Those who DON''T insure their ring, please chime in here...

[denverappraiser]

Gleam,

Internet forums like this one tend to magnify this sort of thing because clients who buy things in the usual ways, like at a jewelry or department store, wear them happily and get on with their lives rarely choose to post while those who for whom things didn't go so well tend to be a bit more noisy.

Jewelers Mutual clients in Denver pay about half the rates of JM clients in NYC with the same item. I presume that their breakage risk is going to be about the same and that this differential has to do with an increased risk of other perils. My guess is it’s about theft but that's just speculation. I suppose it's possible that folks in Fargo are just more careful but, for arguments sake, let's assume that the actuarials have found that breakage risk is fairly constant across the country. In their cheapest markets the rates are about 1% of the declared value. This covers all the risks and they’re still making a profit on the deal. I don’t mention this to alarm folks in New York and LA (these are two of the highest rate places) but to point out that they clearly count the risk of breakage as fairly low. Even if the only risk being covered were breakage, they expect the ‘average’ client to suffer losses of less than 1%/year, probably quite a bit less, and they back up this belief with statistics gleaned from insuring thousands of people over decades of policies. That strikes me as a pretty good basis to evaluate your own risks. If your concern is breakage and you're reasonably careful and at least a little bit lucky, I think you are safe to consider your risk to be fairly low.

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

 

[Gleam]

denverappraiser, many thanks for your thoughtful reply.

 

[Bliss]

Date: 10/25/2009 11:47:01 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Gleam,


Internet forums like this one tend to magnify this sort of thing because clients who buy things in the usual ways, like at a jewelry or department store, wear them happily and get on with their lives rarely choose to post while those who for whom things didn't go so well tend to be a bit more noisy.


Jewelers Mutual clients in Denver pay about half the rates of JM clients in NYC with the same item. I presume that their breakage risk is going to be about the same and that this differential has to do with an increased risk of other perils. My guess is it’s about theft but that's just speculation. I suppose it's possible that folks in Fargo are just more careful but, for arguments sake, let's assume that the actuarials have found that breakage risk is fairly constant across the country. In their cheapest markets the rates are about 1% of the declared value. This covers all the risks and they’re still making a profit on the deal. I don’t mention this to alarm folks in New York and LA (these are two of the highest rate places) but to point out that they clearly count the risk of breakage as fairly low. Even if the only risk being covered were breakage, they expect the ‘average’ client to suffer losses of less than 1%/year, probably quite a bit less, and they back up this belief with statistics gleaned from insuring thousands of people over decades of policies. That strikes me as a pretty good basis to evaluate your own risks. If your concern is breakage and you're reasonably careful and at least a little bit lucky, I think you are safe to consider your risk to be fairly low.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver

This is true! The only time I let my jewelry insurance lapse for a couple months was when I was traveling and it was safe in the bank. The moment I got back, I insured it. Insurance rates in NYC are very high for jewelry. Neil is right. I'm with Chubb for my pieces and I go through the same dilemma when I look at my yearly premium. That's a nice diamond tennis bracelet every year! And I've been with Chubb for a while... But, if it weren't insured... I know I wouldn't wear it and enjoy it as much. I guess I'm paying for peace of mind and that to me, is worth the steep premium. Same for all of my earrings and other articles. They're just too easy to lose.

 

[setell]

Very interesting thread. One of the reasons why I picked a cheaper ring was because I didn’t want to pay extra premiums for insurance. So I got a ring just under the threshold to be covered under my tenant policy without paying extra for it. I’m cheap and this was one way for me to save. Now on the flip side, I can easily replace my ring as it’s way cheaper then you ladies with the 2.5 ct’s as I just have a 0.71ct but I honestly don’t want to pay for it all upfront again. It’s just money I don’t want to spend since I am saving up for many other things like house downpayment, new car etc. so I like having insurance on it.

I am shocked at how costly you guys insurance premium is for the jewellery. Yikes……I wonder if it’s this costly here in Canada! If you have tenant/house insurance you might be covered for partial value up to the max limit per item. If it’s similar to house/tenant insurance in Canada.

