# Gear insurance? I must have gone to the wrong place. Your advice requested



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Jul 11, 2014)

I've seen several topics here previously about insuring your gear against theft or damage and I'm sorry I can't find that thread for reference.

I went to a State Farm agent and requested a quote to cover my inventory that totals about $45K. They sent a proposal for $850/annually which is much more than I recall hearing from other shooters here.

Who are others using for insurance?

Thanks again for your help. This is better than Dear Abby.... :


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 11, 2014)

MARKOE PHOTOE said:


> I've seen several topics here previously about insuring your gear against theft or damage and I'm sorry I can't find that thread for reference.
> 
> I went to a State Farm agent and requested a quote to cover my inventory that totals about $45K. They sent a proposal for $850/annually which is much more than I recall hearing from other shooters here.
> 
> ...



Was this coverage for personal or business use?


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Jul 11, 2014)

raptor3x said:


> MARKOE PHOTOE said:
> 
> 
> > I've seen several topics here previously about insuring your gear against theft or damage and I'm sorry I can't find that thread for reference.
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 11, 2014)

For personal use, I pay $7.60/yr per $1K of gear. You might want to check with another agent. Or, rates may be high in your area...


----------



## atosk930 (Jul 11, 2014)

Mine is covered as part of my personal property insurance within my renters' policy. I definitely suggest calling around.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 11, 2014)

Insurance is a casino game between you and the insurance company in which the odds are stacked in their favour. Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it because the insurance companies have the odds stacked in their favour - they make a profit because on average the insurance premiums cost more than the cost of repairs and losses.


----------



## nonac (Jul 11, 2014)

AlanF said:


> Insurance is a casino game between you and the insurance company in which the odds are stacked in their favour. Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it because the insurance companies have the odds stacked in their favour - they make a profit because on average the insurance premiums cost more than the cost of repairs and losses.



So I take it that you don't insure your house or car either? Of course insurance companies are out to make a profit, they can't provide that service for free! The model is for them to spread the risk over many in hopes of reducing their risks and keeping the premiums lower for everyone in the group. That's just how it works.


----------



## projectmansd (Jul 11, 2014)

Unless they are quoting you a commercial policy this rate is way off. They should quote you a person articles floater as long as your gear is not for business use. I have no deductible, world wide coverage and all for less that $200 per year. I have about $12000 worth of gear. I'm covered with State Farm and I am in Dallas.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 11, 2014)

AlanF said:


> Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it...



The OP mentions having $45,000 worth of gear – that's about what I have, and I'd find it difficult (if not impossible) to replace that amount in the short term. 

But a good reminder is that you should consider carefully before filing a claim, at least for US policies covering personal (not business) use. Those are generally linked to homeowners'/renters' policies, claims against them go into the same database (CLUE), and can affect rates and even eligibility for home/rental coverage. 

I view my policy as 'catastrophic' coverage. If I drop my 135/2L to the pavement and it shatters, I'll buy a new one. If my 1D X + 600/4L IS II fall off a cliff, or if my house is robbed and all my gear taken, I'll file a claim.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 11, 2014)

nonac said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Insurance is a casino game between you and the insurance company in which the odds are stacked in their favour. Many years ago, I was given the advice that you* insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover.* If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it because the insurance companies have the odds stacked in their favour - they make a profit because on average the insurance premiums cost more than the cost of repairs and losses.
> ...






If his house is not too expensive for him to replace with pocket change, he would be ahead to not insure it. I stop insuring my cars, except for liability once they are a few years old, its a losing bet. I once had a homeowners insurance loss of about $5,000. This was after paying insurance for 40 years with no losses. The insurance company cancelled my policy. I lost a lot of $$ on that, If I'd have invested that insurance $$$ in the bank for 40 years, I could buy a new house. Of course, by mortgage company would not allow that.


Life insurance is the same story. Bet a insurance company that you will die, and you will most likely lose. They know the odds, and always win.


Many larger companies are self insured, or only purchase insurance for catastrophic losses, they know the cost well.


----------



## nonac (Jul 11, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> nonac said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



It's like neuro said, insurance is generally for catastrophic events. The problem is many people don't think these events will happen to them. Had you been allowed to "bank" that homeowners premium and in year 2 of ownership, the house burns to the ground, you would wish you had coverage. I can't believe the company cancelled your policy on a $5000 claim. I have had vehicle and homeowner claims over the years totaling way more than that and I still have the same insurance company. 

Twenty-eight years ago I went to the Dr with a sore throat, 5 months and $100k in medical bills later the cancer I didn't know I had was in remission. Had I not had health insurance, I would probably still be paying hospital bills. Insurance is critical for those catastrophic, unexpected events. Yes, they may never happen, but if they do you'll be glad you're covered.


