Dave Haynie wrote:
>
> On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 06:52:08 -0600, "Ken Norton" <image66@xxxxxxx> jammed all
> night, and by sunrise was overheard remarking:
>
> > The deductable is what eats you up. Unless you have a major loss, you won't
> > do very well. An OM-10 will get replaced with an OM-2000. Let's see, with
> > a $250 deductable how much will the insurance company reimburse you?
>
> Howeever, depending on your insurance company, you may want a specific
> rider for your camera gear. I don't, but I have had this for jewelry and
> computer gear. It wasn't all that expensive, and when I lost my Tag
> Heuer diving watch at the gym (most likely stolen while I was in the
> shower), I got full original value, no deductable. The computer gear is
> treated based on replacement value, not original value (they're not
> stupid to the ways of computer gear pricing), but again, no deductable
> and there's an automatic coverage for some percentage of the total value
> in software. If you have lots of camera gear, it couldn't hurt to
> investigate this -- the basic homeowner's policies are really only
> geared to catostrophic losses, not the "camera stolen at the beach" kind
> of thing.
>
> --
> Dave Haynie | V.P. Technology, Met@box Infonet, AG | http://www.metabox.de
> Be Dev #2024 | NB851 Powered! | Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000, PIOS One
>
> I checked with my insurance company, they have the same as above, but also
> cover stupid mistakes you do to the gear by yourself! John.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|