 

[outatouch0]

For me the premiums are yearly so I look at my situation THIS YEAR, i.e. I am not making a 40 yr decision.
I just bought the Ering and I am saving for our wedding. If something happened to the ring this year it would have serious ramifications on our financial situation this year. It would have to be replaced this year and would mean something else would have to go/not be purchased.
So gee whiz, can we forgo a wedding dress? hmm not likely

Are we willing to not have a honeymoon.... ummmm OUCH

Once we are married and living at the same address we will look into adding it to our renters policy vs. separate insurance. Consider our situation and decide if insurance makes sense for us for that year.

My point is that the decision for each individual comes down to the situation the individual faces at the time and place they face it. Add to that, what I just learned from this thread, the locality to which the rates vs. risk is calculated. Interesting post - thanks to the OP

 

[boots7]

Winternight, you did not rub me the wrong way at all so no worries. I am from Canada and people don''t sue there like they do in the US so maybe that is why I find it hard to believe anyone would sue me. I guess I should stop having people over

I just can''t see myself paying those kind of premiums. If I lost everything I owned ion my apartment I would say oh well and move on. The chances of that happening is so remote I can''t justify paying it.

But to someone else post, there is no way you can compare a ring to a car. I am worried about being sued in an accident so insurance all the way for a car or house for me.

 

[elle_chris]

That''s the thing, the chances are so low of something happening, it does feel like throwing money away. And you never think it''s going to happen to you, until it does. In 2001 we lost everything in our apartment and we didn''t have insurance at the time. Cost a ton to replace all our things. So after that experience, insurance was the way to go for us.

Boots- When I was comparing a ring to car, i wasn''t talking about liability insurance which is required by law in the states. I was talking about theft/collision. That''s not required if you''re not financing, but most owners of new cars get it anyway.

 

[Dancing Fire]

we don't,cuz my wife hardly ever wear her ring,it would cost something like $220 per $10k of coverage.

 

[diamondringlover]

ok, i just thought i would throw my 2 cents in, i insure my rings, i cant afford to replace them, it took me 20 years to get them

but my sister did not insure her rings and about 3 years ago, she seriously threw them out of a moving car, it was a total accident, she did not do it on purpose, she lost about $10,000 worth of rings, her wedding rings and a one of a kind right hand ring, so i will never be without the insurance, i feel its worth it, you insure most of your costly assests why not your rings

 

[Dancing Fire]

but...where do you draw the line ? do you guys insure your watches too?

 

[elle_chris]

DF- The only insurance I have is my homeowners/renters policy (homeowners was required by my co-op) with Travelers. The valuable articles amendment was a cheap add on. Something like an extra 70 per year.
And the other policy is for my e-ring. I draw the line at items under a certain amount.

 

[Sam82]

Date: 10/25/2009 1:52:38 PM
Author: boots7
Winternight - we obviously have different thoughts about insurance. If I was concerned that a friend in my apartment was going to sue me for something happening in my apartment I think I would probably reconsider who I thought was my friend. If it gives you piece of mind then obviously that is what it is for. I understand insurance on a car and a house but for most other items I have a hard time justifying paying for everything I own twice (which is what you do with insurance premiums)


Also, to your point of living in a secure building makes you more likely to get insurance is an interesting point. I don''t think many people would agree with that point. Also, you have to be making good money to live in my building so my neighbors are not going to be breaking into my apartment. It is not a secure building because it is in a bad area.. maybe that is what you think I mean. I can assure you I enjoy everything I own... especially the money I save on insurance

Do you work for an insurance company??

Do you take more than one purse when you travel??? I would think designer bags would have a high premium do to easy theft

Many buildings and homes get burglarized, not just ones in seedy areas. My apartment was robbed, and I don''t live in the best of areas. I had a family member who was also robbed, who lives in a "nice" area. I have my heirloom ring insured and I will also have my engagement ring insured. I don''t know what the future will hold. As of now, yes I can replace the ring if it were to be stolen. Who knows if I will always be so lucky?

 

[HVVS]

Date: 10/26/2009 6:29:48 PM
Author: elle_chris
That''s the thing, the chances are so low of something happening, it does feel like throwing money away. And you never think it''s going to happen to you, until it does. In 2001 we lost everything in our apartment and we didn''t have insurance at the time. Cost a ton to replace all our things. So after that experience, insurance was the way to go for us.

