Jewelry Insurance

[ivinsfan]

The $75K ring is insured for $75K minus a $1,000 deductible. But if it were stolen, who knows what would be involved in trying to replace it with another ring of equal value.

We bought her a safe but apparently SIL decided it was too big to fit in her room, so now we are looking at a smaller safe that can be bolted inside a dresser.

You say the ring has sentimental value, so a new one would mean nothing to her.

 

[CSdot]

For those who are saying she made her bed when she insured her $8,000 watch with a replacement insurance policy for only $5,000, please be aware that Rolex raises its prices every year.

So MIL did not play fast and loose with the numbers to commit insurance fraud as some seem to be inferring from the fact as outlined by OP, but likely bought a $5,000 watch, but Rolex has been jacking up the price of the watch over time (a business practice that replacement cost insurers are sure to know as it is literally there business to understand).

My wife bought me a Rolex for $3,000 in 1999 and we had it on our insurance policy for years at that price. After 18 years I saw they were going for $9,000 new.

I cancelled coverage because I realized (1) the $3,000 coverage is 1/3rd what a new one costs; (2) no one is going to steal my old watch when new ones are worth so much; and (3) Insurance was basically a waste of money because it is cheaper to self insure than to pay double the cost of the watch for coverage I am unlikely to use.

 

[ivinsfan]

For those who are saying she made her bed when insured her $8,000 watch for only $5,000, with a replacement insurance policy, please be aware that Rolex raises its prices every year so it is not MIL fast and loose with the numbers to commit insurance fraud, it is Rolex jacking up the price of the watch over time.

My wife bought me a Rolex for $3,000 in 1999 and we had it on our insurance policy for years at that price. After 18 years I saw they were going for $9,000 new.

I cancelled coverage because I realized (1) the $3,000 coverage is 1/3rd what a new one costs; and (2) no one is going to steal my old watch when new ones are worth so much.

Insurance was basically a waste of money.

You do realize that all "fine" jewelry is all inflated to crap from the get go? That actually a reason why the insurance wouldn't cut a check for 75K for that ring either. Maybe these policies are written by the jewelry industry.

 

[CSdot]

You do realize that all "fine" jewelry is all inflated to crap from the get go? That actually a reason why the insurance wouldn't cut a check for 75K for that ring either. Maybe these policies are written by the jewelry industry.

I don’t know about your $75,000 ring, but OP was asking about a $5,000 Rolex she insured that now costs $8,000 to replace.

Here is the OP’s post with a figure she later corrected from $6,500 to reflect the correct $8,000 replacement price:

MIL has a policy for her jewelry with them and her Rolex watch was recently stolen. She is insured for $5,000 with zero deductible. A local jeweler is offering to sell a used replacement for $6,500.

 

[Ready]

I believe the way the policy works is that if the ring is insured for $75K, and it's stolen, she can purchase another ring for up to $75K and get full reimbursement minus the $1,000 deductible.

What the replacement ring is actually worth is a much more complicated issue, but I don't think the insurance company gets involved in confirming its worth before approving the purchase. They simply cut a check to the jeweler for up to $75K upon receipt of an invoice.

Establishing the actual value of a ring like hers is very difficult. There is the full retail price, the price a wholesale jeweler would pay, and the price it might fetch through a private sale. At least with a Rolex watch you can look at the model and serial number and compare it to other watches on the market. But a ring is so unique that you can't compare it by simply looking at model or serial numbers.

 

[ivinsfan]

I don’t know about your $75,000 ring, but OP was asking about a $5,000 Rolex she insured that now costs $8,000 to replace.

Here is the OP’s post with a figure she later corrected from $6,500 to reflect the correct $8,000 replacement price:

It's not my ring...

 

[ivinsfan]

I believe the way the policy works is that if the ring is insured for $75K, and it's stolen, she can purchase another ring for up to $75K and get full reimbursement minus the $1,000 deductible.

What the replacement ring is actually worth is a much more complicated issue, but I don't think the insurance company gets involved in confirming its worth before approving the purchase. They simply cut a check to the jeweler for up to $75K upon receipt of an invoice.

Establishing the actual value of a ring like hers is very difficult. There is the full retail price, the price a wholesale jeweler would pay, and the price it might fetch through a private sale. At least with a Rolex watch you can look at the model and serial number and compare it to other watches on the market. But a ring is so unique that you can't compare it by simply looking at model or serial numbers.

Well that's a sweet gig for the jeweler. Your MIL is still without her sentimental ring, the insurance company is out 70K but the store sells a 70k plus ring for retail. ( just using the ring as an example).

 

[CSdot]

It's not my ring...

Glad to hear. That would be quite a loss.

I read the first few posts, then skimmed the rest, so I honestly missed the whole discussion about a ring that cost more than my first house.

 

[bclover]

Yes, this sounds crazy. $3K a year with a $5K cap and she owns a $75,000 ring (that is in a risky environment)?

