agency in South Carolina and that is a mis-conception with a lot of people about what is covered under your homeowner's policy. Anything that you use to generate income with is usually excluded from coverage under your homeowner's policy. Even if you don't use it to generate income, there is almost always a sub-limit as to how much you can recover in case of theft on items such as jewelry, furs, fine art, cameras, lawnmowers, boats, atv's, etc. My advice to all my insured's is to get a separate policy and not add it to your homeowner's. I would hate for anyone to get non-renewed on their HO insurance because of a theft claim. Plus, the separate policies you can buy normally provide a tremendous amount of extra coverage at around the same premium(+ or - a few dollars). I have a SM Pro account, but I have never sold a picture yet. If you haven't generated any income from your website(easily verifiable), then you should get your agent involved again to at least see what coverages you might have. Still all subjec to your homeowner deductibles.

kdog · February 23, 2011

I think you had another problem with your policy as well. Standard homeowner policies typically have a $2500 limit for cameras. My State Farm one certainly did.

Hog Leg · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

I think you had another problem with your policy as well. Standard homeowner policies typically have a $2500 limit for cameras. My State Farm one certainly did.

No, my policy would have covered my equipment(23000.00) completely. It did not have a limit.

Daddy0 is spot on about the mis-conception.

ront · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

I absolutely hate thieves. In Arizona we can shoot them, which is as it should be as far as I'm concerned. -joel

I feel that I need to move to Arizona!!

I am sorry about your gear Tony!!

Ron

rwells · February 23, 2011

This has been a covered topic here several times in the past.

Again, HO policies will not cover camera equipment that is used for business use. Even though you haven't SOLD any images, this alone does not constitute non-business use. If you have them available for sale, this will do as a business use qualifier, as will contract photo jobs among other things. The HO policy states "business use", notice it doesn't state "sales" or "profit" as a qualifier.

I truly feel bad for the OP. This is the reason that I wish people would quit stating incorrectly that an HO policy will pay for camera gear that's used for "any kind" of business use. If you have pics up that someone can purchase, that's business use!

Yes, I know of people that have been paid for their stolen camera gear that they have used for "business use", but didn't divulge that bit of information to their insurance carrier, but that's a whole other story there, and could get very ugly! Look-up the acronym SIU.

Folks, it's there in B&W in your policy, read it!!!

(Not pertaining to the OP)
I don't think that it's a fair take to claim "legal thievery" either. It's a very detailed contract/policy between you and the carrier. You agree to it, and pay your premiums. When something happens that's NOT covered under your policy, you shouldn't be disappointed when the carrier will not pay. If you wanted the proper coverage for your gear, you should have a proper policy for it. Simple enough.

Thanks to the OP for bringing this up again. Maybe someone will pay attention, get the proper coverage for their gear, and not be completely sunk if a theft of their gear happens...

Sam · February 23, 2011

I am going to disagree with the general conclusions here.

Contrary to DaddyO I believe you have a case. DaddyO states as a profeesional and insurance expert that many people have (a, the, etc) misconception of what is covered. Well since the insurance companies know this they have a duty to ensure their clients understand their policies. providing 37 pages of small type written in a way most if not the majority of people can not undertstand is not sufficient.

Now to what I consider the heart of your case. You mailed your agent a list of your camera gear with the value. You discussed your concerns and needs with the agent, (or his representative), this representative informed you that you were covered. There wasn't any conditions discussed. If in fact this agent had informed you that you were not covered he / she would have offered / quoted you a policy to cover it. Did you receive any quotes? Did the agent think you sent him / her your camera list to brag?

As for "making money" Selling or offering a few photos for sale is not a business. The IRS wouldn't consider selling $100.00 per year a business and allow you to write off $23,000 worth of gear.

It sounds like your agent make a mistake, and the insurance company is using a technically to not pay your claim.

Based on this insurance company's position they could deny any insurance claim you put in for your house if you had ever held a garage sale.

Does your state have an insurance ombudsmen?

I wouldn't give up so easily.

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney now or ever. This is simply my opinion!

Sam

ps: What does AZ have to do with this?

kdog · February 23, 2011

rwells wrote: »

I don't think that it's a fair take to claim "legal thievery" either. It's a very detailed contract/policy between you and the carrier. You agree to it, and pay your premiums. When something happens that's NOT covered under your policy, you shouldn't be disappointed when the carrier will not pay. If you wanted the proper coverage for your gear, you should have a proper policy for it. Simple enough.

