shape
carat
color
clarity

Chubb''s vs. Geico/Travellers

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

kev-man

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
40
I''m planning on replacing my wife''s engagement ring and wedding band insurance (we currently used SF and I realized that I don''t like the terms).

I did some research on Chubb''s around here and see that many people like it b/c of the cash payout. I called up an independent broker who could sell me a policy through Chubb''s. Their price was quite high, about $1,000/year vs. the $650/year I''m currently paying (total insured is about $50k). I still was thinking that the price increase would possibly be worth it due to getting the cash and being able to work with who I want.

Today I called Geico for a quote (it would be through Travellers) and to find out how they handled a claim. The rep told me that if you submit a claim you have the choice of getting a replacement or getting the cash value. We spoke about this for a while and she said that while it isn''t usually advertised for obvious reasons, you have every right to get the cash value if you want it (assuming total loss). The one caveat is I do need to have my homeowners through them, but this isn''t a big deal as their quote was cheaper than what I''m currently paying so I''ll probably move it there as well. The jewelry quote was, $646/yr for 0 ded and $546/yr for $500 ded.

This is significantly lower than with Chubb''s for what seems to be the same coverage. I was wondering if anyone around here has experience that the Geico/Travellers isn''t all that she made it out to be. Have people received cash value from Travellers for total loss? Any thoughts would be helpful.

Thanks.
 
I think I''m going to scream
29.gif


I''ve spent a few hours trying to find out if the Travelers policy is basically the same as Chubb''s and I can''t seem to get a definite answer nor can I get the wording from the policy. Here is what is on Travelers website:

Loss Settlement

Since items of this nature vary so widely, losses are settled differently, depending on the type of property insured. For jewelry and fine arts, in the case of a total loss to a scheduled, appraised item, you are reimbursed for the agreed value shown on your policy.

For other classes of property on the policy (such as furs, silverware, cameras, and personal computers) the value is not already agreed upon, and the value of your property will be determined at the time of the loss. You will then be reimbursed for either the:
* actual cash value of your property, or
* cost to reasonably repair your property to it''s previous condition, or
* cost to replace your property with a substantially identical item, or
* the applicable amount of insurance.
* whichever of these is less.

You should read your policy for the exact loss settlement provisions.

However I can''t seem to get any of the people I''ve spoke with to get me a copy of the policy or to send me the Loss Settlement wording. I can''t even get them to read it to me or just read it themselves and summarize it to me.
20.gif


Does anybody here have a Travelers policy, and if so could they please either copy or summarize how they handle a claim in the event of a jewelery loss?

Thanks.
 
deejay has a travelers policy and made a claim a while back. they sent her a check. let me see if i can find the thread with the links to the info for you.
i actually looked into the policy myself and was told the same thing. scheduled jewelry on a rider are eligable for a cash out.

here's the link i refered to above.


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/travelers-insurance.49550/

here is the link from traveler's site which says you can get actual cash value:

EtA: link takes you to home page, you have to go to other items, broad coverage etc. it's there on a site though...
 
I have Traveler''s. It is a cash payout. I make sure and ask again every single time I renew the policy.
 
Mrsalvo,

I''m assuming the wording you refer to is the one that I posted above but it only deals with a Total Loss and still the wording in the actual policy would hold more in the court of law than what is on the website.

FireGoddess,

Are you basing what you said on what you have heard from agents/brokers or what you read in your actual policy. The key here is the wording in the Loss Settlement part of your policy. Do you have that handy to take a look at?

I called Travelers earlier and spoke to a representative. She said that all claims are handled differently and that they will usually try to replace jewelery before making a cash payout. She said that there is no wording in the policy that they will pay out cash if the customer wants it. I read word for word the text on the website about how they will pay out the policy amount in the event of a total loss and her response was, "I really can''t help you." She certainly was right about that.

I''m not trying to be a pain but it seems the only way to get to the bottom of this is to get the actual wording from the policy and not based on what other agents have said. It was also mentioned in an earlier thread that sometimes insurance companies will simply pay out smaller claims but seek to do a replacement in larger ones. This is why the wording of the policy is even more important that one or two examples of where they did make a payout (which was proven to be for less than $8k).

Thanks again.
 
I''m at work. I don''t have the policy handy. I have spoken to several different agents about this matter because I stated I was only interested in a policy with cash payout, not replacement. At least 6 different people there have told me that my policy is a cash out policy. I don''t have the papers here, nor have I read them in awhile....
 
It’s the wording in the policy, not the wording on the website that’s going to matter although if there is a clear difference between their actual products and their advertisements they will run into some serious trouble with the insurance commission so my guess is that they're pretty similar. You are definitely NOT being a pain to be concerned about it.