There needs to be another solution. You could probably have a Safe Deposit box, and hire a Brinks driver to fetch it for her when she wants for less than $3K a year, and you'd gain more protection.

Would she notice if you subbed a cubic-Z copy? After all, if it is sentimental, then as long as she thinks it is real, her sentiments are fulfilled.

-ERD50

this is what we did. For many folks the true value is sentimental.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

On the $75K ring, have you reviewed the policy to see if there are any requirements for it to maintain the insurance? I don't know of what kind of exclusions there might be, but I could imagine a "safe keeping" provision that could be troublesome if it were stolen from an "unsecured" area.

 

[Ready]

On the $75K ring, have you reviewed the policy to see if there are any requirements for it to maintain the insurance? I don't know of what kind of exclusions there might be, but I could imagine a "safe keeping" provision that could be troublesome if it were stolen from an "unsecured" area.

The requirements are pretty generic:

What Must Be Done in Case of Loss

1. Protect the Covered Property – “You” must take all reasonable steps to protect or recover the “covered property” at and after a loss has occurred to avoid further loss.

2. Notice – In case of a loss, “you” must: a. give “us” or “our” agent prompt notice including a description of the property involved (“we” may request written notice); and b. give notice to the police in the case of a loss from a violation of law.

Here is the entire policy in case anyone is curious:

https://www.jewelersmutual.com/faq/sample-jewelry-insurance-policy

 

[pb4uski]

I wonder if they knew that it was sitting in a drawer in an assisted living facility that they might deny the claim in the grounds that you were negligent... so something like that.

They could learn that it was stored in a drawer in an assisted living facility through the police report.

Perhaps you could tell her that it needs to be stored more securely in order for the insurance to cover it. Does the facility have a safe that she could have it stored in... sort of like you would with valuables if you were staying in a hotel?

 

[Ready]

DH called the Florida Insurance Commission to ask them for advice on how to proceed. They recommended we file a complaint with the Commission and let them handle it. So we are going to give it a try.

We are planning to purchase a small safe to store the remaining jewelry. We just need to figure out what we can secure it to so that a thief can’t just steal the entire safe and walk away with it.

 

[Sunset]

DH called the Florida Insurance Commission to ask them for advice on how to proceed. They recommended we file a complaint with the Commission and let them handle it. So we are going to give it a try.

We are planning to purchase a small safe to store the remaining jewelry. We just need to figure out what we can secure it to so that a thief can’t just steal the entire safe and walk away with it.

I bought a small safe from harbor freight for a relative at a retirement home.
I bolted the safe with large toggle bolts through the drywall.
It was tight in the shelf and was the best option at the time.

It was like this:
https://www.harborfreight.com/037-cu-ft-electronic-digital-safe-62979.html

 

[HarveyS]

Have you looked into renters insurance and getting a rider on that policy? Seems to me from some of the comments that the current policy is over-priced and under whelming vis a vis coverage.
Maybe you could get a jewelry rider on your homeowners insurance?
The best idea for the ring is to spend a few hundred and get a duplicate made in cubic zirconia. Leave that in AL, and take the real thing elsewhere.
Safe is a great idea, if safe is always locked. My DM would have left safe open because that was "easier" for her.
If you leave the ring in the assisted living, don't be surprised when it turns up missing.
I do agree with others that the insurance company is under no obligation to accept your suggestion of cash payout instead of replacement. You don't like it, and I don't like it, but they are doing exactly what they said in the policy. If it were me, I'd go the costco route and not write the insurance commission.

 

[Aerides]

I would be more concerned with the $75k ring - being stored in the same location - after the theft of the watch. The insurers would be "reasonable" to deny a claim if there isn't a significant upgrade to the security. You would be smart to ask them what would be adequate. A small safe (that can be carried) might not be up to the task. And keeping the insurance without the right safeguards might be throwing good money after bad:

Options for MIL, assuming you can get her to see that there's risk in keeping it on her:
Have a copy of the ring made in CZ or something for her to wear - she can have it on everyday that way.
Find an artist to make a lovely painting of the ring, to frame and have on her wall where she can see if all the time. Perhaps put in a side-by-side frame, one of her with her DH, one of the ring. Heck even a really nice photo would do (but i like a painting better)

 

[ivinsfan]

I would be more concerned with the $75k ring - being stored in the same location - after the theft of the watch. The insurers would be "reasonable" to deny a claim if there isn't a significant upgrade to the security. You would be smart to ask them what would be adequate. A small safe (that can be carried) might not be up to the task. And keeping the insurance without the right safeguards might be throwing good money after bad:

Options for MIL, assuming you can get her to see that there's risk in keeping it on her:
Have a copy of the ring made in CZ or something for her to wear - she can have it on everyday that way.
Find an artist to make a lovely painting of the ring, to frame and have on her wall where she can see if all the time. Perhaps put in a side-by-side frame, one of her with her DH, one of the ring. Heck even a really nice photo would do (but i like a painting better)

keep in mind they are filing a claim with the state with this exact insurance company, a non-valid claim IMO.