----------



## jrista (Jul 11, 2014)

First, I agree, you should only insure what you absolutely have to. I insure my 5D III and EF 600/4 L II. That's it. All the rest, I can cover myself. The payouts from the insurance company would top out at maybe a grand anyway, and if you do a lot of little claims like that (especially when using a home insurance rider or schedule), it ultimately results in larger premium increases. Only insure things that cost at least a few thousand dollars. In the case of the 600mm lens, it's $12,800 new...I pay something like an extra $300 a year to insure my two things on my home insurance scheduled property rider...a very small price to pay in case my lens was damaged and had to be replaced. 

Insurance companies may "win" on a personal basis, but in the big picture, they have been getting slammed over the past good number of years now. Maybe since Katrina, the insurance payouts have been pretty significant in large regions of our country. My parents house (they also live here in Colorado, up in the mountains of the Front Range, just above Jamestown) was damaged by the September rains we had here in Colorado last year. 

They are just one of many thousands of people at least, if not millions of people, who have had to file insurance claims. The payout just for the Colorado disaster is going to end up in the hundreds of millions at least, and it's all still on-going. Stuff is still totally damaged, and it will take years to fully repair (for example, the main road up to my parents house is half-washed out in a couple dozen places...there is not enough room for more than one car to pass at a time). The work to shore up whole entire valleys in that area, bring in massive amounts of earth, rebuild roads, build giant culverts and other water management systems to handle the kind of deluge we had, etc. is all ongoing, probably will be for another year or so. Massive insurance payouts and other expenses going on there.

The town of Jamestown itself was pretty much destroyed, only one side of main street (and anything that was up in the mountains) survived, and a lot was damaged there as well. Many homes were completely washed away and have had to be rebuilt from scratch (that's several hundred grand a home right there in insurance payouts.) 

People all over the front range and the plains just in front of it had flood and mud damage. Many thousands more, all the way out to my house (which is in the Aurora South area, fairly well east of the mountains themselves) had significant hail damage (thousands upon thousands of roofs have been replaced around here, some have had multiple claims). 

My roof could probably stand to be replaced, but I'm holding out as long as I can to maintain my "claims free" status, as it's a moderately significant discount, and my insurance has gone up enough already as insurance companies around here scramble to cover all their costs. (Ah, gotta love subsidies in the face of countless natural disasters year after year.) 

Anyway...I wouldn't say that insurance companies just plain and simply "always" win. They win...for a while...until the claims start piling up. Then their profit margins tank significantly, their costs just to handle all the claims flowing in increases, they eventually react by jacking up everyone's premiums...until the next natural disaster occurs, costing hundreds of millions to billions, and the payouts start again. Before Katrina, it was pretty common for insurance companies (mainly the broad insurance providers, Farmers, American Family, All State, etc.) to have profit margins in the double digits (which, truly, is very high...but when you think about what insurance is, in the good years, it NEEDS to be high). I think 8% was relatively "low". After Katrina, profit margins for insurance companies tanked down to around the -20% range for a while. They topped 10% again for a little while, and have been declining since. In recent years, big insurance company profit margins are down in the 2-6% range, however there have been spans in recent years where their profit margins were -7-10%. Average it out, and profit margins for insurance companies are at best a third of what they were, at worst a fifth, and shrinking. And the payouts continue...

So, don't be surprised if you have to *pay *to protect your investments. Insurance payouts are very high in recent years, and look to remain relatively high in the future.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 11, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> nonac said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



I have some rather wealthy friends that recently claimed that home owners insurance was a middle-class invention. I'm not sure if they've changed their tune after their home burned to the ground. ???


----------



## nebugeater (Jul 11, 2014)

Question for the OP

Was this quoted as a rider to your home owners / renter policy or as a stand alone policy? Not sure how much but that will have a pretty good impact on rates


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 11, 2014)

nonac said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > nonac said:
> ...






Maybe I wasn't clear, we probably are thinking alike.


I was trying to say that if you can afford the consequences, then you are ahead to self insure. Having catastrophic insurance that covers huge losses that you cannot afford is a good idea. However, if you are insuring something that you can afford to replace, then its a losing bet. It does not pay to have insurance with zero deductable,


Unfortunately, those who need insurance the most, often can't afford it. 


I definitely keep medical insurance, $100K is not unusual for serious illnesses. I carry $500 deductible on my car insurance for collision, but only for new cars. 


I'd say, carry $500 deductible for camera equipment or even higher. That will protect you from a big loss, but you will have to pay for less costly losses. My camera equipment (about 20K) is insured under homeowners with a $500 deductible.