No, it's not that simple, Randy. These policies say non-professional use. However, "professional use" is not defined. YOU say you don't have to sell anything, just the intent will do. Some folks will say "the minute you sell something". MY insurance agent said "I believe it's when you cross a percentage of your income derived by photography", but was unable to tell me what that percentage was (which is why I canceled). And you DON'T see that much detail in a policy. It's only when you try to make a claim that suddenly they have very strict criteria. It's like me teaching you a new card game, and then keep springing new rules on you as we play so that I keep winning.

kdog · February 23, 2011

Sam wrote: »

I am going to disagree with the general conclusions here.

Contrary to DaddyO I believe you have a case. DaddyO states as a profeesional and insurance expert that many people have (a, the, etc) misconception of what is covered. Well since the insurance companies know this they have a duty to ensure their clients understand their policies. providing 37 pages of small type written in a way most if not the majority of people can not undertstand is not sufficient.

Now to what I consider the heart of your case. You mailed your agent a list of your camera gear with the value. You discussed your concerns and needs with the agent, (or his representative), this representative informed you that you were covered. There wasn't any conditions discussed. If in fact this agent had informed you that you were not covered he / she would have offered / quoted you a policy to cover it. Did you receive any quotes? Did the agent think you sent him / her your camera list to brag?

As for "making money" Selling or offering a few photos for sale is not a business. The IRS wouldn't consider selling $100.00 per year a business and allow you to write off $23,000 worth of gear.

It sounds like your agent make a mistake, and the insurance company is using a technically to not pay your claim.

Based on this insurance company's position they could deny any insurance claim you put in for your house if you had ever held a garage sale.

Does your state have an insurance ombudsmen?

I wouldn't give up so easily.

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney now or ever. This is simply my opinion!

Sam

ps: What does AZ have to do with this?

Excellent points. Furthermore, when somebody lists $23K worth of camera gear, it should at least trigger the question whether it's used for professional use!

Arizona came up because I said that I hate thieves, and in Arizona we're allowed to shoot them (within certain limitations of course.)

rwells · February 23, 2011

Sam wrote: »

I am going to disagree with the general conclusions here.

Contrary to DaddyO I believe you have a case. DaddyO states as a profeesional and insurance expert that many people have (a, the, etc) misconception of what is covered. Well since the insurance companies know this they have a duty to ensure their clients understand their policies. providing 37 pages of small type written in a way most if not the majority of people can not undertstand is not sufficient.

Now to what I consider the heart of your case. You mailed your agent a list of your camera gear with the value. You discussed your concerns and needs with the agent, (or his representative), this representative informed you that you were covered. There wasn't any conditions discussed. If in fact this agent had informed you that you were not covered he / she would have offered / quoted you a policy to cover it. Did you receive any quotes? Did the agent think you sent him / her your camera list to brag?

As for "making money" Selling or offering a few photos for sale is not a business. The IRS wouldn't consider selling $100.00 per year a business and allow you to write off $23,000 worth of gear.

It sounds like your agent make a mistake, and the insurance company is using a technically to not pay your claim.

Based on this insurance company's position they could deny any insurance claim you put in for your house if you had ever held a garage sale.

Does your state have an insurance ombudsmen?

I wouldn't give up so easily.

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney now or ever. This is simply my opinion!

Sam

ps: What does AZ have to do with this?

Sam,

The courts hear suits against carriers all the time. Most times, the carriers win. Why? They have, in very specific detail in the policy, what is and is not covered.

To say you don't understand what is or isn't covered is not the carrier's fault, as they provided specifics to you. The policy. You can also find where it states in the policy that no one has the binding right to change or imply coverages/exclusions, other than the written policy itself.

Most HO policies do cover camera gear. Some with limits, some may not. But that is for personal use, NOT business use!!!

If you don't like that, then don't buy the policy!

You are also completely wrong on "business use", both by insurance carriers and the IRS. You can claim a business involving photography and only sell $100.00 in the year, and claim your business expenses, including gear, in your Schedule C tax form. You can loose money for 5 years before the IRS will change your "business" to "hobby" status. Ask any CPA.

