MartinEB Posted November 28, 2012 Share #21 Â Posted November 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is timely because my insurance policy is due for renewal and I need to look at changing it. And I am concerned that this is a subject where the devil is in the detail so I apologise for being a bit lengthy in this post. I have paid a significant premium for a specialist policy for several years, and it gives me cover on a new for old basis, but I am not happy that it completely meets my needs. I have not suffered a loss to date so have not needed to make a claim. I won't be unusual in that the value of a M body and several lenses quickly adds up so a significant sum of money is involved; and having satisfactory insurance is important for me. (Even with insurance cover, I am always careful about looking after my equipment. And I absolutely do not want and cannot afford to find out that I am not covered in the event that I suffer a serious loss.) Â I am happy about the cover provided when the equipment is at home, and my policy stipulates certain requirements which I meet. And also the policy goes into a lot of specific detail about when equipment is left unattended in a vehicle, although that is a rather minor requirement for me. The issue I have concerns when I am away on a holiday (photo trip!) for a number of days and staying in hotels etc., which could be worldwide. The policy has virtually no details about when equipment is being kept on premises other than at home, or information on different parts of the world. And I have tended to try to stay in places where a room safe is available, but that is not always possible. I have a special holiday arranged to go to Chile and so I asked about this. I was told I would only have cover if the equipment is kept in a safe. So I asked about my tripod, which of course won't fit in a safe, and was told that would be ok, but was referred also to the policy wording which I dug out from the file. The wording rather alarmingly says in one section that I am supposed to look after the equipment as if I had no cover - which I think is wholly unreasonable because I am paying for cover because I want a level of protection because I can't realistically provide round the clock protection. Â My specifics are when I am away from home, and I will be interested in what others do: You are out for the day - do you always take everything with you? You go out for a meal in the evening, same question? You go to have breakfast where you are staying - do you take everything with you, or leave it in a locked hotel room? From a bulk and weight point of view (and also from freedom of use) I don't always want everything with me, but from an insurance cover angle I think I probably have to always take everything unless I have the use of a safe; although bizarrely it could be at greater risk with me. (And some travel policies even exclude the use of a safe.) Â My unease about home contents policies is that they may not pay out in the event of a claim, and/or may impose special conditions about home security. The premium paid, which is significant, is supposed to be related to the risk, so with a special policy I am either paying (too much) for cover for circumstances that I don't need (eg. extensive storage in an unattended vehicle), or if I were paying much less (such as on a home contents policy) then I would actually not be getting the level of cover I need. So have others gone into the detail, or am I worrying unnecessarily? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 28, 2012 Posted November 28, 2012 Hi MartinEB, Take a look here UK camera/lens insurance. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted November 28, 2012 Share #22 Â Posted November 28, 2012 My specifics are when I am away from home, and I will be interested in what others do: You are out for the day - do you always take everything with you? You go out for a meal in the evening, same question? You go to have breakfast where you are staying - do you take everything with you, or leave it in a locked hotel room? From a bulk and weight point of view (and also from freedom of use) I don't always want everything with me, but from an insurance cover angle I think I probably have to always take everything unless I have the use of a safe; although bizarrely it could be at greater risk with me. (And some travel policies even exclude the use of a safe.) Â I've always assumed (possibly incorrectly) that gear left in a hotel room but not in a safe would not be covered by my insurance. It's never really been a problem for me because I've never taken more gear than could fit in a single Domke or smaller Billingham type bag and I would typically carry it with me to breakfast, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted November 28, 2012 Share #23  Posted November 28, 2012 Martin, I have the opposite view. My home policy is much more inclusive. I did some research a year ago into changing from additions to the home policy to a dedicated insurer, but I found the dedicated insurers had so many exclusion clauses (and some bad experiences recorded on the web) that I never changed.  The only change my home insurer made to the policy this year is that they no longer cover equipment left in a car. No problem, I just need to keep it on me in a bag.  That John Lewis up to £5,000 does seem quite good. I may look into it. However I am happy with the service of my insurer (prudential) so would need more then a small incentive to change.  Rgds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 28, 2012 Share #24 Â Posted November 28, 2012 I've always assumed (possibly incorrectly) that gear left in a hotel room but not in a safe would not be covered by my insurance. It's never really been a problem for me because I've never taken more gear than could fit in a single Domke or smaller Billingham type bag and I would typically carry it with me to breakfast, etc. I have always assumed that equipment left in a locked hotel room would be covered. Sure, if I left the door open then it's my fault but with the door locked I have a reasonable expectation of security (real or imagined) so I have taken reasonable steps to secure my equipment and would expect my insurer to pay out. if my equipment's not reasonably secure in a locked room then why does the door have a lock at all? In the event that my insurer refused to pay out then I think I have reasonable justification for seeking satisfaction through the courts. NB: this is only my argument and not intended to provide advice for anyone else. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted November 28, 2012 Share #25 Â Posted November 28, 2012 Many hotels have notices quoting the Innkeeper's Act disclaiming liability for money and valuable unless handed over at reception for safe keeping. This would of course only apply to the liability of the hotel but I would not be surprised if insurance companies might try to wriggle out of liability on the same grounds. Â Many hotels do provide a lockable safe in the room which if big enough seems to give a certain amount of security for cameras, lenses and laptops. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted November 28, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted November 28, 2012 Unless you know the default master code for those in-hotel safes... Â I never use them and keep my valuables on me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinEB Posted November 29, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted November 29, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you for your further comments. I think I will look into extending my home contents cover and will check the policy detail first. My main concern is for clarity in the cover provided under what ought to be fairly straightforward circumstances, and I don't have that at present. Â Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted November 29, 2012 Share #28  Posted November 29, 2012 Thank you for your further comments. I think I will look into extending my home contents cover and will check the policy detail first. My main concern is for clarity in the cover provided under what ought to be fairly straightforward circumstances, and I don't have that at present. Martin  Martin, you might like to look at the "all risks" element (for items taken away from the home). Mine allowed a default upper limit on value, which could be increased at extra cost. High value items needed to be declared explicitly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted November 29, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted November 29, 2012 Many hotels do provide a lockable safe in the room which if big enough seems to give a certain amount of security for cameras, lenses and laptops. The last hotel I was in had one in the wardrobe - loosely screwed down with wood screws and it would have been easy enough to pry it out in a few seconds.... . When travelling I always keep my cameras with me at all times if I possibly can, even though they are insured. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted November 29, 2012 Share #30  Posted November 29, 2012 The last hotel I was in had one in the wardrobe - loosely screwed down with wood screws and it would have been easy enough to pry it out in a few seconds.... . When travelling I always keep my cameras with me at all times if I possibly can, even though they are insured.  I agree Most hotels have big signs saying they are not liable for what is put in the room safe  In any event I am not sure what this has to do with insurance . You should be covered for everything on holiday unless you have a policy with a specific restriction.  I would keep the camera with me simply that it would ruin my holiday if they were stolen! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.