shape
carat
color
clarity

Insurance..why I may not take a policy out

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

goodgal

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Messages
46
I have had a previous diamond ring insured for the last 25 years. No loss and over the years had I saved what I paid for insurance I could have bought another ring! I was talking to my local jeweler (before I found great online sites)and he told me of a client who had purchased several pieces of nice diamond jewelery for his wife and for the last 10 years realized he had paid $20,000 for peace of mind. Just like me , his wife had no loss. I think it is worth thinking about it that way. I am fairly careful and I know that others may be more haphazard , play extreme sports, maybe live in high crime areas that should buy it but for those like me that have a good track record of keeping up with things, maybe consider how much you are saving (in the event you pay for years like I did) :saint:
 
You have to do what you feel comfortable with, both in the short-term and the long-term, so weigh the pros and cons, decide, and don't look back.
 
Many people do not insure their diamonds. It makes no sense to do it if you can afford to replace the diamond on your own.

I pay about $100 per annum for my insurance. In 20 years, that would not replace my ring ;))
 
I don't insure.

If my diamonds go away at least I had some wonderful years with them and someone else can now enjoy them. :appl:
They certainly are NOT necessities, just luxuries I don't need to replace.
I'm very careful, use a safe deposit box in a bank, but I know that's a guarantee there will ever be a loss.

I also do not buy extended warranties and do not insure my car for theft.
No bank can force me to since I buy a cheap car and pay cash.
I like to say I pay cash because I can't afford car payments (rather what they add up to).

A lifetime of being an insurance tightwad has paid for LOTS of nice stuff.
Sure I could have had a loss, but I didn't.

Oh and BTW, I DO have peace of mind anyway.
Worrying is all in your head. :lol:
I think I'm just at peace with the fact that sometimes in life sh!t happens.

That said, if you like insurance, buy it.
 
I'll agree with Dreamer. I pay about $200 a year to insure a $20,000 ring (which is worth more at the moment). Ten years would be $2000. Twenty might be $5000 and the ring might then be worth $30,000+. So to me, it is worth insuring because if I accidentally hit my diamond on the door tomorrow and it cracked, it would really be sad to have to spend $25,000 to replace it. But if the amount your diamond would cost to replace is not a big deal to you, then basically you self-insure. Nothing wrong with that if you have plenty of spare cash! But accidents do happen and we see posts on that here often enough to make me want insurance! Not to mention that my mother's diamond shattered, so I know it happens. I only insure my ering and diamond studs. I don't insure things under about $4-5000. Everyone has their own comfort level as to the amount of financial risk they are willing to take.
 
ain't no way i can afford the insurance... ::)
 
where did my post go?? thought i had submitted it??

Anyways, what i was trying to say was i had not considered insurance until i dropped one of my full carat earrings into the bathroom sink. i wouldn't have every single piece covered but i would definitely make sure the high value pieces are.
 
Mine is on my homeowners. I only insured my e-ring, earrings (1.75 tct), and my Mikimoto pearls....the rest including my wedding bands I left off...so I'm a mixed bag....
 
I agree with DS and Dreamer. I think I pay $75-100 a year (I'm not sure right now as I've been deleting things and adding things recently). My insured jewelry includes my engagement ring, wedding band, my diamond earrings, my two diamond necklaces, my emerald stacking band, and a new OEC ring, plus three high carat gold bangles and a high carat gold rings.

I was also robbed 3 years ago and was just blessed that my diamond pieces were overlooked (yes, overlooked they were there the thieves just didn't see them). Having suffered the loss of all my other jewelry, none of which was insured, I can tell you that my peace of mind is VERY VERY valuable and worth MORE than $100 a year.
 
Insurance is always a gamble - you're betting there will be a loss and the insurance company is betting there won't be. Simply depends on what level of risk you are comfortable with. I don't consider theft and loosing jewelry the big risk for myself but rather the simple, freaky accidents - earring down the drain, the right whack on my ering that chips or splinters it - to be the real culprits for me. I have most of my stuff insured and do at times say wow! about the premium. At this point in my life, I prefer to pay for the protection but probably need to reassess what truly needs to be covered and what I could either replace or live without if it came to it.
 
If mine weren't insured I would only be able to replace the diamond band MAYBE and the plain band. I would rather "overpay" for coverage and peace of mind, than be on the hook trying to replace it.
 