Watch out for the term ‘actual cash value’. This doesn’t mean what most people think it does. In particular, ACV includes depreciation. Different policies will define it differently but the standard interpretation is to take what it will cost them to get a comparable new item in today’s marketplace and then reduce that value by some percentage of the usable life based on an internal chart. If a 5 year old piece of furniture (for example) would cost $1000 to replace new and could be expected to last for 7 years, ACV would be 2/7 of $1000 or $280. I’ve never seen an ACV policy for jewelry but it’s quite common for ordinary household items like furniture, clothing, electronics tools etc. and it leads to a great deal of irritation when people find that their entire wardrobe that burned up in a fire was ‘worth’ close to nothing because it wasn’t brand new.

In the same general vein, ‘agreed value’ generally does mean what you would expect. They are agreeing to pay a predetermined amount of money in the case of a loss and the policy will spell out exactly what sorts of losses will be covered. Chubb offers an agreed value policy. Most insurance companies do not.

I’ve never read a Travelers policy but I would love to hear what you learn from your research. Lots of people are quite reasonably concerned about this as it relates to their own insurance company.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Jewelry Appraisals in Denver
 
Just called again. Getting a copy of the policy sent to me. Because my jewelry item is ''scheduled'' I will receive a cash payout of the agreed value (the definition of which being the amount stated in the appraisal) if there is a total loss. If there is a partial loss (ie stone pops out) and I surrender the rest of the ring to them, I will also receive the total cash payout.

If your item is not ''scheduled'', then you appear to fall into the ''replace like and kind'' route first, before a payout would be given.

The agent actually read my policy to me, which clearly stated the cash out thing. But I''ll also read it when I get the hard copy.
 
I have the Traveler's agreed value coverage. DenverAppraiser talks about it above.

Moderator: if posting this is against any policy, please feel free to remove it with my apologies.
1.gif


trav1.jpg
 
Firegoddess,

That’s interesting. Thanks. It looks like a good policy. Can you show us the next page with referred sections 2c and 2d(1) on it where they talk about how they handle partial losses and salvage?

Do they require periodic inspections or re-appraisals by a qualified professional or is the adjustment in value over time strictly based on that inflation paragraph and the CPI?

What state are you in?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Jewelry Appraisals in Denver
 
Neil, she appears to have only sent me this addendum of 1 page, not the whole policy. I''ll try to get that info for you. I''m in California. I have had the policy for 3 years and have not had to do a re-appraisal yet...
 
In the 3 years since you've been covered, has there been any sort of inflation adjustment applied?

I'm also very curious about Section 2 paragraph 'a.' that was deleted and replaced by this. Is that some sort of a 'standard' settlement procedure that you upgraded from in exchange for an extra premium?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Jewelry Appraisals in Denver
 
No change due to inflation has been applied to date. They also recommend, but do not mandate, a reappraisal every 5 years if the policyholder has concern about it.

Here''s the rest of what you wanted to read:


travcd1.jpg
 
This is what 2a originally says.

I just specified when I bought the policy that I wanted an agreed value policy that paid out cash instead of dealing with replacing like and kind. Don't know if the regular policy (without the agreed value thing) would have cost less or not.

Ugh - sorry it's huge...


trav2a.jpg
 
I just got off the phone with Traveler''s (had to call them about my auto policy anyway) and it looks like I have the same coverage that FG does; cash payout in the value scheduled. Several years ago when I made my claim they did "suggest" that I visit one of "their" jewelers to get my replacement but did not give me any hassle when I said no way/no how and I had a check in my mailbox in a week.

(FG--did you find all this stuff that you''re posting on-line or are you scanning it in from your policy booklet? I can find certain things on-line, like my bill and the scheduled items, but not this info.)
 
2 c) is pretty standard language for replacement type policies. In your case it only seems to apply to partial losses. This is a very common approach and pretty much every insurance company says something similar.
2 d) is a pretty standard way of dealing with loss of a part of a set. With your amendment it only applies is you refuse to give them the salvage so it’s really quite reasonable.
2 a) as revised is very nice.
The original 2 a) seems to be an agreed policy clause that applies to Fine Art only. The ammendment adds jewelry to it. It’s a pretty common way of handling fine art but, as I’m sure you know, it’s a tad unusual to handle jewelry this way.

The Inflation thing is also unusual. I find it very interesting although it’s not really the subject of the current discussion.

So far, this sounds like a policy that deserves serious consideration and recommendation.

Dee*Jay. What state are you in? Do you have any experience with either filing a claim or with the inflation business? Do you remember if you paid extra to get this amendment or if it's the 'standard' policy in your area?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Jewelry Appraisals in Denver
 
Neil, I am glad to know this policy passes muster with you - it''s good to hear it from someone knowledgable like yourself.

DJ - I had to call them and have them email me all the policy documents. It took several tries, as they kept emailing me different things that were not what I asked for.
1.gif
Once I explained in detail, I got the proper information.
 
