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
Neil,
You obviously have more information than I do about this particular story. All I have is what I've read from the OP, and I did not get all those details that you list above.
I did not read that he specifically, before-hand, discussed his possible "business use" of his camera gear. This was his mistake. He might not have known to at that time, but it was still his responsibility to do so.
You make the case that he did so, and the agent then told him that his HO policy would in fact provide coverage for his "business use" camera gear. I didn't read that, but again I wear glasses.
Assumptions don't work in insurance...
Again, maybe this thread will stir others into checking their insurance coverages specifically for any coverage issues.
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.)
The onus is on the seller not to be fraudulent in selling product, it's not on the buyer to ascertain. There are the principles of integrity of product (as in UK law the product sold must be what the buyer understood they were buying) and duty of care. Providing written information in legal language about a specialised product like insurance is only partway satisfying the seller's responsibility in ensuring the integrity of this kind of product and duty of care in informing the buyer about the product. The seller has the responsibility to support the written legal information with an exhaustive consultation with the buyer to ensure that they know exactly what the product is that the seller is selling, to allow them to ask questions and to review the product. This is especially critical when the buyer's language ability is compromised (not referring to the OP).
When I called my insurance company a couple hours ago, the consultant I spoke to had to put our call on hold four times while she checked the information I was asking for with her supervisor and against the actual policy I had bought. This illustrates that the complexity of this kind of purchase is a fundamental factor in a sale of this kind and understanding what the actual product is that is the target of the sale must not be left to chance. Only a charlatan would seek to operate behind the camouflage of legalese and legal reductionism.
You obviously have more information than I do about this particular story. All I have is what I've read from the OP, and I did not get all those details that you list above.
I did not read that he specifically, before-hand, discussed his possible "business use" of his camera gear. This was his mistake. He might not have known to at that time, but it was still his responsibility to do so.
You make the case that he did so, and the agent then told him that his HO policy would in fact provide coverage for his "business use" camera gear. I didn't read that, but again I wear glasses.
Assumptions don't work in insurance...
Again, maybe this thread will stir others into checking their insurance coverages specifically for any coverage issues.
Randy, I have the same information as you, and it is clear that the OP sought to review his purchase with respect to the coverage of a specific number of items. He was told those items were covered. Not that they were only covered in certain specific circumstances, which would obviously be relevant information to him in the context of his review. On the basis of this reassurance he stayed with the cover he had. The sale became fraudulent from that point.
In my call to my insurer, it took me five minutes to get the consultant to understand my question about whether my policy would be void with resepct to my photog gear if it was used for income-business. I was eventually told it would be void for those items if they were used in association with a company registered in my name. This was never pointed out to me at the time I bought the product, and it should have been, complementary to receiving the legal document. I had to extract this information like a dentist a stubborn bad tooth. This is not ethical practice on the part of the insurer.
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.
Joel,
If you don't like the insurance industry, that's OK by me. But, it is what it is.
Should an insurance carrier just simply cover any and all losses on any and all property and personal property, caused by anything, just so the customer doesn't share in any of the responsibility for purchasing their coverages? If that would be the case, none of us could possibly afford HO insurance. There have to be specific coverages and specific exclusions!
So what, just because we like to take pictures, all camera gear should be covered no matter what?
You are aware that your house & other structures will be excluded from coverage also if they are used for "business use" under an HO policy, right?
It's not like carriers don't offer commercial insurance, they do. Some people just don't want to pay the premiums for it, and some didn't know they needed it. Know what your buying applies to insurance too!
I don't think that I missed the point...
Let's remember something here: I'm NOT an insurance company. I'm just stating correct information about this specific topic. Again, you might not like the way policies are written, but that doesn't change the way it is.
Like the OP, I hope this thread will stir others to carefully examine their insurance policies, and possible coverage issues given their specific situations.
Like the OP, I hope this thread will stir others to carefully examine their insurance policies, and possible coverage issues given their specific situations.
Randy, I have the same information as you, and it is clear that the OP sought to review his purchase with respect to the coverage of a specific number of items. He was told those items were covered. Not that they were only covered in certain specific circumstances, which would obviously be relevant information to him in the context of his review. On the basis of this reassurance he stayed with the cover he had. The sale became fraudulent from that point.
In my call to my insurer, it took me five minutes to get the consultant to understand my question about whether my policy would be void with resepct to my photog gear if it was used for income-business. I was eventually told it would be void for those items if they were used in association with a company registered in my name. This was never pointed out to me at the time I bought the product, and it should have been, complementary to receiving the legal document. I had to extract this information like a dentist a stubborn bad tooth. This is not ethical behaviour.
Neil
Neil,
First, I have no knowledge of insurance outside the United States.
Second, I'm bowing out of this thread. I've given credible information on the specific subject. If it's accepted, fine ~ If it's contested, that's OK too. But, it does not change the correctness of my information.
Do with it what you will...
