Equipment Insurance

E&L........

IF you have a house alarm then your insurance is void unless that house alarm is NACOSS approved AND annually inspected by a NACOSS installer.

The above applies EVEN IF YOU DO NOT ACTUALLY NEED AN ALARM :shrug:

Yes I was told that they would only cover me IF I removed my NACOSS alarm because I installed it!
 
E and L wont cover you for car cover if the car has an engine. :) Or any other reason to be honest.


Kev.
 
I went with Aaduki.

£25.90 per month for 10 months including the instalment charge for

£11000 cover with up to £6000 out of the house at any time +
£2100 for a laptop not included in the above figures.....

I think it was about £200 per year for £10K without the computer and annually.
 
mattyh said:
See... Stupid Stupid Stupid :bonk:

Their car policy only covers kit in the boot if you can't get to the boot through the back seats.

According to Aaduki, there are two cars that this applies to, one of which is a Rolls Royce :D
Click to expand...

Rolls Royce probably not covered either. It has central locking.
A nice old clasic car like a Jag would be covered though. Its a stupid set up. :cuckoo:
 
Have you checked your house insurance????

I just did that today and got told that all of my kit is covered as on my policy I can take anything out the house worth up to 5K

I asked about individual items and she told me that even if I drop my 50d and the 100 400 lens then both would be covered as they would come to approx 2K.

Woohoo saved a small fortune

spike
 
Remember though that IF you take your camera to work at all or charge one person in that year then technically you may find that your house insurance cover for the camera is void. Also most house insurance policies have problems with things being left in a car too. Most exclude that cover if the car is outside your own house esp over night. Most policies are different to each other so you need to have a good look.
 
I'm with Winsover Howden and their PhotoShield brand linked closely with the MPA. I was very pleased as they've just added my D3s to my policy for no extra charge :eek: (OK I only have 6 weeks left on my policy but still good service, I'm quite sure others would have charged me £30+ for those 6 weeks)

TBH though, unless you are pro and need PL, PI and EL insurance along side your kit insurance Photoguard are hard to beat (no excess, just a minimum claim of £100), although you need to learn from Gary's mistake and don't leave your kit unattended. I had a good experience with them on a claim :thumbs:

As you've read above avoid E&L who just have a get out against any possible claim especially their laughable "car cover"
 
I'm covered with Aviva under my house contents. Only items over £2000 in individual value need to be specified separately which is very few. merv
 
AUA Insurance. Friendly. Helpful. Accommodating. No nasty small print. :thumbs:
 
House insurance doesn't generally cover your gear if used professionally so be careful.
 
cowasaki said:
Remember though that IF you take your camera to work at all or charge one person in that year then technically you may find that your house insurance cover for the camera is void.
Click to expand...

Not true in practice. If you have a website advertising your services, and you file a tax return you'll have to prove that you're only not a full time pro (easily done if you have a full time job and your photography doesn't bring in that much) but most insurers apply common sense and wouldn't repudiate a claim if you'd flogged some images once.

Most policies are different to each other so you need to have a good look.
Click to expand...

True, and 'have a good look' you should read the policy book carefully and ensure that you understand fully what is covered and what isn't. If at all confused, you might be better off going through a broker.
 
NorthernNikon said:
Not true in practice. If you have a website advertising your services, and you file a tax return you'll have to prove that you're only not a full time pro (easily done if you have a full time job and your photography doesn't bring in that much) but most insurers apply common sense and wouldn't repudiate a claim if you'd flogged some images once.
Click to expand...

Very true in practice, been there! :'(
 
admirable said:
Very true in practice, been there! :'(
Click to expand...

How much were you earning from photography and just how 'professional' were you?

Having worked in loss adjusting and handled hundreds of claims, many of which involved questions over 'professional and business use', I didn't see one instance where a household insurance* claim was repudiated under that clause when there wasn't significant business use involved.

*Motor insurance is different and is far more pedantic and officious about business use.
 
seems to be coming up a lot lately :)

in all honesty i dont think you can beat just being ultra careful with your equipment.
chances are that most specialist photography insurers will look for some way to get out of paying up (photoguard and E+L)

if you really want insurance then try and get it on your household. ING for example paid up for one TPF user when he left his equipment in a field and it wasnt there when he came back. I wont bore everyone again with my photoguard story

we really should make one of these threads sticky. they seem to come up every other day. my fingers are tired from slagging photoguard off :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top