Insurance, on average, is a losing bet. That’s just the nature of the industry and it’s the reason that the insurance companies can afford to buy all of those big buildings and such. The trick is that qualifier of ‘average’. This is no consolation for someone who has a loss and it doesn’t offset the costs for those who don’t. If you could just predict in advance which of these groups you’ll be in it would be easy. As a rule, it’s a mistake to insure against problems that you can afford to deal with without it. This applies to jewelry, high deductibles on cars, healthcare and most other forms of insurance. On the other hand, if insurance buys you peace of mind or if lack of insurance changes your usage (you leave it locked up in the bank because you are afraid to wear it), insurance is a bargain.
 
I have a good amount of jewelry but we only insure my ER because if that got lost/stolen we could not afford to replace it and that is one piece of jewelry I want to always wear. However, we cannot afford to insure all my jewelry and if some of those pieces were lost/stolen I would just have to live without replacing them but the thing is I would not miss them as much as my ER. Hence the reason for insuring my ER. It is pretty expensive to insure it where I live unfortunately (I think we pay just about 1K/year) and it is actually under insured right now but I have been procrastinating about getting it reappraised as I don't want to pay more per year than we are paying right now.
 
denverappraiser|1321282024|3061348 said:
Insurance, on average, is a losing bet. That’s just the nature of the industry and it’s the reason that the insurance companies can afford to buy all of those big buildings and such. The trick is that qualifier of ‘average’. This is no consolation for someone who has a loss and it doesn’t offset the costs for those who don’t. If you could just predict in advance which of these groups you’ll be in it would be easy. As a rule, it’s a mistake to insure against problems that you can afford to deal with without it. This applies to jewelry, high deductibles on cars, healthcare and most other forms of insurance. On the other hand, if insurance buys you peace of mind or if lack of insurance changes your usage (you leave it locked up in the bank because you are afraid to wear it), insurance is a bargain.


That'd be me.

Could we replace it? Sure, if we scrimp on other things.
Would we? Absolutely not.
And so I'd be very, very careful to ensure I never do anything to jeapordise it - including wearing it.
 
I'm going back and forth on whether I'm over-insured right now - at present it's my e-ring, my earrings, my pendant, my bracelet, and two eternity bands. All of them were added in on the logic that,

a) I wear them regularly, and want to feel comfortable wearing them regularly, even when, say, I'm traveling abroad
b) I found them bargain-hunting in ways I would not be able to replicate, so I might as well "buy" myself peace of mind about being able to pay retail should there be a need to replace them with the difference (at, for example, $60 per year on a 10K ring that I paid 2K for ... I'm no math genius, but I figure I've got a while to go)

and

c) at present, I'm going into a period of great absent-mindedness as I embark on having kids. I got away without insuring my stuff for the first 30 years of my life with no major losses: methinks for the next decade or so, I'm playing it safe!

Will I maybe feel a twinge a decade down the line when I realize the money I've sunken into "protecting" my existing pieces could have gotten them a buddy? Sure. Would that compare to the blow of losing any one of them? Nope. Individual trade-off, I guess ....
 
I do not have insurance specifically for jewelry or musical instruments because, according to our agent, that is covered under home owners and the insurance co's are aware of the inflated appraisal values, have connections with local and international jewellers and can replace whatever you have lost or stolen at a fraction of the appraised cost. Our agent just said to have plenty of photos, and details of your stones, and they could replace. As a result of that conversation, I've never gone for an extra rider on my policy.
 
I'm with others. I have only my ering insured and that's it because there's no way in Hell I could afford to replace it at current value (and it's insured for current value). I love having the peace of mind I get by having it, and I love that I wear my ering all of the time, instead of being too scared to wear it anywhere.

The rest of my stuff isn't all that expensive so I don't insure it because I'm sure I could replace it if need be.
 
Enerchi|1321287099|3061390 said:
I do not have insurance specifically for jewelry or musical instruments because, according to our agent, that is covered under home owners and the insurance co's are aware of the inflated appraisal values, have connections with local and international jewellers and can replace whatever you have lost or stolen at a fraction of the appraised cost. Our agent just said to have plenty of photos, and details of your stones, and they could replace. As a result of that conversation, I've never gone for an extra rider on my policy.
It is not necessary to submit unreasonable appraisals to get insurance. As you point out, it's not even desirable. This has to do with your appraiser, not your insurer and it's one of the reasons to use professional appraisal services rather than just going with the 'free' documents that come along with the packing materials.
 