I'm not here to stand up for insurance carriers ~ just trying to let people know that they need to understand their insurance needs, then confirm that the policies in hand provide the coverage that they seek, given their specific needs.
If ya'll want to bash the insurance industry ~ be my guest!
First, I have no knowledge of insurance outside the United States.
Second, I'm bowing out of this thread. I've given credible information on the specific subject. If it's accepted, fine ~ If it's contested, that's OK too. But, it does not change the correctness of my information.
Do with it what you will...
I'm not here to stand up for insurance carriers ~ just trying to let people know that they need to understand their insurance needs, then confirm that the policies in hand provide the coverage that they seek, given their specific needs.
If ya'll want to bash the insurance industry ~ be my guest!
Randy, I didn't touch the information you have given. I think it is necessary information, but I don't think it is sufficinet to the matter in hand. Buying and selling is not only a matter of product changing hands and the wording of documents, it's also about the manner in which that happens, about people's behaviours and responsibilities.
I have insurance, I want insurance, insurance is great! I am not throwing an impotent tizzie. I am speaking to a specific situation related to the *manner* of sale of an insurance product. Your information is safe from me.
Let's use common sense here
OK guys, sorry I missed all the fireworks. I had a 3 yr old at the doctor's office with a double ear infection and the house is now finally quiet.
First things first. Homeowner's policies are not all inclusive policies like the average person has come to expect. In years past when the economy was on hyper drive and the stock market was rolling, insurance companies were able to keep premiums down and cover the difference with the market returns. Therefore a lot of things got "covered" that never were supposed to be covered. The problem with that is that now everyone thinks that is the norm. The HO policy is to cover personal property, not business property. It is also for usual and customary property for the maintenance of your home. $23k of camera equipment is not usual and customary.
If you have a high net worth, then you can get specialized policies that may have extra coverages for that amount of equipment. But without a business use endorsement(which is very limited), then if you are using the equipment in a business manner its not covered.
How many of you guys have an antique dining table or an antique fireplace mantel(I have both). If they were destroyed in a fire, I couldn't be reimbursed for like kind and quality. Anybody have any Lladro collectibles. Not covered unless specifically endorsed.
If it is anything that you own that has any special value above what you can get from Wally World, then be prepared for it not to be covered unless you specifically address those items with a specialized policy.
Second, there a lot of very knowledgable agents out there and there are a lot of agents just hunting for a paycheck. It is a sad fact that a lot of "agents" don't take the time to ask questions or to listen to what the potential insured says so that they can pick up on areas that need to be addressed. And potential insureds have learned to hold back some info so they won't get denied coverage or won't have to pay the correct premium for the risk involved. Cat and mouse game.
It sounds like his agent(or assistant) dropped the ball after he provided his equipment list. That should have thrown up red flags everywhere. Also sounds like they are not very knowledgable on the policies they are selling if they led you to believe it was covered. They have E&O insurance, make a claim if you feel you were mislead.
I call my underwriters and reread guidelines and policies everyday just to make sure I am providing the most up to date info and correct info to my clients.
Lastly, we wouldn't even be having this discussion if we had a good justice system here in America. Get caught stealing, cut your hand off. Probably not be a lot of repeat offenders!!!!!!!!!
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.
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 .
I read this three or four times and of all the things I thought of to say I will leave it with a stunned WOW!
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.
I just spoke with State Farm and have received the definitive word on this matter (for my coverage).
1. My personal rider covers full replacement cost on all my equipment even though I have a website on which I sell photos.
2. If I am asked to shoot a wedding or an event, or if someone were to pay me to go shoot something, and my equipment was lost, stolen or damaged, I would not be fully covered.
3. Since I currently do not get paid to shoot events, and only sell photos on my website, my personal rider coverage is absolutely good. It will cover 100% replacement with no deductible.
4. If I decide I want commercial coverage because I am now going to shoot events for pay, it would cost me $100/year more than what I currently pay and there would be a $100 deductible per loss.
Your policies may differ, but this is what is so for me. My agent verified this with his claims adjusters, and I spent a good 30 minutes on the phone making sure of this.
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.
Two key words "most of the time". This means that there are cases that are decided in the policy holders favor.
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.
While I do understand this and can see many instances where this would be totally legitimate, but to apply it to every situation without taking into consideration the details is nonsense.
Many years ago I challenged a claims denial based on this statement / concept. When the dust settled they paid the claim and rewrote tens of thousands or more policy documents.
I would say that most people, including lawyers wouldn't be able to accurately tell you what every clause in an insurance policy says.
Also based on this statement an insurance agent could tell you that based upon your stated needs this policy will cover you, provide dollar amounts, terms, etc. then state that he / she is not responsible for anything they just said, and after you purchase the policy it's up to you to read, have, an attorney or two read the actual policy. Oh and if you have any questions feel free to call and ask. All answers of course will be meaningless.
I just spoke with State Farm and have received the definitive word on this matter (for my coverage).
1. My personal rider covers full replacement cost on all my equipment even though I have a website on which I sell photos.
