Insurance recommendations

JustJoe

JustJoe

Suspended / Banned
Messages
417
Name
Joseph
Edit My Images
Yes
I know this has been asked before I did a search a lot of what I found was pros looking for a lot of cover and liability and stuff.

Personally I just want basic cover say £400 for my newly acquired D3100.

I can't get it on home insurance at the moment.

So what I need:
- £400 cover
- Only need UK cover
- Theft and accidental damage cover
- Don't want to pay excess

I don't drive so don't need theft from car cover.

Any recomendations would be REALLY apreciated. :)

Thanks.
 
Hi Joe. Just wondering why you can't cover it on your home insurance? Usually all risks for something valued at £400 is easily included?

I imagine any specific camera insurance is going to cost you about £100 a year minimum - is it worth it for a £400 camera body?
 
My contents insurance was around £11 per month with Directline and covered me for up to £2500 goods "away from the home" with a single item limit of £2500 within the home. This also covered me for items if they're stolen from the car provided they are out of sight and the car is secured.

I upped that limit to £5000 and the premium went up to £21 per month which I don't think was too bad.

Worth bearing in mind though that this only covers non-professional usage ;)
 
For that level of cover for the amount you need covering you may be better off with home contents insurance unless of course you don't have any contents cover. I have both mine and the wife's gear insured with Photoguard https://www.jltonline.co.uk/secure/Photohome.asp?product=Photo&promCode= who have a very good reputation and sound as though they handle any claims swiftly and without problems (I've never claimed on my own policy so I'm not 100% sure about this).
They do a cover level to suit an individual and you can choose to pay an excess or not. I've got over £9,000 cover for around £300 a year but I've just set up the wife's policy and that was around £2,500 worth for under £90 a year, but a quick look just now gives £500 of cover for around £30 a year. Well worth the peace of mind.
I had a policy from E&L last year but their excess level is between 7 and 12% depending on circumstances, which would mean between £700 and £1,200 for a total loss for me, whereas it's £250 total with Photoguard.
 
I read an excellent article in BJP that went into an explanation about how to cut costs working as a freelance photographer. One of the first suggestions was to not pay for insurance - the thinking being that you are probably going to take good care of your equipment because it is important to you so the likelihood of it being damaged, going missing, or being stolen is remote. Also, the cost of the insurance may be equivalent to the cost of a new lens a year!
 
Photofocus said:
the cost of the insurance may be equivalent to the cost of a new lens a year!
Click to expand...

Not much consolation though when ALL of your gear gets stolen, a paying customer trips over your bag and sues you or a disgruntled customer claims against you for substandard work...........

Granted, for an amature photography, cover for loss/damage under home insurance is probably adequate but a professional freelance photographer has more to consider ;)
 
Photofocus said:
I read an excellent article in BJP that went into an explanation about how to cut costs working as a freelance photographer. One of the first suggestions was to not pay for insurance - the thinking being that you are probably going to take good care of your equipment because it is important to you so the likelihood of it being damaged, going missing, or being stolen is remote. Also, the cost of the insurance may be equivalent to the cost of a new lens a year!
Click to expand...

What a load of crap (aimed at the article not you personally)

a) - anyones gear can be stolen, damaged etc so the possibility isnt remote at all - and if you've got thousands of pounds worth of gear losing it all with no insurance would put you out of business

b) PL is also a necessiy in this litigation happy age (not to mention that many venues won't let you shoot without it)

c) and buisness costs insurance is likewise essential unless you fanncy winding up seriously out of pocket when an unhappy client complains

d) The cost of insurance isnt "equivalent to the cost of a new lens per year" unless you buy seriously cheap lenses - you can get all of the above for not much over £100pa - and thats a business cost that can come off before tax so in real terms you are only paying 75% of it
 
Last edited:
On the OPs question which wasnt to do with pro insurance - if you really can't add it to home or contents my suggestion would be aaduki or photoguard - don't go with E and L not just because their claims process is a bitch, but also because (in my experience at least) their customer service sucks , and also they may quote a low monthly price but thats distorted by them charging based on lunar months so you pay 13 monthly premiums a year
 
Photofocus said:
I read an excellent article in BJP that went into an explanation about how to cut costs working as a freelance photographer. One of the first suggestions was to not pay for insurance - the thinking being that you are probably going to take good care of your equipment because it is important to you so the likelihood of it being damaged, going missing, or being stolen is remote. Also, the cost of the insurance may be equivalent to the cost of a new lens a year!
Click to expand...

sounds like a very stupid article. surely on that basis nobody needs car insurance as everyone wants to look after their car?

accidents happen, for professional photographers whos livelyhood relies on income from their equipment insurance is a no brainer.

and as pete said, thats even before PLI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top