R
Phoenix,#2Consumer Comment
Fri, April 21, 2006
I realise this advice is late, but collections should be appraised and added on with a scheduled floater to make sure they are covered. Personal property coverage is really intended for common items and not collectables which could have intrinsic value. Floaters also extend coverage from the standard "covered perils". Like if you had a wedding ring worth $10k, without a floater its only covered up to a smaller limit of maybe $1500 (it will be listed in your policy). If you were to get a Jewelry Floater, you would have a seperate deductible and it would also be covered for something like losing it and for the appraised amount. Your main issue on the case is the collectables should have been on a floater. When you rented storage space, that could be considered under the "loss of use" clause. On the hail damage to the car. I really dont know what to offer on that, it sounds like the claims person was really not being very nice about it. There might be a clause in the Colorado Law where you are allowed to get a 3rd party appraiser in on the claim settlement.
R
Phoenix,#3Consumer Comment
Fri, April 21, 2006
I realise this advice is late, but collections should be appraised and added on with a scheduled floater to make sure they are covered. Personal property coverage is really intended for common items and not collectables which could have intrinsic value. Floaters also extend coverage from the standard "covered perils". Like if you had a wedding ring worth $10k, without a floater its only covered up to a smaller limit of maybe $1500 (it will be listed in your policy). If you were to get a Jewelry Floater, you would have a seperate deductible and it would also be covered for something like losing it and for the appraised amount. Your main issue on the case is the collectables should have been on a floater. When you rented storage space, that could be considered under the "loss of use" clause. On the hail damage to the car. I really dont know what to offer on that, it sounds like the claims person was really not being very nice about it. There might be a clause in the Colorado Law where you are allowed to get a 3rd party appraiser in on the claim settlement.
R
Phoenix,#4Consumer Comment
Fri, April 21, 2006
I realise this advice is late, but collections should be appraised and added on with a scheduled floater to make sure they are covered. Personal property coverage is really intended for common items and not collectables which could have intrinsic value. Floaters also extend coverage from the standard "covered perils". Like if you had a wedding ring worth $10k, without a floater its only covered up to a smaller limit of maybe $1500 (it will be listed in your policy). If you were to get a Jewelry Floater, you would have a seperate deductible and it would also be covered for something like losing it and for the appraised amount. Your main issue on the case is the collectables should have been on a floater. When you rented storage space, that could be considered under the "loss of use" clause. On the hail damage to the car. I really dont know what to offer on that, it sounds like the claims person was really not being very nice about it. There might be a clause in the Colorado Law where you are allowed to get a 3rd party appraiser in on the claim settlement.
R
Phoenix,#5Consumer Comment
Fri, April 21, 2006
I realise this advice is late, but collections should be appraised and added on with a scheduled floater to make sure they are covered. Personal property coverage is really intended for common items and not collectables which could have intrinsic value. Floaters also extend coverage from the standard "covered perils". Like if you had a wedding ring worth $10k, without a floater its only covered up to a smaller limit of maybe $1500 (it will be listed in your policy). If you were to get a Jewelry Floater, you would have a seperate deductible and it would also be covered for something like losing it and for the appraised amount. Your main issue on the case is the collectables should have been on a floater. When you rented storage space, that could be considered under the "loss of use" clause. On the hail damage to the car. I really dont know what to offer on that, it sounds like the claims person was really not being very nice about it. There might be a clause in the Colorado Law where you are allowed to get a 3rd party appraiser in on the claim settlement.
Jeanne
Colorado Springs,#6Author of original report
Wed, March 08, 2006
Since I first contacted you in Nov. some other things have come up. After almost 7 months, our claim still isn't settled. After being contacted by the insurance commissioner, Farmer's "appraiser" was required to actually look at the damaged collectibles. Of course we had offered them to him in August but he said he didn't need them. So he "reappraised" them in January but very little changed. We got back another binder full of junk from eBay. I did some more research into the appraiser. I had wondered why, when we asked for copies of his credentials, all we were sent was his resume, which we all know isn't the same thing. But his resume and Farmers both said that he was accredited by the International Society of Appraisers. We called them and found out that he had lost his accreditation last May because he wouldn't do the continuing education that's only required every 5 years!!! But the insurance commissioner said that the insurance company doesn't have to hire an accredited or even competent appraiser, they can hire "whoever they feel comfortable with." Which of course translates to whoever they can pay to do what they say. She did say that it is supposed to be a fair and unbiased appraisal, uninfluenced by either side. Yet, when I got the "documentation" from the appraiser, one page had a sticky note attached that told how much the insurance company wanted to give as the replacement value for the piece. So the appraisal was obviously corrupted by the insurance company. When I talked to this district attorney's office, I was told that the insurance company can do pretty much anything they want because they laws are heavily skewed in their favor. When I said "So, if I try to rip off my insurance company by misrepresenting the loss, that's fraud and I go to jail. But if the insurance company misrepresents the value of my property and costs me thousands of dollars then that's just good business and they go out drinking." She said "yes, until the laws are changed." Can't anybody do anything??? Jeanne