2. If I am asked to shoot a wedding or an event, or if someone were to pay me to go shoot something, and my equipment was lost, stolen or damaged, I would not be fully covered.
3. Since I currently do not get paid to shoot events, and only sell photos on my website, my personal rider coverage is absolutely good. It will cover 100% replacement with no deductible.
4. If I decide I want commercial coverage because I am now going to shoot events for pay, it would cost me $100/year more than what I currently pay and there would be a $100 deductible per loss.
Your policies may differ, but this is what is so for me. My agent verified this with his claims adjusters, and I spent a good 30 minutes on the phone making sure of this.
Joel, I like steak dinners.
Even though they said that you were covered, you had better make sure that you have EXACTLY what they told you in writing . I reread my policy again last night(good for making you sleepy) and there are more exclusion than things that are covered.
Just a word to the wise.... for whats its worth. So ..... how do I get in on this Steak deal?:eat
I just spoke with State Farm and have received the definitive word on this matter (for my coverage).
1. My personal rider covers full replacement cost on all my equipment even though I have a website on which I sell photos.
2. If I am asked to shoot a wedding or an event, or if someone were to pay me to go shoot something, and my equipment was lost, stolen or damaged, I would not be fully covered.
3. Since I currently do not get paid to shoot events, and only sell photos on my website, my personal rider coverage is absolutely good. It will cover 100% replacement with no deductible.
4. If I decide I want commercial coverage because I am now going to shoot events for pay, it would cost me $100/year more than what I currently pay and there would be a $100 deductible per loss.
Your policies may differ, but this is what is so for me. My agent verified this with his claims adjusters, and I spent a good 30 minutes on the phone making sure of this.
Joel, I like steak dinners.
Dan,
First i am sure your agent is trying to do the best for you and may be absolutely right.
I think the upshoot of this thread is that it doesn't mater what your agent said, it doesn't matter if you have the conversation recorded, and it doesn't matter if your agent puts it in writing.
Based on the insurance company's policy your agent can not make any binding statements. Only the written policy has any meaning.
When you buy insurance you must be clear, and you must make clear, what product you need and want. So obviously you check whether you actually got that, and you know if you did from the words in the policy. The words of the policy are the product you have been sold and the product you have bought.
This however is not the main issue with Hog Leg. He asked the company through its agent to review his purchase and product, and was specific about what was to be reviewed, namely the coverage of his $23k photog gear. The nature of a review such as this is to look at the appropriateness of the existing product and alternatives with respect to those specific items. This is like a crossroads. You either continue the way you've been going or you diverge. The information you get from the company is what determines which way you go. Hog Leg was told by the company that an alternative product was not appropriate, which in the event is false. In reality he was resold a product which, despite his efforts to avoid it being the wrong policy, was proven by the company itself on receiving his claim to be the wrong policy.
It is not the wording of the policy which is the main issue here, but the fraudulent reselling to him of a policy which did not address the needs that he made clearly and specifically to the company. The wording of that fraudulent policy is irrelevant, and that is not Hog Leg's fault.
Food for thought
Not that it looks like anybody is willing to take friendly advise, but this is what I would do if I were a working photographer and generated any income from my hobby/professional photography business.
1. If I had any amount of camera equipment that I wanted to protect, I would buy an inland marine policy to cover it. It will give you much broader coverage than an endorsement on a homeowners policy. You can endorse some homeowners policies to give you increased limit coverage over what the standard policy gives you(usually $2,500.00), but you are alwys going to be at the mercy of some underwriter or claims adjuster to determine if it was busines use. Do you want to take that chance? You may not be generating income today, but that doesn't mean you won't 10 years from now. Will you have the same agent and will he remember to adjust your policy. Will you remember to call him or be like most people and forget that little fine print about "paying jobs" until its too late.
2. If I was a working photographer that generated income by doing weddings(especially weddings), portraits, etc, then I would look into a general liability policy that I could endorse professional liability onto. You may then be able to endorse on an inland marine policy for your equipment. If you have a studio, then all this could be included in a package policy that would also include property coverage. The general liability would cover you when you have harmed another persons property or by your negligence caused them bodily harm. The professional liability would be picking up coverage for what you present as your level of photography, website problems, etc. For those that do location photography(outside of your studio), a general liability policy is a must. For those of you that have studios in your home, beware. If someone were to fall and get hurt, your homeowners could deny the claim or they may pay the claim, but then you will get a non-renewal in the mail.
We live in a very litigous society and a society that has grown into an entitlement mentality. No one is willing to take responsibility for their actions.
Pay the few extra dollars to get a commercial policy that will cover business use and sleep better at night. DISCLAIMER: No policy can cover all situations that may arise. If it did, you wouldn't/couldn't stand to pay the premium).
Looks like I need to do some research on eqipment coverage and liability coverage that is designed for photographers. Then I'll have to get licensed in the other 49 states and offer my services.