Any policy holder has the legal right to dispute a claim denial. That's also in the policy!

rwells · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

No, it's not that simple, Randy. These policies say non-professional use. However, "professional use" is not defined. YOU say you don't have to sell anything, just the intent will do. Some folks will say "the minute you sell something". MY insurance agent said "I believe it's when you cross a percentage of your income derived by photography", but was unable to tell me what that percentage was (which is why I canceled). And you DON'T see that much detail in a policy. It's only when you try to make a claim that suddenly they have very strict criteria. It's like me teaching you a new card game, and then keep springing new rules on you as we play so that I keep winning.

Joel,

We've gone down this road before...

It's obvious that you don't want to accept correct information about insurance policies. That's OK for you, but please, don't lead others to follow that line of incorrect thinking.

I'm not aware of the term "non-professional" in any HO policy. I am very aware of the term "business use" in all HO policies. Yes, words matter.

The policy is ALL DETAIL!!! That's why it's so long. There's no hocus-pocus, smoke nor mirrors. Everything is written out in the policy.

Also, to your story of your agent's understanding, or not.
I previously suggested to you: Contact the Underwriting department of your insurance carrier with specific policy questions. They are the ones that write it, they will know.

kdog · February 23, 2011

rwells wrote: »

Joel,

We've gone down this road before...

It's obvious that you don't want to accept correct information about insurance policies. That's OK for you, but please, don't lead others to follow that line of incorrect thinking.

I'm not aware of the term "non-professional" in any HO policy. I am very aware of the term "business use" in all HO policies. Yes, words matter.

The policy is ALL DETAIL!!! That's why it's so long. There's no hocus-pocus, smoke nor mirrors. Everything is written out in the policy.

Also, to your story of your agent's understanding, or not.
I previously suggested to you: Contact the Underwriting department of your insurance carrier with specific policy questions. They are the ones that write it, they will know.

Wow, Randy. It's clear that you're in the insurance biz. Well, I am the customer, and my perception matters. The very fact that you're telling us that exact definitions of words matter, and to read long policies and to contact underwriting departments for clarification demonstrates my point perfectly. Who the hell other than somebody in the insurance business would know to do that? Insurance companies don't want you to know the truth about your policy because you most likely wouldn't buy it if you did.

So let me ask you this, Randy. When does an insurance customer receive their policy? Answer: AFTER they purchase the insurance. See any problem with that?

But go ahead and call me ignorant, Randy. And call the OP stupid as well for not understanding his policy. We're all stupid, and the insurance companies are right and very honest and would never, ever do anything to make their policy look more attractive than it really is.

Hog Leg · February 23, 2011

I'm not crying about it, it was my stupidly.
I'm not trying to cause an argument here guys. I really appreciate your input. Everyone that contributes! Thanks to everyone that has offered kind word.

Its my fault for not knowing my policy. I know it now!!! My problem is that I took the word of someone that I trusted to look out for me. My agent. That will not happen again. And yes, claims adjusters looks for cracks in the policy, that their job. They are not your friend they are the claims adjuster. Sucks, but its just the facts. Its not the claims adjuster or my agents fault that that slime bag stole my equipment .

If I can get 11,750 people to by just one 4x6 from my site I will be back in business....

You can see by the conversation that is going on here, this can be a confusing issue to you and me but its crystal clear when it come to the claim. Make sure that you are covered. Do not leave any room for interpretation. This could happen to you and take it from me, its a very sick feeling when it does. I hope someone will learn from my mistake and prevent it from happening to them.

kdog · February 23, 2011

So Hog Leg, since you've presumably been through your policy with a fine tooth comb now, does it precisely spell out what constitutes professional use? If you'd read it before your loss, would you have realized that a Buy button on your Smugmug site invalidates your coverage?

Thanks,
-joel

rwells · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

Wow, Randy. It's clear that you're in the insurance biz. Well, I am the customer, and my perception matters. The very fact that you're telling us that exact definitions of words matter, and to read long policies and to contact underwriting departments for clarification demonstrates my point perfectly. Who the hell other than somebody in the insurance business would know to do that? Insurance companies don't want you to know the truth about your policy because you most likely wouldn't buy it if you did.

So let me ask you this, Randy. When does an insurance customer receive their policy? Answer: AFTER they purchase the insurance. See any problem with that?

But go ahead and call me ignorant, Randy. And call the OP stupid as well for not understanding his policy. We're all stupid, and the insurance companies are right and very honest and would never, ever do anything to make their policy look more attractive than it really is.