----------



## chasinglight (Jul 11, 2014)

MARKOE PHOTOE said:


> I've seen several topics here previously about insuring your gear against theft or damage and I'm sorry I can't find that thread for reference.
> 
> I went to a State Farm agent and requested a quote to cover my inventory that totals about $45K. They sent a proposal for $850/annually which is much more than I recall hearing from other shooters here.
> 
> ...




I pay state farm ~$150/year for $11k.... $150x4 is $600..so seems like a little much. I have a personal article policy (not for business) that covers everything except for war and vermin. I will note that it was kinda a hassle to get everything insured though, as you might expect they want receipts and some other form of proof of purchase. They even wanted an appraisal, but I got them to settle for the aforementioned documentation. Thankfully I have not needed it yet, but contrary to what others have said, if I lost, broke, or had a $1k piece of gear stolen I would file a claim....though I might think twice about filing a claim for something worth only a few hundred. I suppose the threshold of when to file a claim depends on one's financial state.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 11, 2014)

nonac said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Insurance is a casino game between you and the insurance company in which the odds are stacked in their favour. Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it because the insurance companies have the odds stacked in their favour - they make a profit because on average the insurance premiums cost more than the cost of repairs and losses.
> ...



You clearly haven't read what I wrote and you don't understand odds. I insure my house because I could not afford to replace it if it burned down. I don't insure my washing machine because I can afford to replace it if it breaks down. I don't bother to insure most of my photographic gear because I am more careful than the average bear and rarely drop or lose items or leave them where they can be stolen and I can afford to replace them. If I insured them I would be paying over the odds to have the insurance company make a profit and to pay for all those careless individuals who don't look after their gear.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 12, 2014)

AlanF said:


> I don't bother to insure most of my photographic gear because I am more careful than the average bear and rarely drop or lose items or leave them where they can be stolen and I can afford to replace them. If I insured them I would be paying over the odds to have the insurance company make a profit and to pay for all those careless individuals who don't look after their gear.




I agree with that. If I'd insured my photo gear for minor losses over the past 50 years, I'd have had "0" losses, but the same $ invested would buy me a new 600mmL.


However, there is fire and theft to consider, theft is not always due to carelessness, so I do insure for those, just not breakage. I knew a guy who kept his gear in a steel Knaak box in his basement bolted to the floor (from inside). Someone broke in, ransacked his house, pried up the box and too the whole thing. 


Right now, we are at the start of wildfire season, and its pretty scarey. We could be burned out with little notice, and my camera gear is not what I'd be rescuing first.


----------



## jmphoto (Jul 12, 2014)

*Re: Gear insurance? Check is in the mail*

Just mailed check to State Farm - for just over 25K Personal Articles - Cameras. Worked out to $16.17 per thousand. Last year it was $12.80, but they sent nice (sic) letter sorta apologizing for increase. Letter also indicated some elements of Coin, Stamp, and Jewelry coverages eliminated. Located in semi-rural California and this is my only State Farm policy. My homeowner's wouldn't even quote; quietly recommended State Farm.


----------



## nonac (Jul 12, 2014)

One very important note to go along with this post: Before you sign anything and hand over a check, make sure you read and understand your policy! When I was pricing policies for my gear, I read every part of them and jotted down questions for the agents as I went through them. There can be major differences between them that may be important to you. Make sure you get the coverage you are aiming for. I bought my policy through Hill & Usher.


----------



## Northstar (Jul 12, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it...
> ...



Agree...that's how I would handle it too.....generally.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 12, 2014)

*Re: Gear insurance? Check is in the mail*



jmphoto said:


> Just mailed check to State Farm - for just over 25K Personal Articles - Cameras. Worked out to $16.17 per thousand. Last year it was $12.80, but they sent nice (sic) letter sorta apologizing for increase. Letter also indicated some elements of Coin, Stamp, and Jewelry coverages eliminated. Located in semi-rural California and this is my only State Farm policy. My homeowner's wouldn't even quote; quietly recommended State Farm.


Mine didnt increase, but I did get the same notice on them not covering certain elements (coins, jewelry, etc) which didn't affect me.

I think mine is in the $14/1k gear range, in the Northern Virginia area just outside the beltway. If you were in a higher crime city, I'd suspect that what you were quoted ($18/1k) is probably accurate.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 12, 2014)

*Re: Gear insurance? Check is in the mail*



preppyak said:


> I think mine is in the $14/1k gear range, in the Northern Virginia area just outside the beltway. If you were in a higher crime city, I'd suspect that what you were quoted ($18/1k) is probably accurate.