When you buy insurance you must be clear, and you must make clear, what product you need and want. So obviously you check whether you actually got that, and you know if you did from the words in the policy. The words of the policy are the product you have been sold and the product you have bought.
This however is not the main issue with Hog Leg. He asked the company through its agent to review his purchase and product, and was specific about what was to be reviewed, namely the coverage of his $23k photog gear. The nature of a review such as this is to look at the appropriateness of the existing product and alternatives with respect to those specific items. This is like a crossroads. You either continue the way you've been going or you diverge. The information you get from the company is what determines which way you go. Hog Leg was told by the company that an alternative product was not appropriate, which in the event is false. In reality he was resold a product which, despite his efforts to avoid it being the wrong policy, was proven by the company itself on receiving his claim to be the wrong policy.
It is not the wording of the policy which is the main issue here, but the fraudulent reselling to him of a policy which did not address the needs that he made clearly and specifically to the company. The wording of that fraudulent policy is irrelevant, and that is not Hog Leg's fault.
Neil
Neil,
that is very true. HogLeg was mislead in believing that his equipment was covered under his homeowners policy. As I stated in a previous post, if he feels that he has enough verifiable proof that his agent mislead him, then he should file a claim against that agents E&O coverage. If he gave them his equipment list, described his use of that equipment to include generating income with it and then did not recieve a quote for a commercial inland marine policy but was told that his homeowner's policy was sufficient, then I would think he has a legitimate claim against that agents E&O coverage. That would be the route I would take.
First i am sure your agent is trying to do the best for you and may be absolutely right.
I think the upshoot of this thread is that it doesn't mater what your agent said, it doesn't matter if you have the conversation recorded, and it doesn't matter if your agent puts it in writing.
Based on the insurance company's policy your agent can not make any binding statements. Only the written policy has any meaning.
We can only hope your agent is correct.
Sam
Dan, if you don't have it in writing in your policy or directly from your underwriter, you have nothing. :nah
Dan, if you don't have it in writing in your policy or directly from your underwriter, you have nothing. :nah
This is exactly the crux of the problem.
They were ready to pay my claim for stolen equipment out of my car. They even cleared it with the adjuster after looking at my website. As long as I am not being paid for the actual shoot, there is no problem, i.e. if I go to Death Valley and post 400 photos and a few are sold it is not a problem.
The fine print can be ambiguous, but what I have posted is what my agent and claims adjuster will abide by.
How about out of the country, Dan? Don't forget about Africa.
I'm curious about the stolen equipment incident that didn't end up needing to be paid off. Sounds like a senior moment. You can PM me with the details.
I still claim if it's not in writing, it don't mean diddly. But I won't argue the point. We'll have to hook up for that dinner some time soon.
Me, I'm going with a professional policy. I'll pay a bit more, but will sleep better at night.
State Farm agents seem to be the worse, the least intelligent and least educated of all insurance agents. I had a rider on my home owners for my business and I asked the agent every question in detail.
I specifically asked them do i need to update the items listed for you to cover them, the answer was no, just as long as the items total value is under $22,000.
Sure enough my home was burglarized and State Farm would not cover anything that was not on that original list that I gave the agent. On top of all of that, their claims agent treated me like a criminal. Being burglarized is a traumatic experience, mine happened almost 2 years ago and I still have dreams where people are breaking into my home. It is a horrible thing to go through.
After I got my lawyer involved State Farm did treat me better, however they still wouldn't cover anything not on the original list of camera gear.
Thankfully I had another business policy through another insurance company and they really picked up the slack and took good care of me, not only that, they treated me like a person. They actually had compassion and concern for my well being, where as state farm did not.
I hate state farm for this. The saddest part is, their uneducated agent is still selling insurance to people and is probably still giving them bad advice, in other words, there was no accountability for his lack of knowledge, and he was a 20 year agent!
State Farm agents seem to be the worse, the least intelligent and least educated of all insurance agents. I had a rider on my home owners for my business and I asked the agent every question in detail.
I specifically asked them do i need to update the items listed for you to cover them, the answer was no, just as long as the items total value is under $22,000.
Sure enough my home was burglarized and State Farm would not cover anything that was not on that original list that I gave the agent. On top of all of that, their claims agent treated me like a criminal. Being burglarized is a traumatic experience, mine happened almost 2 years ago and I still have dreams where people are breaking into my home. It is a horrible thing to go through.
After I got my lawyer involved State Farm did treat me better, however they still wouldn't cover anything not on the original list of camera gear.
Thankfully I had another business policy through another insurance company and they really picked up the slack and took good care of me, not only that, they treated me like a person. They actually had compassion and concern for my well being, where as state farm did not.
I hate state farm for this. The saddest part is, their uneducated agent is still selling insurance to people and is probably still giving them bad advice, in other words, there was no accountability for his lack of knowledge, and he was a 20 year agent!