The typical replacement type US insurance policy costs about 1% of the declared value per yer. This gets modified by your zip code, your claims history, your deductible and a few other variables but I've never seen one below half of that and it's unusual to see one more than double. At the end of the day, what controls it is the actual verbage of the contract you sign and the rules and prices vary from state to state and even city to city. This is what the agent is for and don't be shy about asking them questions.

What you CAN control is the declared value. It's common for jewelers to offer 'free' documents proclaiming a value thats 2, 3 or even 10 times the transaction price and use this as evidence that you got a bargain. Maybe you did, but anyone who wants to can write a document titled an appraisal and they can put whatever value conclusions on it they wish. Do not assume it's correct just because the sales person told you so and it's not a second opinion if it comes from teh same source as the first. If you haven't vetted your appraiser and just bind a policy based on what came from the seller, you may be paying many times more for your insurance than is necessary. Insurance companies actually hire some pretty savvy shoppers and they really do have a pretty good grasp on what things cost. If they are agreeing to replace lost items with another of like kind and quality in the case of a covered loss, it's entirely fair to expect them to do that, but you can also expect them to do that for the lowest cost to their stockholders that they can arrange. The fact that some 'appraiser' said it's worth a fortune doesn't change this any more than the fact that you voluntarily chose to pay higher premiums to get a higher limit than was necessary.
 
Enerchi|1321287099|3061390 said:
I do not have insurance specifically for jewelry or musical instruments because, according to our agent, that is covered under home owners and the insurance co's are aware of the inflated appraisal values, have connections with local and international jewellers and can replace whatever you have lost or stolen at a fraction of the appraised cost. Our agent just said to have plenty of photos, and details of your stones, and they could replace. As a result of that conversation, I've never gone for an extra rider on my policy.

You'd better check your policy because you need to see in writing what is covered. Most homeowners insurance has a limit on jewelry coverage unless a rider is added. I think our previous policy covered up to around $2500 if the item was lost, stolen, or destroyed in a fire, etc. But it would not have covered it from damage if, for example, I hit my ring on something and the stone shattered or chipped. Always put a separate rider on more valuable items that you would want to replace and but not be willing to pay for a second time.

I just looked and our current policy covers up to $1500 for jewelry.
 
diamondseeker2006|1321292609|3061458 said:
Enerchi|1321287099|3061390 said:
I do not have insurance specifically for jewelry or musical instruments because, according to our agent, that is covered under home owners and the insurance co's are aware of the inflated appraisal values, have connections with local and international jewellers and can replace whatever you have lost or stolen at a fraction of the appraised cost. Our agent just said to have plenty of photos, and details of your stones, and they could replace. As a result of that conversation, I've never gone for an extra rider on my policy.

You'd better check your policy because you need to see in writing what is covered. Most homeowners insurance has a limit on jewelry coverage unless a rider is added. I think our previous policy covered up to around $2500 if the item was lost, stolen, or destroyed in a fire, etc. But it would not have covered it from damage if, for example, I hit my ring on something and the stone shattered or chipped. Always put a separate rider on more valuable items that you would want to replace and but not be willing to pay for a second time.

I just looked and our current policy covers up to $1500 for jewelry.


I did not realise most homeowner policy limits were so low! DH thinks ours is $3000...

Enerchi I also do not have my violin insured, and there's no way I could replace that either (the bow is an antique we had restored, for one thing). The distinction for me is that I just can't envision a potentially hazardous scenario in which I'll ever have it out of its case - I don't walk around the house with it, I don't accidentally fall asleep with it, there's no chance of it getting knocked off a counter or into a drain, and no chance of it falling off or of someone walking off with it without my noticing... it could get stolen, but the thief would have to A) recognize the case, B) recognize the contents are monetarily valuable, and C) have something to cart it off in - can't exactly stick it in one's pocket and walk down the street! And I think A and B are the bigger deterrents anyway - everyone knows sparkly = expensive, few would recognize one violin (or other instrument) or brand from another.


ETA: I just realized that probably sounds kinda preachy. I don't mean it to be - just trying to explain what is in my mind a clear distinction, and why one merits what the other does not :))
 
Yikes - i'm going to get on that little research project right away! I'm glad for your comments and suggestions - thank you! ok - off to the file cabinet to see what we are covered for and to find a local appraiser for "the good stuff"!

Now I'm panicked that 10 minutes from now, our house will be broken in to by theives then besieged by pests/locusts/fire/brimstone :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks everyone!
 
