Other: Insurance Policies
- Thread starter digitalinnovations
- Start date
(emphasis mine)
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAT............. why???
Personally it would be madness for me to not have a website :-o
Why on earth would they have that condition?? So that no one who ever finds you via googling could rent from you?? As you don't have a website. Thus only personal friends (or at least acquaintances) could ever rent from you? As they know of you already, without needing a website. That would be my best guess as to "why".
Agreed, some of us are indeed putting our (business) life into the hands of fate every time we go out on a shoot without insurance!
Just my sound gear is easily in the tens and tens of thousands of dollars worth of original RRP (and I've got an embarrassingly large amount of camera / lighting gear, for someone who specializes now in sound, easily they're worth even more!).
Of course I could replace it a lot cheaper than original RRP was, but that requires literally HUNDREDS of hours stalking eBay auctions! (and other secondhand/deals sites)
Is a scary amount of time I've wasted of my life researching and looking for bargains on gear....
Wonder why insurers are avoiding "people like us".
What specifically makes us extra risky?
Guess you could just exclude drone flying completely from your insurance if you only very very rarely fly your drone (such as myself, and I only have a little phantom ish like drone anyway).
Well we're operating in such a very niche area, that even an insurance specialist might not have that much more knowledge about this specific area that what the collective group knowledge is on this forum.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Okay, so a little context: that was well over a decade ago and probably closer to the early 2000's. I'm gonna step out on a limb and say pre-2005. But the impression I got from the agent was that it was looked at as unnecessary liability. You would basicallly be telling anyone and everyone, "Hey look at all of this expensive stuff I have, come steal it". This was also an insurance company that ended up deciding to not insure me when the underwriter found out I worked in TV and not stills. And again, they had absolutely no problem with the (large)amount of coverage I wanted, it was just the fact that I shot TV.
I'd love to see the risk tables, etc. that show "why" we are such a risky pool to insure vs. just a still photographer. I guess maybe it's a simple as, if someone stole one of their cameras it's a few grand vs if someone steals one of ours it can be many, many tens of thousands. The insurance company that I'm looking at now that specializes in 'us' is pretty much double what my premium was with my other insurance company that for all these years has somehow had their head in the sand and didn't know that I worked in TV. Even though I had a claim with them back in 2006(!).
Last edited:
Jim Feeley
Veteran
Good point, Josh.
I'd think additionally that many still photographers have a lot less total money tied up in gear. Like maybe under $15,000 vs. $50,000+
I'd think additionally that many still photographers have a lot less total money tied up in gear. Like maybe under $15,000 vs. $50,000+
Run&Gun
Veteran
Again, it doesn't seem to be just the dollar amount of equipment. "Hey, I want $XXX,XXX.00 in equipment coverage." Agent, "OK, no problem." "Are you a still photographer?" "No. I shoot TV." Agent, "Our underwriter says No, we can't cover you then."
The funny thing is, my insurance company that I'm having to leave sounds like they still want my business for the liability and errors and omissions policy... (what ?!)
Jim Feeley
Veteran
My thought was that the potential loss just isn't worth it for the broker/agent you're working with. Like, some car insurers won't cover Ferraris (so I'm told by a couple dot.com-lottery-winning tech friends). Or who knows, maybe some careless or unlucky video people just caused enough pain for your contacts to say, "nah...I'd rather insure chainsaw jugglers" or something.
But odd that they're still willing to cover you for E&O and liability... seems like that's the bigger risk with all the trip hazards etc we spread out on location.
Would be interesting to hear what reasoning they give you (if they're willing to give any).
Anyway, like has come up here, I mainly hear about people like us going with Heffernan, Whelan, and Athos...
Good luck Jeremey & R&G let us know what you end up doing (or did you already say and I didn't notice?)
But odd that they're still willing to cover you for E&O and liability... seems like that's the bigger risk with all the trip hazards etc we spread out on location.
Would be interesting to hear what reasoning they give you (if they're willing to give any).
Anyway, like has come up here, I mainly hear about people like us going with Heffernan, Whelan, and Athos...
Good luck Jeremey & R&G let us know what you end up doing (or did you already say and I didn't notice?)
Last edited:
digitalinnovations
Well-known member
Thank you, Jim. I’m not sure if I ever said or not but I ended up going with Athos. They seem to be one of the only “games in town” so hopefully I chose wisely 
I don't think you'll find many insurance brokerages able to offer monthly payment policies, but just wanted to mention Front Row Insurance here as they weren't mentioned yet. They do policies in the USA and Canada, including film/video equipment insurance, photographers insurance, production insurance and more. They don't do monthly payment options either, though. FYI.