I believe in most State Farm offices, you have the principal agent(the one that owns that particular State Farm franchise) and then all the other "agents" and support personnel the principal agent hires. Other than the continuing education hours each agent has to have to keep their license, there is not a huge push for those agents to really further their educationand insurance knowledge. The principal agent/owner becomes more of a PR/Marketing person for the agency as the agency grows and prospers. The State Farm "agents" learn how to sell their products, not necessarily learning the ins and outs of those products.
Since I own an independent agency, to be able to recommend the right coverages to my clients I have to know the ins and outs of as many as 6 or 7 different companies plans. Every clients needs are different and so are the policies available to cover those risks. A lot of your independent agents take specialized classes to earn designations; some for commercial lines insurance, life and health,or personal lines insurance.
Not saying there aren't any good State Farm agents, but they don't have any motivation to learn the ins and outs of the policies they are selling or how to compare them to other plans.
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
Yes, this is the question I'm very curious about. If there's any way you can reprint that section for us here, it would be very instructional. And no matter how much responsibility lies w/ a person for reading their policy, it truly is a bum deal that the agent basically lied to you. I mean, perhaps it was ignorance on his part, & one sorta hopes so (that seems better than willful misleading) but at the same time it seems like a pretty basic thing to be ignorant about-- I mean, if this is such a common policy for Homeowners' Ins. to not cover certain business usage, then one would certainly think the agent would say so-- especially when asked specifically about camera gear! At any rate, I too am sorry for your loss and am grateful that you posted the info. here, as it's news to me as it seems to be to many of us. But I'd really like to know how they spell out "business use" or "professional use" or whatever, because-- yes, there are many fine distinctions. In my household, we have many musical instruments & other equipment that we do generate some income from at times. I will now be reading our fine print as well.
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....
the above quote is post 31 and I decided I had to say somethin........
1st zoinkz ....it will probably cost you between $500 -1000 and that is not thru some HO insurance company...that is thru Hill and Usher or Marsh (thru PPA).....You need to make a list of each piece of equipment used for your business....lump together such things a gels, cables and small incidentals, lights of you have 10 different brands...lump together studio flash units, shoe / handle mount ......camera's and such need single line on inventory sheet along with date of purchase prices and serial numbers...computer / monitor same as cameras....then they can give you a quote...since you need to take the time to make an inventory list...PHOTOGRAPH everything also
I DO NOT TRUST INSURANCE AGENTS.......
My first 35mm got stolen and It was covered on my HO policy with State Farm .....my 2nd camera I uped my Inland Marine policy to cover the new cam and new lens and new flash......it got stolen, and now get this, I had yet to sell, or shoot for money, but the ownership of a pro level camera made my policy void......I even went to the State Capital to the Insurance Commissioner and he agreed with the insurance company....from my experience InLand Marine rider Policies are not worth the paper they are writ on for camera gear at least.....I do have one for jewelry and some 1st edition books I have procured and such items........
Having an agent explain things to you is also worthless, cause they will deny what they tell you come hell and high water......if they won't put it in writing then they are scamming you.
Want to have some fun....take a recorder (digital or tape) or a video camera to their office to record them explaining your policy to you...if you want to do it over the phone, tell them you are recording the conversation and see what happens........so far I have been denied the ability to record in any fashion for any reason and all agents hangup as soon as I say I want to record our conversations .....
To the OP and anyone else that has lost gear and thought they were covered....Call Your State Insurance Commissioner, send them a copy of your policy [they are supposed to be there to protect us from being scammed], also call the BBB, consumer protection and also your Chamber of Commerce.........
Remember each state treats insurance differently or at least just because it is so in Ks., does not make it so in Ga., or any where else....that goes for interpretations of definitions of terms also.........
Usually only Professional Photo equipment insurance companies (hill and Usher and Marsh ...just to name a couple)
will cover out of country travels with equipment.........when I went to Prague...I got travel insurance to cover my equipment thru the Airline Ticket company, but I got clarification on if it covered my gear as I was a PRO and I was assured it did and the policy I recieved by email stated gear used for business and profit.....that is where I also got insurance to ship my body bak if I expired anywhere overseas.............
Comments
Neil,
You obviously have more information than I do about this particular story. All I have is what I've read from the OP, and I did not get all those details that you list above.
I did not read that he specifically, before-hand, discussed his possible "business use" of his camera gear. This was his mistake. He might not have known to at that time, but it was still his responsibility to do so.
You make the case that he did so, and the agent then told him that his HO policy would in fact provide coverage for his "business use" camera gear. I didn't read that, but again I wear glasses.
Assumptions don't work in insurance...
Again, maybe this thread will stir others into checking their insurance coverages specifically for any coverage issues.
Link to my Smugmug site
Limits! We don't need no stinking limits!