Exactly. Always have tenant''s insurance, or homeowner''s insurance. Stuff happens and it''s not your fault. Back when I lived in an apartment building, the wiring in another apartment in the building caught fire. I had smoke damage and soot throughout my apartment, and my renters insurance paid for cleaning or replacing all of my possessions that were affected.

 

[Kaleigh]

I only have a few pieces insured. My ering, and a 2 other items. Husband is ok with insuring the ering... But beyond that it's a bit of a fight. He's says you've never lost anything, you are sooo good with your jewelry. True, haven't lost anything yet. But if it's stolen??? That's why I need insurance. So the most valuable pieces are in a safe deposit box, collecting dust.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 10/24/2009 8:09:51 PM
Author: NovemberBride
In addition to thinking about whether you have the cash to replace a ring down the road, I also think about whether it is something you would feel comfortable spending the money on at a later date as priorities tend to change. To illustrate, when DH bought my 2+ carat RB, we were both in secure jobs, had bought our first home and were childless. 4 years later, my job is somewhat less secure due to the economy (I work in financial services), we are expecting our first child in a few weeks, and we''d like to relocate to a more expensive area and move to a larger home in the next couple of years. If I lost or damaged my ring today, could we afford to replace it? Well, yes if it''s just a question of whether we have the cash in the bank, we certainly do. But our priorities have somewhat shifted and I would have a hard time parting with 25k to buy a replacement today, even though technically I could afford it. But when I think of my daughter''s education. new home, etc., I don''t think I could spend the money on such a luxury item at this point. However, I have a Chubb insurance policy, and if my ring were lost or damaged, I would definitely replace it with the policy payout. I guess this is not an issue if you have millions in the bank where you wouldn''t have to decide between a ring and other priorities, but for most there will always be competing priorities, and in my experience, jewelry falls down the priority ladder as you get older and gain more responsibilities. That doesn''t mean I love jewelry any less, in fact that''s why I have insurance, because it ensures that I won''t have to make that decision.

well explained

 

[boots7]

Gleam,

I decided to insure my ring with touchstone insurance. They offer a great rate so I have decided to get a policy and after a month decide whether or not I will keep it. I figure if anything does not happen for the first month then I might feel more comfortable.

I still don''t like the idea of insurance but would like a month to decide whether or not anything happens.

I just picked up my new Leon Mege yesterday and love it.

I will post picks after my vacation.

This site has been awesome in regards to teaching me about diamonds and it opened my eyes to vendors as I used WF and Leon and I would probably have not come across these vendors if it was not for this website. I even got the Leather case from Leon!! My only complaint which did not matter in the end was that he said the ring would take 3-4 weeks and it took 4.5. Obviously it is fine with me but I am glad my vacation is at the end of this week and not last week because I would not have had the ring in time

 

[blondie23]

As someone who recently lost her 1.5ct Cartier engagement ring, I thank the heavens everyday that I have Chubb insurance on ALL my jewelry.

Although Chubb''s premiums might be higher, their customer service and payout policy made it all worth it. Most never think they''d need the insurance, but when it happens to you, you''re so glad you have it!

I know I was. Otherwise, the money in our savings that was meant to be used for something else would be used for a replacement.

 

[Hest88]

My rings aren''t particularly large or pricey. I think if mine were closer to $10K or more I might think about it, but right now I can easily replace either one with savings. As a result, the calculated risk of not having insurance seems okay to me.

 

[ACN]

Ring: $20k+ (2.5ct)
Insured @ $30k+

Insurance added onto Renters/Homeowners with a $1k deductible for ~$300/year (and this is in Chicago). To me, that is completely worth it. It will take about 55+ years to pay more in insurance then the value of the ring at the time of purchase (even after the deductible). The extra clause added on was specific to the ring and the insurance will give us the insured amount to replace the ring; not in cash, but towards a new ring.

Basically, if something were to ever happen to the ring (lost/stolen/ect), I know in the back of my mind that it will be replaced without having to worry about the finacial repercussions. As others have mentioned, you may be able to afford to replace it, but the question becomes is it the right decision. With insurance, you don''t have to make those decisions.