OK, I/we "used" Toni's recent inquiry to do two things. I'd like to separate out the insurance issues and ask those who responded to succinctly respond again, if they could.
Frankly, I was surprised to read that Toni was pretty well covered through her home owner's insurance (correct?) for $160.
Then, someone else wrote that if you're a pro, you shouldn't/can't be camping onto your homeowner's policy, which makes sense to me.
As for me, I'm a pro, and I have a State Farm business policy that costs me $225/yr and has a $1000 deductible. The policy covers a lot of other things besides my camera gear, and State Farm required me to get fire vault in which I must store my negatives/trannies (which is a good idea, no matter what). So, my coverage may be different coverage from what Toni has, and maybe others. My insurance agent told me that I was better off storing my camera gear in my car, as my theft deductible there is $500! ;)
Thanks in advance to those who respond...
Tim!
Posted by Toni Lankerd on March 11, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Tim,
Your coverage is different than mine in that I only have my gear covered...not my slides/negs, etc. My coverage is actually less than $100 per year...Ken B. said his was $160 for roughly $12,000 worth of equipment.
I think a lot depends on who you have your policy with. When I still lived in my house, I had insurance with AAA and had no complaints with their coverage, or cost, but there was a deductible. When I moved into an apartment and needed renter's insurance, they (AAA) were going to triple the cost for the camera gear alone. I said thanks, but no thanks and switched providers. Yes, my agent knows I'm a pro, but my gear amounts to less than $10K...maybe that's why my cost is lower?
It wouldn't be a bad idea to check around with different companies, then compare their prices and whether or not there is a deductible.
Posted by Bruce Palla on March 11, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Tim,
My State Farm agent told me the same thing; keep it in my truck and it's covered. The reasoning for this was to avoid the home-owner extra rider($300/year and a $1500 deductable) and to "maintain" my amateur status. I shoot freelance and if I make more than $1000 a year off of photography, it becomes a business. This would than adversely affect my vehicle rates,and coverage for things we worry about like theft! Hope that helps, Bruce
Posted by Ken Bachofer on March 11, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Wow, what a range of stories.
When I started getting more equipment I contacted my agent (Let me say it probably helped that I had been with the same agent and insurance company for over 30 years.) The rules imply that anyone seeking remuneration is a pro and needs a commercial policy. My agent called the underwriter and negotiated a "semi-pro" status rider on my homeowners because most of my photography is for my pleasure. I donate prints and cards for environmental group fundraisers, use my photographs for volunteer nature photography instruction, and give them to local municipalities for websites. I do occasionally have prints in small exhibits and will sell a print if requested but I am not currently a commercial cash flow enterprise.
My rate did just go up so I can say that coverage for $11,000 in equipment costs $242/yr. This coverage is no deductable, replacement cost for any type of damage or loss. Anyone in a similar situation should discuss it with their agent.
I am only 22, so I have my insurance for my gear riding on my parent's home owner's policy (Non-Pro). I have no deductible and I have $18,000 worth insured (I only insure things over $1,000 cuz its not worth the increase in the premium if I had to claim anything under that amount).
This past October, I dropped my 5D into a river and it was totaled, I claimed it and my parents rate has not climbed a penny. I pay about $300 a year to insure all of my equipment and my policy will insure it no matter where I take it or no matter what happens to it.
Discussion
5 repliesFrankly, I was surprised to read that Toni was pretty well covered through her home owner's insurance (correct?) for $160.
Then, someone else wrote that if you're a pro, you shouldn't/can't be camping onto your homeowner's policy, which makes sense to me.
As for me, I'm a pro, and I have a State Farm business policy that costs me $225/yr and has a $1000 deductible. The policy covers a lot of other things besides my camera gear, and State Farm required me to get fire vault in which I must store my negatives/trannies (which is a good idea, no matter what). So, my coverage may be different coverage from what Toni has, and maybe others. My insurance agent told me that I was better off storing my camera gear in my car, as my theft deductible there is $500! ;)
Thanks in advance to those who respond...
Tim!
Your coverage is different than mine in that I only have my gear covered...not my slides/negs, etc. My coverage is actually less than $100 per year...Ken B. said his was $160 for roughly $12,000 worth of equipment.
I think a lot depends on who you have your policy with. When I still lived in my house, I had insurance with AAA and had no complaints with their coverage, or cost, but there was a deductible. When I moved into an apartment and needed renter's insurance, they (AAA) were going to triple the cost for the camera gear alone. I said thanks, but no thanks and switched providers. Yes, my agent knows I'm a pro, but my gear amounts to less than $10K...maybe that's why my cost is lower?
It wouldn't be a bad idea to check around with different companies, then compare their prices and whether or not there is a deductible.
My State Farm agent told me the same thing; keep it in my truck and it's covered. The reasoning for this was to avoid the home-owner extra rider($300/year and a $1500 deductable) and to "maintain" my amateur status. I shoot freelance and if I make more than $1000 a year off of photography, it becomes a business. This would than adversely affect my vehicle rates,and coverage for things we worry about like theft! Hope that helps, Bruce
When I started getting more equipment I contacted my agent (Let me say it probably helped that I had been with the same agent and insurance company for over 30 years.) The rules imply that anyone seeking remuneration is a pro and needs a commercial policy. My agent called the underwriter and negotiated a "semi-pro" status rider on my homeowners because most of my photography is for my pleasure. I donate prints and cards for environmental group fundraisers, use my photographs for volunteer nature photography instruction, and give them to local municipalities for websites. I do occasionally have prints in small exhibits and will sell a print if requested but I am not currently a commercial cash flow enterprise.
My rate did just go up so I can say that coverage for $11,000 in equipment costs $242/yr. This coverage is no deductable, replacement cost for any type of damage or loss. Anyone in a similar situation should discuss it with their agent.
This past October, I dropped my 5D into a river and it was totaled, I claimed it and my parents rate has not climbed a penny. I pay about $300 a year to insure all of my equipment and my policy will insure it no matter where I take it or no matter what happens to it.
It looks like I should do some more investigating with my agent, as there may be more options available to me than I knew...
Tim!