Sam
When I called my insurance company a couple hours ago, the consultant I spoke to had to put our call on hold four times while she checked the information I was asking for with her supervisor and against the actual policy I had bought. This illustrates that the complexity of this kind of purchase is a fundamental factor in a sale of this kind and understanding what the actual product is that is the target of the sale must not be left to chance. Only a charlatan would seek to operate behind the camouflage of legalese and legal reductionism.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
Randy, I have the same information as you, and it is clear that the OP sought to review his purchase with respect to the coverage of a specific number of items. He was told those items were covered. Not that they were only covered in certain specific circumstances, which would obviously be relevant information to him in the context of his review. On the basis of this reassurance he stayed with the cover he had. The sale became fraudulent from that point.
In my call to my insurer, it took me five minutes to get the consultant to understand my question about whether my policy would be void with resepct to my photog gear if it was used for income-business. I was eventually told it would be void for those items if they were used in association with a company registered in my name. This was never pointed out to me at the time I bought the product, and it should have been, complementary to receiving the legal document. I had to extract this information like a dentist a stubborn bad tooth. This is not ethical practice on the part of the insurer.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
Joel,
If you don't like the insurance industry, that's OK by me. But, it is what it is.
Should an insurance carrier just simply cover any and all losses on any and all property and personal property, caused by anything, just so the customer doesn't share in any of the responsibility for purchasing their coverages? If that would be the case, none of us could possibly afford HO insurance. There have to be specific coverages and specific exclusions!
So what, just because we like to take pictures, all camera gear should be covered no matter what?
You are aware that your house & other structures will be excluded from coverage also if they are used for "business use" under an HO policy, right?
It's not like carriers don't offer commercial insurance, they do. Some people just don't want to pay the premiums for it, and some didn't know they needed it. Know what your buying applies to insurance too!
I don't think that I missed the point...
Let's remember something here: I'm NOT an insurance company. I'm just stating correct information about this specific topic. Again, you might not like the way policies are written, but that doesn't change the way it is.
Like the OP, I hope this thread will stir others to carefully examine their insurance policies, and possible coverage issues given their specific situations.
Link to my Smugmug site
Neil,
First, I have no knowledge of insurance outside the United States.
Second, I'm bowing out of this thread. I've given credible information on the specific subject. If it's accepted, fine ~ If it's contested, that's OK too. But, it does not change the correctness of my information.
Do with it what you will...
I'm not here to stand up for insurance carriers ~ just trying to let people know that they need to understand their insurance needs, then confirm that the policies in hand provide the coverage that they seek, given their specific needs.
If ya'll want to bash the insurance industry ~ be my guest!
Randy, I didn't touch the information you have given. I think it is necessary information, but I don't think it is sufficinet to the matter in hand. Buying and selling is not only a matter of product changing hands and the wording of documents, it's also about the manner in which that happens, about people's behaviours and responsibilities.
I have insurance, I want insurance, insurance is great! I am not throwing an impotent tizzie. I am speaking to a specific situation related to the *manner* of sale of an insurance product. Your information is safe from me.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
OK guys, sorry I missed all the fireworks. I had a 3 yr old at the doctor's office with a double ear infection and the house is now finally quiet.
First things first. Homeowner's policies are not all inclusive policies like the average person has come to expect. In years past when the economy was on hyper drive and the stock market was rolling, insurance companies were able to keep premiums down and cover the difference with the market returns. Therefore a lot of things got "covered" that never were supposed to be covered. The problem with that is that now everyone thinks that is the norm. The HO policy is to cover personal property, not business property. It is also for usual and customary property for the maintenance of your home. $23k of camera equipment is not usual and customary.
If you have a high net worth, then you can get specialized policies that may have extra coverages for that amount of equipment. But without a business use endorsement(which is very limited), then if you are using the equipment in a business manner its not covered.
How many of you guys have an antique dining table or an antique fireplace mantel(I have both). If they were destroyed in a fire, I couldn't be reimbursed for like kind and quality. Anybody have any Lladro collectibles. Not covered unless specifically endorsed.
If it is anything that you own that has any special value above what you can get from Wally World, then be prepared for it not to be covered unless you specifically address those items with a specialized policy.
Second, there a lot of very knowledgable agents out there and there are a lot of agents just hunting for a paycheck. It is a sad fact that a lot of "agents" don't take the time to ask questions or to listen to what the potential insured says so that they can pick up on areas that need to be addressed. And potential insureds have learned to hold back some info so they won't get denied coverage or won't have to pay the correct premium for the risk involved. Cat and mouse game.
It sounds like his agent(or assistant) dropped the ball after he provided his equipment list. That should have thrown up red flags everywhere. Also sounds like they are not very knowledgable on the policies they are selling if they led you to believe it was covered. They have E&O insurance, make a claim if you feel you were mislead.
I call my underwriters and reread guidelines and policies everyday just to make sure I am providing the most up to date info and correct info to my clients.
Lastly, we wouldn't even be having this discussion if we had a good justice system here in America. Get caught stealing, cut your hand off. Probably not be a lot of repeat offenders!!!!!!!!!
www.focusedonyourmemories.com
What you see depends on what you're looking for.
Yes
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
I think these are good points as well.
Sam
I read this three or four times and of all the things I thought of to say I will leave it with a stunned WOW!
Sam
I just spoke with State Farm and have received the definitive word on this matter (for my coverage).
1. My personal rider covers full replacement cost on all my equipment even though I have a website on which I sell photos.
2. If I am asked to shoot a wedding or an event, or if someone were to pay me to go shoot something, and my equipment was lost, stolen or damaged, I would not be fully covered.
3. Since I currently do not get paid to shoot events, and only sell photos on my website, my personal rider coverage is absolutely good. It will cover 100% replacement with no deductible.
4. If I decide I want commercial coverage because I am now going to shoot events for pay, it would cost me $100/year more than what I currently pay and there would be a $100 deductible per loss.
Your policies may differ, but this is what is so for me. My agent verified this with his claims adjusters, and I spent a good 30 minutes on the phone making sure of this.
Joel, I like steak dinners.
http://danielplumer.com/
Facebook Fan Page
Just a word to the wise.... for whats its worth. So ..... how do I get in on this Steak deal?:eat
Dan,
First i am sure your agent is trying to do the best for you and may be absolutely right.
I think the upshoot of this thread is that it doesn't mater what your agent said, it doesn't matter if you have the conversation recorded, and it doesn't matter if your agent puts it in writing.
Based on the insurance company's policy your agent can not make any binding statements. Only the written policy has any meaning.
We can only hope your agent is correct.
Sam
This however is not the main issue with Hog Leg. He asked the company through its agent to review his purchase and product, and was specific about what was to be reviewed, namely the coverage of his $23k photog gear. The nature of a review such as this is to look at the appropriateness of the existing product and alternatives with respect to those specific items. This is like a crossroads. You either continue the way you've been going or you diverge. The information you get from the company is what determines which way you go. Hog Leg was told by the company that an alternative product was not appropriate, which in the event is false. In reality he was resold a product which, despite his efforts to avoid it being the wrong policy, was proven by the company itself on receiving his claim to be the wrong policy.
It is not the wording of the policy which is the main issue here, but the fraudulent reselling to him of a policy which did not address the needs that he made clearly and specifically to the company. The wording of that fraudulent policy is irrelevant, and that is not Hog Leg's fault.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
Not that it looks like anybody is willing to take friendly advise, but this is what I would do if I were a working photographer and generated any income from my hobby/professional photography business.
1. If I had any amount of camera equipment that I wanted to protect, I would buy an inland marine policy to cover it. It will give you much broader coverage than an endorsement on a homeowners policy. You can endorse some homeowners policies to give you increased limit coverage over what the standard policy gives you(usually $2,500.00), but you are alwys going to be at the mercy of some underwriter or claims adjuster to determine if it was busines use. Do you want to take that chance? You may not be generating income today, but that doesn't mean you won't 10 years from now. Will you have the same agent and will he remember to adjust your policy. Will you remember to call him or be like most people and forget that little fine print about "paying jobs" until its too late.
2. If I was a working photographer that generated income by doing weddings(especially weddings), portraits, etc, then I would look into a general liability policy that I could endorse professional liability onto. You may then be able to endorse on an inland marine policy for your equipment. If you have a studio, then all this could be included in a package policy that would also include property coverage. The general liability would cover you when you have harmed another persons property or by your negligence caused them bodily harm. The professional liability would be picking up coverage for what you present as your level of photography, website problems, etc. For those that do location photography(outside of your studio), a general liability policy is a must. For those of you that have studios in your home, beware. If someone were to fall and get hurt, your homeowners could deny the claim or they may pay the claim, but then you will get a non-renewal in the mail.
We live in a very litigous society and a society that has grown into an entitlement mentality. No one is willing to take responsibility for their actions.
Pay the few extra dollars to get a commercial policy that will cover business use and sleep better at night. DISCLAIMER: No policy can cover all situations that may arise. If it did, you wouldn't/couldn't stand to pay the premium).
Looks like I need to do some research on eqipment coverage and liability coverage that is designed for photographers. Then I'll have to get licensed in the other 49 states and offer my services.
Hopefully this will help somebody.
www.focusedonyourmemories.com
What you see depends on what you're looking for.
Neil,
that is very true. HogLeg was mislead in believing that his equipment was covered under his homeowners policy. As I stated in a previous post, if he feels that he has enough verifiable proof that his agent mislead him, then he should file a claim against that agents E&O coverage. If he gave them his equipment list, described his use of that equipment to include generating income with it and then did not recieve a quote for a commercial inland marine policy but was told that his homeowner's policy was sufficient, then I would think he has a legitimate claim against that agents E&O coverage. That would be the route I would take.
www.focusedonyourmemories.com
What you see depends on what you're looking for.
Dan, if you don't have it in writing in your policy or directly from your underwriter, you have nothing. :nah
This is exactly the crux of the problem.
Link to my Smugmug site
They were ready to pay my claim for stolen equipment out of my car. They even cleared it with the adjuster after looking at my website. As long as I am not being paid for the actual shoot, there is no problem, i.e. if I go to Death Valley and post 400 photos and a few are sold it is not a problem.