Now Joel,

You've known me on this forum long enough to know I'm not a vindictive person, and I've not meant any hard feeling toward anyone. Matter of fact, I clearly stated that I felt bad for the OP, and previously I discussed insurance matters with you, to help, nothing more.

You asked "When does an insurance customer receive their policy?"
Of course, you receive your policy after you purchase it.

Let's use an analogy:

When do you receive the warranty information about your camera?
Of course, you receive your warranty after you purchase the camera.

This is the same for most things you buy. No, I don't see anything wrong with that. You can cancel your policy if after you read the policy, you don't like it.

I would like to particularly address this:

"But go ahead and call me ignorant, Randy. And call the OP stupid as well for not understanding his policy. We're all stupid, and the insurance companies are right and very honest and would never, ever do anything to make their policy look more attractive than it really is."

Again, I'm sorry if you feel that I have called or implied anything about you or the OP, as that was certainly NOT my intent.

Insurance is not the easiest thing to understand, but that doesn't give the customer/policy holder a free pass. Like most things, you need to do your homework to determine if a product is right for you, insurance or other.

If I buy a 1DMkIV, and don't know how to use it and just start pressing the shutter button without reading the provided manual, can I expect that Canon has done something underhanded because I'm not getting good images?

Peace Joel

dlplumer · February 23, 2011

Total bummer, sorry indeed.

I took out a separate rider policy on all my equipment about a year ago. It is with State Farm, and covers full replacement for each piece of equipment regardless of how it was lost or damaged, and the cost was very reasonable.

kdog · February 23, 2011

I accept your peace offering, Randy, and hereby off my sincere apology for calling insurance companies thieves.

That said, the camera warranty analogy doesn't really hold because the warranty period is clearly stated on all marketing materials. One has very little to go on when they buy an insurance policy other than the agent's word for it, until they get the policy. Also, for the record, I did do exactly what you are suggesting. I read my policy, decided it was a rip, and summarily canceled it. So there.

kdog · February 23, 2011

dlplumer wrote: »

Total bummer, sorry indeed.

I took out a separate rider policy on all my equipment about a year ago. It is with State Farm, and covers full replacement for each piece of equipment regardless of how it was lost or damaged, and the cost was very reasonable.

Ahem. I'm willing to bet you a dinner, Dan, that your policy isn't worth the paper it's printed on. That's because you are considered a professional since you sell photos, and those riders don't cover professional use.

rwells · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

I accept your peace offering, Randy, and hereby off my sincere apology for calling insurance companies thieves.

That said, the camera warranty analogy doesn't really hold because the warranty period is clearly stated on all marketing materials. One has very little to go on when they buy an insurance policy other than the agent's word for it, until they get the policy. Also, for the record, I did do exactly what you are suggesting. I read my policy, decided it was a rip, and summarily canceled it. So there.

All is good Joel

endurodog · February 23, 2011

I am presently involved with a dispute over a claim with State Farm. Of course they are denying it and that is the business to save money. Nope I didn't read all the fine print but after being with them for 15+ years and no claims I would expect them to work with me a bit, fat chance there. They have even been horrible about returning calls when they said they would. Time to give my money to someone else, State Farm is not a customer friendly company.

Good info on the camera coverage guys, thanks for posting your experinces.

NeilL · February 23, 2011

My sympathy Hog Leg. I will certainly buy a 4x6 of yours if it will help. Through your website?

Very valuable discussion. In court, on first pass, precedence and the words usually rule. But the plaintiff can appeal. All law is based on principles (are dressed that way, at least). Laws don't fall out of the sky, they are for a purpose. Laws, and legal decisions, can be reviewed, which is what an appeal can do, with reference to principle and intent. Insurance is sold for your protection, you buy it for your protection. You ask for a particular product to cover your particular situation. The product the company offers to you and sells you must meet your needs, not different needs, not a different situation. Otherwise the sale is fraudulent. You can show that you made your situation and your needs clearly known to the company. Yet they sold you a product which is not appropriate. In order to justify taking your premium money, to prove that their behaviour was not fraudulent, they need to show that they gave you what you asked for.

Wording of the actual policy you were sold is not relevant if that policy was fraudulently sold to you, that is if it is not what you asked for. You did in fact act on the basis of the actual wording of the product you were sold because you had a doubt that you had been sold the correct policy. The company assured you that it was the correct policy. In the event they have contradicted themselves because they have refused to pay your claim as legitimate, when you had asked for a policy in which this claim would be legitimate. In short, they have acted fraudulently in selling and confirming that they had sold you the product you asked for and have been paying for. The principle that insurance is sold for your protection has been transgressed, as much as when quack medicine is sold.