I'm near Boston, and my rates are comparatively low. But there are other factors...for example, we get a nice discount on our home insurance, and therefore probably on my gear coverage, because my wife stays home with our kids (she chose to give up her academic faculty position to do so).


----------



## Canon1 (Jul 12, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it...
> ...



I insure all of my gear under a Personal Articles policy with State Farm. Cost is $1.25/$100 of coverage. No deductible, and it is not linked to my home-owners policy, so if I ever have a claim it won't jack my rates elsewhere. It's a no questions asked policy that covers theft, damage, loss, etc...


----------



## Canon1 (Jul 12, 2014)

jrista said:


> First, I agree, you should only insure what you absolutely have to.



I insure everything. If someone grabs my camera bag there are thousands of dollars worth of gadgets and "cheap" lenses. I've got almost $1,000 in just memory cards and spare batteries! It all adds up, and the insurance costs to cover everything is well worth the peace of mind.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 12, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Many years ago, I was given the advice that you insure yourself only against events that happen very rarely and are too expensive for you to cover. If you can afford to replace your gear, then don't insure it...
> ...



That is why you need yo put your foot down and insist and a completely floating personal articles policy. In some areas some agents have started playing hard ball and trying to force riders onto home and stuff. If you hit one of those pains then try another nearby office.
It's not smart whatsoever to let it get tied to homeowners or car insurance.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 12, 2014)

chasinglight said:


> MARKOE PHOTOE said:
> 
> 
> > I've seen several topics here previously about insuring your gear against theft or damage and I'm sorry I can't find that thread for reference.
> ...



yeah same here, his State Farm price seems very high unless it was for professional coverage

although maybe if you are living in the middle of the hood or on some fancy beachfront that has a big hurricane risk, perhaps the rates can go crazy though?

the S.F. policy is nice since it's totally unattached, covers loss for ANY reason (and anywhere too, be careful as some policies will pay zilch if you break or have stuff stolen on vacation) with zero deductible


----------



## kennephoto (Jul 12, 2014)

I today got State Farm to give me 20k gear insurance and liability for my shoots for 335 a year. Allstate quoted me 558 for less coverage. I'm happy with State Farm.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 12, 2014)

Canon1 said:


> ...it is not linked to my home-owners policy, so if I ever have a claim it won't jack my rates elsewhere. It's a no questions asked policy that covers theft, damage, loss, etc...



I wouldn't be too sure about that. While it's true that the State Farm personal articles policy is 'standalone' (not a rider or endorsement), claims against it are still reported to CLUE, and insurers use that database (and your credit score, etc.) to determine your rates and eligibility. 




LetTheRightLensIn said:


> That is why you need yo put your foot down and insist and a completely floating personal articles policy. In some areas some agents have started playing hard ball and trying to force riders onto home and stuff. If you hit one of those pains then try another nearby office.
> It's not smart whatsoever to let it get tied to homeowners or car insurance.


 
As I said, it's not formally 'linked'. But if you file a bunch of gear claims, it *will* very likely affect your rates...even if your gear and homeowners policies are with different companies. That's why insurers use the CLUE database – to determine how likely you are to file a claim, and charge you accordingly. 

As for trying a nearby office, that's not an option. State Farm doesn't write policies for new customers in Massachusetts (they cover us because we had policies prior to moving here)...there are no agents in MA, just a main Policy Service Office (one for the whole state).


----------



## Canon1 (Jul 12, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > ...it is not linked to my home-owners policy, so if I ever have a claim it won't jack my rates elsewhere. It's a no questions asked policy that covers theft, damage, loss, etc...
> ...



I should clarify. It wouldn't cause my other CURRENT policies (including the personal articles policy) with State Farm to suffer increased premiums if I make a claim. (I have this in writing). I don't know if/how it would impact future policies with either State Farm or elsewhere should I have a claim. I am not the type of person to shop insurance every year to save a buck so for a customer like me... CLUE reporting is irrelevant (Most companies only have a three year look-back anyway).


----------



## Straightshooter (Jul 12, 2014)

*Re: Gear insurance? Check is in the mail*



neuroanatomist said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > I think mine is in the $14/1k gear range, in the Northern Virginia area just outside the beltway. If you were in a higher crime city, I'd suspect that what you were quoted ($18/1k) is probably accurate.
> ...



So your wife is smart TOO?! 8)


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Jul 12, 2014)

nebugeater said:


> Question for the OP
> 
> Was this quoted as a rider to your home owners / renter policy or as a stand alone policy? Not sure how much but that will have a pretty good impact on rates



The quote I received was from another insurance company and not my home insurance carrier. I didn't want to tie these two together as Neuro had mentioned.


----------