FireGoddess,

Thank you very much, this is exactly what I was looking for. It seems there are two types of coverage as you said. You have the actual value coverage. Did they ever mention what the other one is called? Was it still referred to you as the Travelers Valuable Items policy?

Nonetheless I can now make sure that the quote I received was for the actual value coverage and also make sure I have that amendment to the policy for Loss Settlement. Thanks again to you and DenverAppraiser for shedding much light on the Travelers insurance program.

I don''t know how to change the topic and fix the typo for Travelers. This certainly will be helpful for future people searching about the topic. Is there a moderator who can fix the spelling?

Thanks again.
36.gif
 
I am glad the info was helpful. It was also nice to verify again that my policy will do what I purchased it to do! And to get valuable insights from Neil as well.

It's been a few years so I have no clue how the original convo went...sorry. But this is a 'scheduled item' on a separate personal articles policy, with the agreed value clause in there. That should get you what you need.

At the top of this page there is a button with a red question mark that says 'msg admin'. If you click that and ask for the spelling on the thread title to be changed, it will be done.
1.gif
 
Date: 10/19/2007 5:32:35 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Dee*Jay. What state are you in? Do you have any experience with either filing a claim or with the inflation business? Do you remember if you paid extra to get this amendment or if it's the 'standard' policy in your area?
Neil, I'm in Illinois. Several years ago I thought I lost my engagement ring. I called Travelers and explained the situation. They offered me the option of going to one of the jewelers on their list but I declined (even PS I was very picky about my diamonds, LOL). No problem--they sent me a check promptly. The check was actually for more than the item was scheduled for (ergo the inflation thing), and I argued for (and received) sales tax too. The claim/payout was for under $10K though in case that makes any sort of difference ($9600ish... $9900ish... can't remember the exact number now, but I will go dig through the file if you're really interested). I did find the ring before the check was cashed and I sent the $ back to them. (I had a harder time getting them the $$$ BACK then I did getting the $$$ in the first place!)

Also (before I knew better) I made two other small claims on the policy. Once where I broke the crystal on my Rolex and once where I lost a diamond out of my eternity band. Both were in the neighborhood of $400-500 payouts with no deductible, and again, one phone call = check in my hand.

I also have my homeowner's, auto and personal umbrella policies with Travelers and I LOVE them.


FG, thanks; I was afraid I was just missing it!
 
Date: 10/19/2007 5:49:37 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
...
The check was actually for more than the item was scheduled for (ergo the inflation thing), and I argued for (and received) sales tax too.

From memory you had your appraisal stating a value sans sales tax, is that correct Dee*Jay? I wonder if they actually calculated the premium assuming a sales tax though (either your local one or the State where you bought the item). It just seems strange that they would pay out more than the premiums purchased...

Same with the inflation thing--I note the policy FG posted above implies that they increase cover and premiums for inflation somewhat invisibly. Maybe the amount paid out was simply the adjusted scheduled value, the amount you were paying premiums on?
 
Date: 10/19/2007 7:04:55 PM
Author: stebbo



Date: 10/19/2007 5:49:37 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
...
The check was actually for more than the item was scheduled for (ergo the inflation thing), and I argued for (and received) sales tax too.

From memory you had your appraisal stating a value sans sales tax, is that correct Dee*Jay? I wonder if they actually calculated the premium assuming a sales tax though (either your local one or the State where you bought the item). It just seems strange that they would pay out more than the premiums purchased...

Same with the inflation thing--I note the policy FG posted above implies that they increase cover and premiums for inflation somewhat invisibly. Maybe the amount paid out was the adjusted scheduled value, the amount you were paying premiums on?

Stebbo, the appraisal on my original e-ring didn't state that the value was being represented without tax, but now that I know about this I make sure all of my appraisals read that way so I can get the sales tax if it were to be an issue becuase it's 9% in Chicago, which is no small chunk of change on some of the larger ticket items. You could be correct though about them calculating the premium assuming tax, although I would be surprised by that because I had to argue like hell to get it.

As for the inflation thing; you're probably right. I can easily see that they would adjust the premium annually to compensate for the additional amount that would have to be paid out taking the inflation factor into account in the event of a claim. It's hard for me to judge that though because since I usually add at least one item to my jewelry schedule each year I can't really compare the premium apples-to-apples from one year to the next.
 
Date: 10/19/2007 7:15:09 PM
Author: Dee*Jay

Stebbo, I just dug out the appraisal to check and it did not state that the value was being represented without tax, but now that I know about this I make sure all of my appraisals read that way so I can get the sales tax if it were to be an issue becuase it''s 9% in Chicago, which is no small chunk of change on some of the larger ticket items. You could be correct though about them calculating the premium assuming tax, although I would be surprised by that because I had to argue like hell to get it.