To appeal the company's decision will likely be expensive unless you can get the ombudsman, legal aid, or consumer rights (is there an insurance industry watchdog?), or local politician, to take it on. It would obviously not be to your benefit to throw more money after your loss already.

Neil

NeilL · February 23, 2011

I just hung up from a call to my insurance co.

I asked for clarification on business/not for business use of insured items, new for old replacement, payment limits on specified valuables versus unspecified, and natural disaster coverage.

I was told that if my gear was used in the conduct of a registered business I would need a commercial policy.

I asked for policy clause references for everything I was told on the phone, and the enquiry reference of the telephone conversation itself. I will follow up in writing with a request for the information I received to be confirmed in writing from the company.

Neil

Hog Leg · February 23, 2011

kdog wrote: »

So Hog Leg, since you've presumably been through your policy with a fine tooth comb now, does it precisely spell out what constitutes professional use? If you'd read it before your loss, would you have realized that a Buy button on your Smugmug site invalidates your coverage?

Thanks,
-joel

Not clearly "professional use". The wording is something like "equipment used in a business". Like many other people, I had not read my policy in finite detail. Thats what I thought I was paying my agent to do. If I wanted to read policies I would just purchase from the internet. When I first contacted my Agent. I'm not sure that my agent knew exactly what was in my policy and I do not remember the "equipment used in a business" coming up in our conversation. I did not know to ask(not an excuse, just a fact). I would have thought the agent would have ask me if I sold photos after seeing my list of equipment if that would have been a disqualifier on my H/O. I was wrong about that one huh?

The ability to purchase from the "BUY "button could be augured if you had never had someone purchase from your site. That is not true in my case. While my photo sales is a very small percentage of my income , I have had sales. If I had of thought for a moment that the "BUY " button would cause me such pain or invalidated my coverage or if I thought I need a rider policy I would not be posting this information.

Thanks kdog for your input.

davev · February 23, 2011

First off, sorry to hear about the OP's loss.
I don't have nearly that much invested, but I'd hate to lose it in that manner.

That said, I bought a policy through State Farm for my cameras and laptops.
I'm sure that it says non business use.

So, if I have a smugmug account, and a person can buy photos on there for 1 cent over cost, (I do this so I can see who is buying photos) am I covered?
I think last year my site generated $6.35.
Is anyone covered that has any site that someone can buy photos from.

What do you think?
Do we have anyone out there that's an insurance agent?

rwells · February 23, 2011

NeilL wrote: »

My sympathy Hog Leg. I will certainly buy a 4x6 of yours if it will help. Through your website?

Very valuable discussion. In court, on first pass, precedence and the words usually rule. But the plaintiff can appeal. All law is based on principles (are dressed that way, at least). Laws don't fall out of the sky, they are for a purpose. Laws, and legal decisions, can be reviewed, which is what an appeal can do, with reference to principle and intent. Insurance is sold for your protection, you buy it for your protection. You ask for a particular product to cover your particular situation. The product the company offers to you and sells you must meet your needs, not different needs, not a different situation. Otherwise the sale is fraudulent. You can show that you made your situation and your needs clearly known to the company. Yet they sold you a product which is not appropriate. In order to justify taking your premium money, to prove that their behaviour was not fraudulent, they need to show that they gave you what you asked for.

Wording of the actual policy you were sold is not relevant if that policy was fraudulently sold to you, that is if it is not what you asked for. You did in fact act on the basis of the actual wording of the product you were sold because you had a doubt that you had been sold the correct policy. The company assured you that it was the correct policy. In the event they have contradicted themselves because they have refused to pay your claim as legitimate, when you had asked for a policy in which this claim would be legitimate. In short, they have acted fraudulently in selling and confirming that they had sold you the product you asked for and have been paying for. The principle that insurance is sold for your protection has been transgressed, as much as when quack medicine is sold.

To appeal the company's decision will likely be expensive unless you can get the ombudsman, legal aid, or consumer rights (is there an insurance industry watchdog?), or local politician, to take it on. It would obviously not be to your benefit to throw more money after your loss already.

