Nov 132015
 

insuranceIn this article Auckland Valuer Paul Nilsson questions whether jewellery valuers have kept up with changes to domestic insurance policy wordings as they apply to jewellery.

Most Valuers would agree that when they write an insurance valuation on a piece of jewellery for a consumer their primary objective is to protect the owner.
Here are two scenarios where that objective may not have been met.
Consumer A had an estate diamond brooch professionally valued at $6000 and listed separately on their insurance policy for that amount. A year later they lost it and discovered it would cost $12,000 for the new replacement their policy entitled them to. However the insurance contract meant that the settlement was limited to the specified amount of $6000. Their Valuer had unfortunately only valued the brooch at its second-hand value.
Consumer B inherited their mothers’ engagement ring and had it valued for $2,000 and listed on their policy. When they made a claim 5 years later they discovered their policy only entitled them to a $400 pay out. The Valuer had valued it for replacement with a new one but their policy was for market value (indemnity value) not replacement.
More about these two scenarios later. Continue reading »