Chubb Insurance under MY name. Is she insured?

[echelon6]

Hi All, this is my first post in many months having returned from a long 3 month trip. I''m now engaged and we''re living happily ever after. But that''s a different post.

I just came to the realization that under my Chubb policy wording (standaline ring insurance), the insured includes myself, family members, and spouse (legal or defacto) which currently LIVES with you. She does not live with me (if you can even call her my spouse, de facto or not) and the insurance is under My name.

The ring is now always on her finger, so is it insured?

TIA

 

[choro72]

I''ve read somewhere that until she LIVES with you, the ring will not be insured...

 

[echelon6]

Thanks. Any further confirmation?

 

[ImpatientOne]

I don''t have Chubb, but when we got engaged, I called my fiance''s insuance company and asked them the generic question. They told me that even though we did not live together, the ring was still covered. They just had to have a note in the file as to where the ring would be (my address).

I would just call and ask them!

 

[denverappraiser]

Echelon,

It’s a slightly complicated question and you should call up your underwriting department and ask. In many cases, you can simply add her as a ‘named insured’ party to the list. There may or may not be a fee associated with this. I suspect not unless she lives in a different state or country.

I was actually an expert witness in a case like this and part of the case revolved around what sorts of things you are permitted to do with YOUR ring. Council argued that since it’s a standard practice among buyers of engagement rings to present and allow them to be worn by a woman who is not their spouse and who doesn’t live with them, it’s reasonable that the ordinary risks associated with this practice should be covered under an ‘all risk’ type of policy.

Opposing council took the position that the ring was presented as a gift to the bride-to-be and that it was no longer his ring, it was now HER ring. Obviously this would make the whole insurance policy null and void since she is not a client of the company unless she were to buy her own policy.

I’m not going to give the outcome because, like all legal matters, there were quite a few other variables involved and it would be misleading to suggest that this answers the question. I bring this up only as an example of what the question is. The real answer is to ask the underwriter.

It’s also worth noting that every insurance policy I’ve ever read includes language that you must inform the company of important changes that affect the risk. Giving the ring to be worn continuously by someone else clearly qualifies and failure to disclose this to them, even though it’s the usual thing that guys do with engagement rings could be interpreted as withholding relevant facts. Merely asking them the question can serve as giving them notice that you’ve done this and are not withholding any information from them.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[elle_chris]

The application for my Jewelers Mutual policy specifically asked, "Insured information" and "co-applicant/ information on the person wearing the jewelery" both are supposed to be covered under the policy.

but def. call and make sure she's covered.

 

[surfgirl]

We have Chubb and both our names are on the policy and have been since we got the policy when we purchased the ring.

 

[WinkHPD]

I was going to answer but Neil did it so well that I can not possibly add anything to what he said...

Wink