[TenTec] Insurance
Grins
Grins" <Grins@interconnect.net
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:37:37 -0500
> Just for a mental picture, I have the Omni6+ the 238 and the 961
> connected to a HyGain TH6DXX and a HyGain 6mtr and a M2 2mtr on top of my
> 75' Rohn.. All of this is very grounded at multiple points, but my big
> concern was the talk about the wire antennae... Have you heard of an
> adjuster kicking it out because of a 50' piece of ladder-line connected to
> a 40mt inverted V dipole before?? If so, can you tell me where I can get a
> copy of the'code' to bring myself up to spec? Oh by the way, this is all
in
> the barn, not in the actual house... Well, the tower and dipole are
> actually outside the barn if you want to get technical about it...
>
> Just curious...
Hi Robert...
I know of no problems culminating from the type of lead in wiring from an
antenna..
however, you did mention something that is important to examine closer.
If you radio gear is NOT in the described dwelling shown on the declaration
page of your homeowner policy, but in fact, in a building that is described
by an attached schedule page... (such as in a farm & ranch policy) you may
not have any theft *AT ALL*
You see, contents that affords the included basic coverages under a
homeowner policy contemplates them being physically located primarily inside
the dwelling.. an "outbuilding" as the term goes, such as a barn, can have
contents covered for sure, but it is normally named perils (fire, lightning,
windstorm, hurricane/hail, vandalism, vehicles, explosion, etc..) but
normally does NOT include THEFT..which includes burglary or robbery of
contents..
If this is the case, then in fact, a policy via the arrl might be in order..
because it is a "inland marine" form, that doesn't limit the total value to
a specific location.. normally there is a 10 percent extension for contents
that are outside of the house... like on vacation.. or in the course of
travel.. but in an appertinate outbuilding does not meet this criterion...
hence, an inland marine form is better for this kind of exposure..
I looked into the ARRL coverage years ago.. and did a program for my club on
it.. and it is a damn good insurance contract.... only thing is, you are
supposed to schedule, list and actually pay premiums on the entire amount of
your ham gear.. and not pick and choose what equipment you want insured...
but, the rate is 1.50 to 1.75 per 100 of value.. so it is not normally very
much money...
Plus when written this way, it carries its own deductible of $50
bucks....and when endorsed under your homeowner policy it would carry the
deductible for that policy.. which is at least $250 to $1,000 per
occurrence... so, a lot of stuff has to get damaged to actually get any
money, if it is a seperate theft of your better equipment...
Food for thought... the marine insurance forms are always broader in
coverage scope than the named peril policies, such as the contents portion
of the homeowner policy...
they basically read: "If it ain't excluded, its covered." Whereas a named
peril policy reads: "If it ain't listed as a covered peril (fire, lightning,
etc) then it is NOT covered..
Hope this helps... the point is, in most instances, there is in fact
duplicate coverage, if you purchase the ARRL policy, as long as the items
described remain in the home.. but, once you take them out of the home, say
mobile or camping.. etc, you are limited as the amount you can claim under
your homeowner policy.
73/Mike
>
>
> At 12:11 PM 10/11/99 , you wrote:
>
> >Howdy everyone....
> >
> >I have been in the insurance business for 21 years as an independent
agent,
> >and thought I might throw in my two cents worth of suggestions here...
> >
> >Company A Vs Company B is a common "error" made, during these type
> >conversations... unfortunately, Company A may have an adjuster that is
> >familiar with lightning claims, has had plenty of experience handling
them,
> >and would "go at it" in such a manner as to resolve it for the insurance
> >claimant in a quick, easy manner.
> >
> >However, it is quite possible that this same Company A might have an
> >adjuster that is assigned to your claim that is NOT so familar with this
> >type of claim and that in itself is going to make it more difficult to
> >resolve. Same Company, but different adjusters.. can make all the
difference
> >in the world.
> >
> >So... what can one do, AHEAD of time, to make "adjusting" (I love how
they
> >use that word) your claim, fair, quick and the least amount of work for
the
> >insurance buyer.
> >
> >Here are some suggestions:
> >
> >1. Take the time to setup files on EACH piece of ham equipment you have.
> >In that file, keep the original invoice (even if you bought it used, and
if
> >it was used, any repair invoices you might have incurred, getting it back
up
> >to snuff.) In this file, keep the specifications, operating manuals,
etc...
> >then if you need to you can provide factual documentation on what you had
> >... and more than the adjuster will be able to understand anyway.
> >
> >2. Take photographs of your equipment as it sets in the shack, the
computer
> >next to it, as well as the tower/beam outside. As a previous list member
> >mentioned, endorsements (or add on coverages) are available for antennas,
> >towers and lead in wiring... but must be added to the "standard"
homeowner
> >policy form. In Texas (where I am from, the rate for antennas and towers
is
> >about 2.00 per 100 dollars of value..)
> >
> >3. Realize that there are two basic methods for "adjusting" a claim.
> >Replacement cost and actual cash value. Replacement cost is somewhat
> >nebulous, because the insurance carrier has several options here....
> >replace with "like kind and quality" or repair what you have, it the cost
to
> >repair is less than the value if paid outright, or give you the money for
> >what it would cost THEM to replace the item, with a similar like kind and
> >quality item. If it is a Television, they can probably buy it for less
than
> >you can, from a wholesaler... cuz they can do it on a global scale.
Actual
> >Cash Value, is subject to even more interpretation and quite frankly
> >negotiations because it is determined by arriving at the Replacement Cost
> >and then deducting from it, depreciation for age, condition and expected
> >remaining useful life.