It does bring up an interesting point though for stones purchased interstate.

Neil, would you typically factor in the use tax liability for a stone purchased out-of-state?
 
Date: 10/19/2007 7:30:25 PM
Author: stebbo

Date: 10/19/2007 7:15:09 PM
Author: Dee*Jay

Stebbo, I just dug out the appraisal to check and it did not state that the value was being represented without tax, but now that I know about this I make sure all of my appraisals read that way so I can get the sales tax if it were to be an issue becuase it''s 9% in Chicago, which is no small chunk of change on some of the larger ticket items. You could be correct though about them calculating the premium assuming tax, although I would be surprised by that because I had to argue like hell to get it.

It does bring up an interesting point though for stones purchased interstate.

Neil, would you typically factor in the use tax liability for a stone purchased out-of-state?

I do want to point out that this stone was originally bought in Massachusetts and when the claim was made I resided in Illinois. But some cities within states can have different tax rates. For instance, Chicago''s tax rate is 9% but in the suburb where my husband works it''s only 6%.
 
I thought I would mention that I received a letter from Chubb in the last week that gave me the one-time option of increasing the stated value of my diamonds insured with them by 10%, 25%, or 50% (inflation protection)!!! I did not over-insure at the outset, so I am considering the 10% increase.
 
Date: 10/19/2007 8:56:42 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I thought I would mention that I received a letter from Chubb in the last week that gave me the one-time option of increasing the stated value of my diamonds insured with them by 10%, 25%, or 50% (inflation protection)!!! I did not over-insure at the outset, so I am considering the 10% increase.

That''s interesting! I wonder if they''ve had a lot of claims lately where they''ve had to pay out more, even to their "own" jewelers, to replace stones than what they were insured for because the values have gone up so much in recent years and people might not have current appraisals.
 
Date: 10/19/2007 9:05:54 PM
Author: Dee*Jay

Date: 10/19/2007 8:56:42 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I thought I would mention that I received a letter from Chubb in the last week that gave me the one-time option of increasing the stated value of my diamonds insured with them by 10%, 25%, or 50% (inflation protection)!!! I did not over-insure at the outset, so I am considering the 10% increase.

That''s interesting! I wonder if they''ve had a lot of claims lately where they''ve had to pay out more, even to their ''own'' jewelers, to replace stones than what they were insured for because the values have gone up so much in recent years and people might not have current appraisals.
I was assuming they wanted a reason to raise my premium.
9.gif
 
Date: 10/19/2007 9:07:17 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 10/19/2007 9:05:54 PM
Author: Dee*Jay


Date: 10/19/2007 8:56:42 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I thought I would mention that I received a letter from Chubb in the last week that gave me the one-time option of increasing the stated value of my diamonds insured with them by 10%, 25%, or 50% (inflation protection)!!! I did not over-insure at the outset, so I am considering the 10% increase.

That''s interesting! I wonder if they''ve had a lot of claims lately where they''ve had to pay out more, even to their ''own'' jewelers, to replace stones than what they were insured for because the values have gone up so much in recent years and people might not have current appraisals.
I was assuming they wanted a reason to raise my premium.
9.gif

LOL DS -- here I am overthinking the situation! I''m sure you''re right.
 
Date: 10/19/2007 7:30:25 PM
Author: stebbo

It does bring up an interesting point though for stones purchased interstate.

Neil, would you typically factor in the use tax liability for a stone purchased out-of-state?

Sales tax is a topic that gets hotly debated amongst appraisers at every convention. Some will include it and some will not. I’m at odds with some very esteemed colleagues on this (some of whom are regulars here so you may get an opposing view).

My position is that an appraisal is describing a theoretical purchase in an actual marketplace. In general, an insurance replacement appraisal is describing the marketplace where the insurance company is reasonably likely to be expected to make the replacement and the value conclusion is intended to provide funding for them to do this. For most US residents this is the local market where the client lives and in most, but not all states, this will be a taxable event even when the purchase is made from an out of state source. Paying the sales tax is the only legal way for them to exact replacement and obviously the insurance policy is intended to replace the lost item legally. Sales tax is a burden on the purchaser and it''s as much a part of the replacement as the labor required to size it to the correct size or fees and shipping costs involved in hiring the lab to grade the stones.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver
 
Date: 10/19/2007 8:56:42 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I thought I would mention that I received a letter from Chubb in the last week that gave me the one-time option of increasing the stated value of my diamonds insured with them by 10%, 25%, or 50% (inflation protection)!!! I did not over-insure at the outset, so I am considering the 10% increase.

You better act quick! One-time only! Reminds me of credit-card limits.

And 50%! Sounds a bit sneaky--I''m sure they wouldn''t pay you out the ''agreed'' value if they discovered you were substantially over-insured. Imagine the fraud...
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top