Neil

Neil,

This logic falls apart when you remember that the OP purchased HO (Home Owners) insurance, not specifically camera insurance. The carrier did provide the policy that the OP requested. Unless the OP specifically requested that his camera equipment, that he uses for business use, be covered, he did indeed receive the policy and coverage that he requested. Even if he had specified the business use of his camera gear, the HO insurance he purchased was still correct for his main request. (protection for his home) He would have needed to purchase separate insurance for his business use camera gear.

As far as I know, no carrier offers a business camera policy that also protects your home.

You did the right thing in requesting very specific information from your insurance carrier about your policy. Make sure they don't assume anything about your coverage needs.

BTW, as painful as this was for the OP, as he stated, this thread will hopefully have others check their policies specifically for coverage issues.

NeilL · February 23, 2011

rwells wrote: »

Neil,

This logic falls apart when you remember that the OP purchased HO (Home Owners) insurance, not specifically camera insurance. The carrier did provide the policy that the OP requested. Unless the OP specifically requested that his camera equipment, that he uses for business use, be covered, he did indeed receive the policy and coverage that he requested. Even if he had specified the business use of his camera gear, the HO insurance he purchased was still correct for his main request. (protection for his home) He would have needed to purchase separate insurance for his business use camera gear.

As far as I know, no carrier offers a business camera policy that also protects your home.

You did the right thing in requesting very specific information from your insurance carrier about your policy. Make sure they don't assume anything about your coverage needs.

BTW, as painful as this was for the OP, as he stated, this thread will hopefully have others check their policies specifically for coverage issues.

Randy, yes I understand your argument.

If the OP had merely purchased this product, and then claimed for his loss, the company's response would be justifiable. However, he asked for clarification of the coverage of his purchase subsequently, and prior to the event precipitating his claim, and provided details of the property he wished to protect, so that it was obvious he was raising the possibility of another kind of cover being more appropriate and asking for information which could assist him to make a decision whether to continue to buy the product he had or another which better met his needs. The advice he received from the company's agent was not to change the product because it met his concerns. In the event, this was proven, by the company itself, to be false information. The product he bought has as a result of this factual history become a fraudulent sale.

Neil

kdog · February 23, 2011

rwells wrote: »

Neil,

This logic falls apart when you remember that the OP purchased HO (Home Owners) insurance, not specifically camera insurance. The carrier did provide the policy that the OP requested. Unless the OP specifically requested that his camera equipment, that he uses for business use, be covered, he did indeed receive the policy and coverage that he requested. Even if he had specified the business use of his camera gear, the HO insurance he purchased was still correct for his main request. (protection for his home) He would have needed to purchase separate insurance for his business use camera gear.

As far as I know, no carrier offers a business camera policy that also protects your home.

You did the right thing in requesting very specific information from your insurance carrier about your policy. Make sure they don't assume anything about your coverage needs.

BTW, as painful as this was for the OP, as he stated, this thread will hopefully have others check their policies specifically for coverage issues.

You're missing the point, Randy. He went to an insurance agent, told him what his needs were, and bought insurance. He went as far as giving them an exact equipment list. If the policy was predicated on having never derived a single penny of income from photography, the agent should have said so. Remember, there isn't even a policy to read at this point. How can you seriously say that an amateur photographer with a full-time day job, who throws a couple of shots on a website with a default buy button, and maybe sold one print to their mother, should deserve to have a $23K theft claim DENIED. It's absolutely ludicrous! The OP isn't running a business, why in HELL would he say he is???

It's a stupid technicality that his insurance company is using to get out of claims, and we all know it.

So what's next? Insurance companies denying a fire loss because little Johnny had a lemonade stand, so they should have bought commercial business insurance instead? Really, how is this any different?

So maybe his insurance underwriter, or whatever you call it is technically blameless. However, his insurance agent certainly isn't. And the agent is acting as an agent (duh) for the carrier. I'm pretty sure that also makes it the carrier's problem as well. I'll tell ya, the more I hear about this, the more I think OP has a good case.

I think this is just the tip of the iceberg. We've heard from Dan, Dave and Neil in this thread and nobody is exactly sure what the hell they have for insurance at this point. Personally I find that appalling. I'll bet they find out that none of the camera coverage they think they have is legitimate.

zoinkz · February 23, 2011

very sorry to hear this.
Ok first off, sorry for your loss dude, I would be devastated!!! So my question is this what kind of coverage do I need what specifically should I ask for? After reading through my HO that I pay extra for my cameras value to be covered in..... It reads as though they would not be covered....

Stolen In Atlanta Georgia

Comments