> >
> >The adjuster has a "book" or table that they look to, in order to
> >approximate the expected life of a given item... Electronics will range
from
> >8 years to possibly 15, depending upon what it is...
> >
> >Normally the most an adjuster will depreciate an item is 50 percent, if
in
> >fact it is still working at the time of the loss...
> >
> >The point here, is you do NOT want your contents written at Actual Cash
> >Value... ever.. Replacment Cost basis is tricky enough.
> >
> >At the time of the loss, you will have to generate the list of
> >stolen/damaged items, with cost new, current values and any receipts you
> >have, to document your figures. The photograph will help you remember
> >exactly what you had... cuz if it was a fire, this will be more difficult
to
> >do, than you think.. We suggest that you actually walk all though your
> >house with a video camera, opening closets, drawers, gun safes, etc.. and
> >recording everything you can see... and then PUT THE TAPE AT A DIFFERENT
> >LOCATION OTHER THAN YOUR HOME.... obviously, the necessary "proof" is not
> >good, if it burns up with the contents..
> >
> >These adjusters need written documentation to justify to their superiors
why
> >they are cutting checks for the amounts they are... the more
documentation
> >you can produce, generally the easier it will go.
> >
> >To date, I have yet to have a carrier raise the issue of code
requirements
> >where antennas are concerned.. cuz frankly, their applications for the
> >policy do not address this issue. It DOES normally address, the type of
> >wiring, ie alumnium or copper, when it was updated, if any and other
general
> >specifics on the construction and maintance of the house.. so, I am not
> >saying it is not possible for a company to try this tact, but if pressed,
> >unless there was missrepresentation on the application on the part of the
> >insured... I think they are toast, and will have to pay...
> >
> >A good agent can make a big difference in these kind of things... cuz, it
is
> >quite frustrating settling a claim of this type... and not having the
> >customer begin to feel like the adjuster thinks they are lying... (which
> >unfortuantely is often the case...) The agent can make the customer
> >understand why the carrier is wanting what they want and how they want
it..
> >
> >They (the insurance companies) DO require the insured to do some legwork,
> >developing this information... so if you can have it up front and keep it
> >current as you acquire equipment, it makes the job easier when you have
to
> >"prove it up" as they say.
> >
> >Hope this helps...
> >
> >73/Mike K5AWI
> >
> >PS. I am retiring at the end of this year from the insurance bizz.... so
> >this is NOT a sales pitch... !! Questions welcome...
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: George T. Baker <w5yr@swbell.net>
> >To: Gary Harmon <gharmon@idworld.net>
> >Cc: <tentec@contesting.com>
> >Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:53 AM
> >Subject: Re: [TenTec] Insurance
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Gary, the National Electrical Code has some very stringent words
> > > concerning wire antennas, how they are constructed, installed,
operated,
> > > etc. The language of the NEC suggests that the content was generated
in
> > > the 1920's or thereabouts. I doubt that one amateur installation of
wire
> > > antennas in 1000 could meet the NEC specs, if that many.
> > >
> > > Since most insurance companies have the built-in loophole of not being
> > > liable for claims when any Code violations are involved, I wonder what
> > > State Farm did in your case if you had any wire antennas erected, etc.
> > >
> > > I also have State Farm for all my car, motorhome, home owners and
> > > liability insurance and would like to know further of your experience
if
> > > you don't mind sharing some of the details.
> > >
> > > I was gratified to read of your satisfaction with the way your claim
was
> > > settled. I have always had good relations with SF and intend to remain
> > > with them. But, are they sticklers for Code violations re wire
antennas
> > > per a 1920's definition of what a wire antenna is and how it is to be
> > > erected?
> > >
> > > Thanks, Gary.
> > >
> > > 72/73, George AMA 98452 R/C since 1964
> > > Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 54th year and it just keeps getting better!
> > > AutoPOWER Systems, Fairview, TX (30 mi NE Dallas) Collin County
> > > QRP-L QRP-ARCI FISTS NORCAL ZOMBIE ARS 10-X 33.2 N 96.6 W EM13RE
> > >
> > >
> > > Gary Harmon wrote:
> > > >
> > > > My personal experience with State Farm has been wonderful. My
> >lightening
> > > > strike occurred several years ago and they paid for everything, no
> > > > questions. Our local HAM store did the estimate for a small charge
> >since I
> > > > wasn't going to give them the fried equipment. The estimated the
TV,
> >VCR
> > > > and all the HAM stuff including the antenna. State Farm accepted
the
> > > > estimate and cut me a check while I was waiting.
> > > >
> > > > If I had a tower I could add it's value to the policy for a small
> >additional
> > > > fee but I don't remember how much. Also, you can add mobile rigs
and
> >mobile
> > > > antennas to your car insurance for almost nothing. I believe the
only
> > > > stipulation is that the radio must be mounted and not just laying on
the
> > > > seat.
> > > >
> > > > BTW, they also have an option that covers other peoples things that
you
> >may
> > > > be using or trying out. I know from personal experience since I
blew up
> >my
> > > > son's friend's Commayuck 64 some years back. They replaced it no
> >questions
> > > > asked.
> > > >
> > > > My reflections about my insurance carried earn me no rewards or
frequent
> > > > flyer miles, I'm just a happy customer.
> > > >
> > > > 73,
> > > > gary
> > >
> > > --
> > > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> > > Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> > > Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > > Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> > > Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
> > >
> >
> >
> >--
> >FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> >Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> >Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> >Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> >Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm