Re: [Leica] Leica camera & insurance

[Mike Leitheiser <flyh2o@worldnet.att.net>]

ACV can be defined in several ways depending on the jurisdiction.  From the
consumers point of view ACV defined as "market value" is generally the most
desireable interpretation.  Your friendly local insurance company typically
prefers "cost new" or "replacement cost(new for old) LESS depreciation " as the
definition.  In the case of something like a Leica the market value approach
will make you close to whole again.  In the case of something subject to normal
or rapid depreciation, how good would you feel about a depreciated value?  Think
in terms of a 9 month old Epson color printer whose value is subject to a
rapidly changing technology....or the brand new car that you drove off the lot 6
months ago after waiting for 3 weeks for your specs(color, optons etc.) to be
met and delivered.  Not a pretty picture...

"Replacement cost" in the context of a Homeowners policy means literally "new
for old" with no deduction for depreciation.  How about a new black paint M6 2
years down the road?  Wanna bet on whether or not it appreciates or
depreciates?  IMHO replacement cost is critical on anything that you regularly
use or is part of your lifestyle or work.  For the sake of clarification we
should understand that scheduled items on consumer insurance products(those on a
"floater" or "rider" are covered on either an ACV basis or "valued" vasis, not
replacement cost.  Coverage for professional or business property can/will have
different terms)  See the Dan Cardish post where he indicates that his
homeowners provides replacement cost for his contents subject to the
deductible.  If he pays $2,500 for a black paint M6 that is worth $4,000 on the
market 2 years later and it is stolen, falls in water burns up or any of the
other covered perils in his contract.  He collects $4,000 less his deductible.
If he "scheduled" it for $2,500 on the "floater" or "rider" on either an ACV or
valued basis he would collect $2,500 max. (the only caveat I would have in Dans
case is that I was under the impression he was a professional and if so, his
homeowner policy has some limitations for loss of "business" property).    If
you don't want to spend part of your life horsing around with insurance people
replacement cost or in the case of scheduled or specifically insured items
"valued" coverage is the only way to go IMHO.  You might also remember that the
guy that sells you the coverage doesn't call the shots on settling the loss,
particularly in the case of "captive" agents or direct writers like St. Farm,
Allstate et al......

For you M6J owners out there....how many of you scheduled them when you got
them?  Have you updated your schedule lately?

BOB KRAMER wrote:

> Mike, can you explain the downside to Actual Cash Value?  I mean, if I lose
> my M3 wouldn't the ACV be what it would cost me to replace it with another
> M3 in like condition?  Do I run a risk of not being able to replace my
> camera assuming my max. scheduled amount is sufficient to cover this cost?
>
> The thing I like about the rider is the part where Mysterious Loss if
> covered, as well as no deductible.  My regular HO's insurance has a $500
> deductible, which is fine for my level of risk around the house.  But I go
> out in the streets with my Leicas all the time, and I have been repeatedly
> warned by the "Leica police" <g> that this is an exceptionally bad idea.
>
> don't know what they expect me to do with these cameras other than go out
> and shoot with them, but apparently there really are gangs of thieves in my
> fair city who are very aware of what a Leica is worth.  As explained to me,
> a typical MO is for perp no. 1 to bump into you from the front as a
> distraction while perp no. 2 cuts your strap and dashes off with the goods
> into a crowd.
>
> I love my Leicas, but if someone shoves a gun in my face and says your Leica
> or your, or your wife's, or your dog's life, I will hand over the camera on
> a silver platter and say yes sir while I do it!  I just want to make sure I
> can get another camera if that ever happens.
>
> Bob Kramer
> Atlanta (one of the highest crime rates in the country), GA
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: Mike Leitheiser <flyh2o@worldnet.att.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica camera & insurance
> >
> > Replacement value?  Read the actual polilcy form.  All too many agents
> > think that scheduling items on a marine form means replacement cost as a
> > pay off.  Not necessarily so...Your pay off may well be only "ACV" or
> > actual cash value and is always subject to a max of the scheduled
> > amount.   A good homeowners policy avaolable in most parts of the
> > country already provides coverage for the perils you indicated subject
> > to the deductible on a replacement cost basis.

- --
Mike Leitheiser
Lake Oswego, Oregon

"When the trout are lost, smash the state."
   Tom McGuane