 

[Aerides]

keep in mind they are filing a claim with the state with this exact insurance company, a non-valid claim IMO.

yeah I'm kinda ignoring the current claim and the $5k watch, as I think the state thing is a non-starter too, and more concerned with what happens when the $75k ring goes missing...

 

[Ready]

I understand that filing a claim with the State of Florida has a low probability of success. But we presented all of the facts to them and the woman we spoke to was very familiar with the policy and the insurance company’s desire to reimburse rather than settle. And even with these facts she encouraged us to file a claim. So at this point I’m doing it more for the curiosity to see how it plays out than anything else.

I’m also prepared for the fact that Jewelers Mutual may cancel the policy after they become aware of our complaint. And if that happens it will make it easier for us to convince MIL to keep the ring at the bank. So that may solve the problem for us if it happens.

 

[CSdot]

I understand that filing a claim with the State of Florida has a low probability of success. But we presented all of the facts to them and the woman we spoke to was very familiar with the policy and the insurance company’s desire to reimburse rather than settle. And even with these facts she encouraged us to file a claim. So at this point I’m doing it more for the curiosity to see how it plays out than anything else.

I’m also prepared for the fact that Jewelers Mutual may cancel the policy after they become aware of our complaint. And if that happens it will make it easier for us to convince MIL to keep the ring at the bank. So that may solve the problem for us if it happens.

Good on you. Even though it is the $5K amount, not the $75K amount, we are discussing with respect to the claim you are making, I agree with you that the principle of the matter justifies your filing the claim with the State of Florida's Insurance Department.

First, it is offensive that the carrier would take your MIL's payments all those years, only to refuse to pay the claim unless she is willing to accept a lesser watch or pony up an extra $3,000 out of her own pocket.

Second, sounds like they acknowledge that they have the option (apparently at their discretion) to either cut a check to MIL for $5,000 or force MIL to accept a replacement watch (which apparently costs $8,000 and MIL has to make up the difference out of pocket), and for some reason (some here have suggested it may be because the Insurance company suspects their customers engage in insurance fraud) the carrier is electing the option that will cause the most pain to its insured customer.

So in summary, I hope you get an acceptable resolution from the State Dept of Insurance.

 

[Sunset]

I am totally blown away by a $75K ring in a drawer. It will be stolen.

I agree, get a copy made and swap them now, before it's stolen.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

I wonder if they knew that it was sitting in a drawer in an assisted living facility that they might deny the claim in the grounds that you were negligent... so something like that.

They could learn that it was stored in a drawer in an assisted living facility through the police report.

Perhaps you could tell her that it needs to be stored more securely in order for the insurance to cover it. Does the facility have a safe that she could have it stored in... sort of like you would with valuables if you were staying in a hotel?

That exclusion isn't on the sample contract the OP posted and negligence isn't even noted at all. So, as I read it (in the sample contract) it would still be covered while in said drawer. -oh yeah...this is NOT legal advice.

 

[Ready]

Yes, there is no requirement to keep it in a safe location. What’s even more perplexing is the entire description on the policy is “ladies ring, $75K”. No description of diamond weight or gold quality or anything. So in theory someone could buy a $1,000 ring, insure it for $75,000, file a claim against it, and then go to a jewelry store and buy a $75K ring with the proceeds.

Of course that is not something MIL would ever do, but it does make me wonder how they protect against that type of fraud.

 

[CardsFan]

Yes, there is no requirement to keep it in a safe location. What’s even more perplexing is the entire description on the policy is “ladies ring, $75K”. No description of diamond weight or gold quality or anything. So in theory someone could buy a $1,000 ring, insure it for $75,000, file a claim against it, and then go to a jewelry store and buy a $75K ring with the proceeds.

Of course that is not something MIL would ever do, but it does make me wonder how they protect against that type of fraud.

Based on what I read here: https://www.jewelersmutual.com/faq , I suspect MIL at some point got an appraisal. The insurer may even have photos, or a detailed description from a jeweler. If I read it correctly, you don't need an appraisal to get insurance, but you need one to file a claim. So, if they DON"T have one, I suggest you get one on file.

And, as others have said, that ring, and any other piece of jewelry owned by MIL has no business being in the AL apartment.

 

[ERD50]

Yes, there is no requirement to keep it in a safe location. ...

What's required and what is prudent are often two different things.

Frankly, I'm amazed that after being upset with the $5,000 replacement limit situation with this company, that you are willing to try to play this so close to the line, with so much more at stake.

I understand that much of this is driven by emotion (sentimental attachment to the ring), and that may lead to some seemingly irrational approaches. But that doesn't mean that everything about the situation needs to be treated irrationally.

I'll just say it, it just isn't rational to keep an expensive item in an assisted living center where things have already been "lost", and "hope" the insurance company covers it.

Maybe you need to step back, take a break, and reassess the situation? I really think you have become blind to some things that a number of us have pointed out.

-ERD50