My e-ring is insured not because I'm concerned about theft, but I'm so afraid of losing or damaging it! I've heard horror stories about people losing their rings in the ocean, or taking off a glove and the ring coming off with it, only to lose the ring in the snow (my aunt).... :errrr:

My insurance with JM is $200-something per year. That's only about $1k over 5 years, well worth the peace of mind for me!
 
I only insure my engagement ring and my 5 stone wedding band on a separate homeowners rider, I pay around $110 a year, I cannot afford to replace them so it is peace of mind for me. I have alot more jewelry that is not insured other then thru what it on my regular homeowners insurance, which is normally up to $1000 or $1500 (forget which), however I do have a rider for increased limits, I have coverage for up to $2,500 per item and $5,000 total and the increased limits do not require an appraisal. It has taken me many years to obtain my very small jewelry collection, so I want to make sure that if something does happen that I could afford to replace them..insurance is the only way for me to go.
 
Enerchi|1321319901|3061781 said:
Yikes - i'm going to get on that little research project right away! I'm glad for your comments and suggestions - thank you! ok - off to the file cabinet to see what we are covered for and to find a local appraiser for "the good stuff"!

Now I'm panicked that 10 minutes from now, our house will be broken in to by theives then besieged by pests/locusts/fire/brimstone :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks everyone!

:lol: Didn't mean to cause you any stress!! I don't cover things I probably wouldn't replace, but those I would want to replace and wouldn't want to shell out thousands of dollars to do so, I put on there! I think I worry more about accidentally hitting my hand against the car door and chipping the diamond more than I do those other things! Hopefully there won't be any plagues of locusts! :bigsmile:
 
missy|1321282346|3061351 said:
I have a good amount of jewelry but we only insure my ER because if that got lost/stolen we could not afford to replace it and that is one piece of jewelry I want to always wear. However, we cannot afford to insure all my jewelry and if some of those pieces were lost/stolen I would just have to live without replacing them but the thing is I would not miss them as much as my ER. Hence the reason for insuring my ER. It is pretty expensive to insure it where I live unfortunately (I think we pay just about 1K/year) and it is actually under insured right now but I have been procrastinating about getting it reappraised as I don't want to pay more per year than we are paying right now.

This is exactly what I think and do. Mine isn't too expensive to insure anymore (it definitely was when I lived in Philadelphia), but it's underinsured out of laziness. My wedding band is not insured.

For a while I didn't insure my ring because I calculated the cost over time and realized it was a losing bet unless I actually needed a replacement. PS eventually convinced me to insure because I have a princess set with small double-prongs rather than V-prongs, and it may only be a matter of time before a corner chips.
 
I made the mistake last year of adding up all the insurance I pay every year and it really made me mad. I could take a nice vacation or put it into my house. I'm single right now, so there's really nothing to insure, but if I do ever get married again, I will probably get something $2000 or less so I don't feel compelled to give another insurance company any more $$$.
 
We have my engagement ring and wedding band insured - all the other jewelry I care about greatly that I own is either something I made, something my grandmother made, or a family heirloom (I guess things my grandmother made fall into that category, too), that could never be replaced adequately by an insurance policy. The engagement ring is the only meaningful piece of jewelry I own that I feel could be adequately replaced, and thus it is insured (it is also certainly the most expensive, though I believe many of my grandmother's necklaces would have significant value as well, as she had baller skillz). We could afford to replace it if we had to, but that sort of unexpected expense would certainly put a crimp in our budget the way a regularly-scheduled insurance payment does not. And that, in the end, is why we made sure to insure it.

Although I do think we should probably get it independently appraised and re-insured for that value after reading this thread... my fiance insured it the day he got it just using the papers the store gave us (which definitely had an inflated value) because we were going on vacation the next day and that's when he was going to propose so he needed to get it done fast. I think we could be paying less for the insurance, while still insuring it for a proper replacement value. But I don't know how to broach that subject with my fiance... he really likes the idea that he got me a ring that's worth what the current insurance papers say it is worth. He wanted to spend much more on my ring than I would let him, and I think he likes the idea that we got a value close to what he wanted for a price close to what I wanted. I guess ultimately maybe that feeling is worth the extra money we pay in insurance?
 
I don't insure everything... I only insure what I cannot afford to replace. If I lost my main stone I would have to wait a long time to replace it. But if I lost my earrings or my other rings... I wouldn't be happy but...
 
ain't no way i'm paying $270 per $10k worth of coverage... :knockout:
 
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