The fine print can be ambiguous, but what I have posted is what my agent and claims adjuster will abide by.
http://danielplumer.com/
Facebook Fan Page
I'm curious about the stolen equipment incident that didn't end up needing to be paid off. Sounds like a senior moment.
I still claim if it's not in writing, it don't mean diddly. But I won't argue the point. We'll have to hook up for that dinner some time soon.
Me, I'm going with a professional policy. I'll pay a bit more, but will sleep better at night.
Cheers,
-joel
Link to my Smugmug site
There's a stolen equipment registry at photo.net, you might want to list your serial #'s there.
Thanks for the heads up, I just registered all of them.
I specifically asked them do i need to update the items listed for you to cover them, the answer was no, just as long as the items total value is under $22,000.
Sure enough my home was burglarized and State Farm would not cover anything that was not on that original list that I gave the agent. On top of all of that, their claims agent treated me like a criminal. Being burglarized is a traumatic experience, mine happened almost 2 years ago and I still have dreams where people are breaking into my home. It is a horrible thing to go through.
After I got my lawyer involved State Farm did treat me better, however they still wouldn't cover anything not on the original list of camera gear.
Thankfully I had another business policy through another insurance company and they really picked up the slack and took good care of me, not only that, they treated me like a person. They actually had compassion and concern for my well being, where as state farm did not.
I hate state farm for this. The saddest part is, their uneducated agent is still selling insurance to people and is probably still giving them bad advice, in other words, there was no accountability for his lack of knowledge, and he was a 20 year agent!
I believe in most State Farm offices, you have the principal agent(the one that owns that particular State Farm franchise) and then all the other "agents" and support personnel the principal agent hires. Other than the continuing education hours each agent has to have to keep their license, there is not a huge push for those agents to really further their educationand insurance knowledge. The principal agent/owner becomes more of a PR/Marketing person for the agency as the agency grows and prospers. The State Farm "agents" learn how to sell their products, not necessarily learning the ins and outs of those products.
Since I own an independent agency, to be able to recommend the right coverages to my clients I have to know the ins and outs of as many as 6 or 7 different companies plans. Every clients needs are different and so are the policies available to cover those risks. A lot of your independent agents take specialized classes to earn designations; some for commercial lines insurance, life and health,or personal lines insurance.
Not saying there aren't any good State Farm agents, but they don't have any motivation to learn the ins and outs of the policies they are selling or how to compare them to other plans.
www.focusedonyourmemories.com
What you see depends on what you're looking for.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
the above quote is post 31 and I decided I had to say somethin........
1st zoinkz ....it will probably cost you between $500 -1000 and that is not thru some HO insurance company...that is thru Hill and Usher or Marsh (thru PPA).....You need to make a list of each piece of equipment used for your business....lump together such things a gels, cables and small incidentals, lights of you have 10 different brands...lump together studio flash units, shoe / handle mount ......camera's and such need single line on inventory sheet along with date of purchase prices and serial numbers...computer / monitor same as cameras....then they can give you a quote...since you need to take the time to make an inventory list...PHOTOGRAPH everything also
I DO NOT TRUST INSURANCE AGENTS.......
My first 35mm got stolen and It was covered on my HO policy with State Farm .....my 2nd camera I uped my Inland Marine policy to cover the new cam and new lens and new flash......it got stolen, and now get this, I had yet to sell, or shoot for money, but the ownership of a pro level camera made my policy void......I even went to the State Capital to the Insurance Commissioner and he agreed with the insurance company....from my experience InLand Marine rider Policies are not worth the paper they are writ on for camera gear at least.....I do have one for jewelry and some 1st edition books I have procured and such items........
Having an agent explain things to you is also worthless, cause they will deny what they tell you come hell and high water......if they won't put it in writing then they are scamming you.
Want to have some fun....take a recorder (digital or tape) or a video camera to their office to record them explaining your policy to you...if you want to do it over the phone, tell them you are recording the conversation and see what happens........so far I have been denied the ability to record in any fashion for any reason and all agents hangup as soon as I say I want to record our conversations .....
To the OP and anyone else that has lost gear and thought they were covered....Call Your State Insurance Commissioner, send them a copy of your policy [they are supposed to be there to protect us from being scammed], also call the BBB, consumer protection and also your Chamber of Commerce.........
Remember each state treats insurance differently or at least just because it is so in Ks., does not make it so in Ga., or any where else....that goes for interpretations of definitions of terms also.........
Usually only Professional Photo equipment insurance companies (hill and Usher and Marsh ...just to name a couple)
will cover out of country travels with equipment.........when I went to Prague...I got travel insurance to cover my equipment thru the Airline Ticket company, but I got clarification on if it covered my gear as I was a PRO and I was assured it did and the policy I recieved by email stated gear used for business and profit.....that is where I also got insurance to ship my body bak if I expired anywhere overseas.............