Insurance Options?

[erkme73]

The problem you may have is that SF probably reports all claims to an indexing system. So other carriers will most likely see that you had this policy and had 2 claims.

Probably? No, definitely. It's called ChoicePoint (a LexisNexis product). Any and all claims get reported there, just as delinquencies on your Amex shows up on Experian for Visa to see.

There is no free lunch.

Having a $100 claim may seem trivial, but for a massive insurance company like SF, the sheer overhead cost of processing that claim was probably several time the payout.

$60/yr isn't where SF makes its money. It's when you are in their sights for the PAP that they can market other products (like a loss-leader in retail). Even if you don't use them for anything else, they can still make money after a claim by using your now-blemished record to justify higher premiums.

 

[Former Member]

Having a $100 claim may seem trivial, but for a massive insurance company like SF, the sheer overhead cost of processing that claim was probably several time the payout.

Good time to use refresh.

 

[erkme73]

Sorry but this is simply incorrect and can be show with basic math.

Cost of a personal article floater = $60 for $2100 coverage

The OP had $100 worth of repairs. So right there, the OP was better off with the PAF as he saved $40. Again, simple math.

However, the OP also then filed another claim for total loss. Since the PAF is replacement cost, the OP would have been paid $1000. So the OP paid $60 and was paid $1100. Again, simle math shows that the OP was better off with insurance.

The only way what you mention would be true is if the OP could have had the 1st Mavic repaired and the 2nd Mavic replaced all for less then $60.

This is a very short-sighted way of looking at how insurance works. You do not take into account the very tangible effect on risk rating increases as a result of those claims. Underwriters look at the number and frequency of claims, not just the monetary values of the claims.

A potential customer who has no problem filing a claim on a $100 loss is a statistically more likely to file more claims where others may pay out of pocket to avoid the charge to their policy.

 

[erkme73]

Ah ok thanks, looks like it requires the drone SN before I can buy.

What are the differences between DJI Care Refresh and the personal articles policy with State Farm?

I'm looking at the FAQ and the only difference I'm seeing so far is that DJI CR only covers the drone within your own country, and not international? That would be a negative compared to the SF policy.

Also sounds like you need to recover the drone in order to get any compensation with DJI CR.

But I'll take what I can get.....

The biggest difference (besides cost) is the fact that the refresh is like term insurance. It is wholly separate from any insurance reporting, and filing a claim has zero impact on your risk rating with other insurers. It's like buying an extended warranty for appliances.

 

[tcope]

This is a very short-sighted way of looking at how insurance works. You do not take into account the very tangible effect on risk rating increases as a result of those claims. Underwriters look at the number and frequency of claims, not just the monetary values of the claims.

My reply was in no way related to that.

However, a PAF is far more likely to not be renewed rather then have a rate increase due to a number of claims. It's the carriers way of say, "it was fun... but not fun enough".

 

[erkme73]

My reply was in no way related to that.

What? Here, let me refresh your memory...

Sorry but this is simply incorrect and can be show with basic math.

You're looking at the premium and lack of deductible and confidently proclaiming the math makes sense. I'm saying you're completely ignoring the very real, tangible, and expected costs of filing a claim with a common insurance carrier.

However, a PAF is far more likely to not be renewed rather then have a rate increase due to a number of claims. It's the carriers way of say, "it was fun... but not fun enough".

This patently false. Here, read what a SF agent emailed me regarding the very real risk of premium increases due to PAP claims:

A personal articles policy (PAP) policy is considered a “fire” policy. Under the fire category is home, PAP, and inland marine policies. If there is a claim on any of these policies, it is recorded in Lexus Nexus and does affect your future rating if you intend to get any of those policies started as new business.

With State Farm (I can’t speak for other companies) if you do a PAP claim during a time where you have an existing home policy, it will not affect your rate. As I mentioned before, however, if you start a new home policy, it does have the potential to affect that.
​

This is coming from a SF agent trying to sell this service. While it's quite possible that your rates might not be affected if you file a claim (or two) if you stay with your existing insurer, to deny that the potential isn't significant enough for an agent to warn about it is simply wrong.

 

[tcope]

What? Here, let me refresh your memory...

You're looking at the premium and lack of deductible and confidently proclaiming the math makes sense. I'm saying you're completely ignoring the very real, tangible, and expected costs of filing a claim with a common insurance carrier.

Again, you are not applying the correct context. As I pointed out, here is what I was responding to:

Why insure a $1,000 drone that's worth half that once you fly it? The only reason to insure ANYTHING is if you can't afford to pay to replace it in a total loss. i.e. House, car, life and health

Then you expanded my comment to the fact that filing a claim could have additional costs in the form of higher premiums. That is 100% correct (I've never said otherwise). However, it has _nothing_ to do with the statement that insurance should only be obtained when you can't afford to replace the items yourself.

Again, I'm showing, financially with math, that insurance can benefit a person even if they can afford to replace the item itself (in this case saving the person a thousand dollars) and you appear to say I'm incorrect because rates could be increased. You are 100% correct that a person's rates might be increased but this does not show my initial statement is incorrect.

1. Only reason to get insurance is when you can't afford to replace the item
2. No, you can actually save thousands of dollars even if you can afford to replace
3. You are incorrect as your rates might increase

Yes, rates _might_ increase. Still, has nothing to do with what I was responding to.

 

[Spanishcop]

Not to butt in on your Rants....

But I think this thread is going further than it should. I think the point has been made and the question has been answered.

1) If you feel the need for insurance from State Farm or other your aware that it's out there.
2) You have the option to use AMA membership for damage costs if you cause property damage.
3) Refresh offered by DJI.

If there are other options I'd be interested to hear. I'm unsubscribing from this thread as this thread has become useless now.

The options have been mentioned. To each their own. Choose what you want to use 1, 2 or all of them.

Best regards,
Mike

 

[Foxtrot Uniform]

The first claim was a repair that cost $100ish I think, second claim was a total loss. This was in the space of about 2 years.

I just bought a Mavic with no controller from the DJI store 2 days ago. Still eligible for DJI Refresh?

You made an insurance claim for a $100 repair???? You should have just bent the elbow for the repair. I hope you are not planning on switching insurance carriers for anything in the near future. According to your profile you are under 30yo. I would be willing to bet that those two claims are going to cost you way more than $1100 down the road. Insurance claims should only be used as a last resort.

 

[method007]

As I stated in this thread:

Trackimo vs. Insurance?

Regarding non-commercial use, using insurance to replace a Mavic is likely not the best fiscal decision to make.

 

[tcope]

Not to butt in on your Rants....

But I think this thread is going further than it should. I think the point has been made and the question has been answered.

Rants, okay. However, the information posted by erkme and thunder are very much on-point with the thread. Thunder has refresh and a PAF, for very good reasons. Erkme raises the same good issues, the PAF is a 1st party property policy (fire policy) and a carrier could use a claim under it as a reason for higher rates. Typically this won't be on the same policy, as I usually see the carrier just non-renew those policies.

I wanted to do some more checking on this but....

Once a carrier pays the limits on a policy they have a right to cancel the policy. What was promised (to pay the limits) has been paid. Also, once a carrier pays for something as a total loss, they would have the ability to drop 1st party coverage on that item. You'd typically see this on an auto policy... they would drop comprehensive and collision coverage. This is probably what happened to the OP. This goes directly to why Thunder has refresh and a PAF on the same item. It also goes to what erkme posted in that we need to understand that filing a PAF claim can very well be more than just getting a payout. It's not all roses and sunshine.

What I wanted to see is be able to see what the best way to work our coverage under the PAF and run all of that information together.