• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Replacement cost for jewelries due to theft.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

utsug

New member
Recently my house was burglarized and lost a lot of jewelries. I have a HO-290 Personal Property Replacement Cost endorsement on my policy. What I understand is the insurance will give me ACV first then have the item replaced and give them the receipt for reimbursement. Is this true?
There are almost 40 jewelries (watch, earrings, necklace, ring, etc) that were taken so do we need to find the replacement for each? I hope somebody can help me understand it better.
Thank you.
 


adjusterjack

Senior Member
Recently my house was burglarized and lost a lot of jewelries. I have a HO-290 Personal Property Replacement Cost endorsement on my policy. What I understand is the insurance will give me ACV first then have the item replaced and give them the receipt for reimbursement. Is this true?
Yes, it's true. With two caveats:

A -
1. PROPERTY NOT ELIGIBLE
Property listed below is not eligible for replacement cost settlement. Any loss will be settled at actual cash value at the time of loss but not more than the amount required to repair or replace.
a. antiques, fine arts, paintings and similar articles of rarity or antiquity which cannot be replaced.


B -The coverage is subject to any special limits stated in the policy.

http://www.etokio.com/Forms/HO-290 (Ed. 1-87) CA.pdf

If you have the HO-3 Homeowners policy there is a limit of

$1,500 for loss by theft of jewelry, watches, furs, precious and semiprecious stones.
Homeowners policies may include increased limits on proprietary forms or may offer increased limits on a separate form attached to the policy.

Check yours carefully.
 

utsug

New member
Yes, it's true. With two caveats:

B -The coverage is subject to any special limits stated in the policy.

Homeowners policies may include increased limits on proprietary forms or may offer increased limits on a separate form attached to the policy.

Check yours carefully.
Where can I find this "special limits in the policy"?
I have HO-3 and HO-290 on my policy. If I understand it correctly, since HO-3 limit for jewelry is $1,500, HO-290 will change that and should cover the replacement cost of my jewelries. Unless there is this "special limits" on my policy.
I'll read my policy again and look for these limits, if any.

Thanks.
 

adjusterjack

Senior Member
Where can I find this "special limits in the policy"?
I have HO-3
The HO-3 is a booklet of approximately 24 pages. The number of pages may differ slightly based on the edition date.

On my edition Coverage C - Personal Property starts on Page 3 and starts the Special Limits of Liability which continue on Page 4. In my edition Paragraph "e" is the limitation on jewelry.

If I understand it correctly, since HO-3 limit for jewelry is $1,500, HO-290 will change that and should cover the replacement cost of my jewelries. Unless there is this "special limits" on my policy.
The HO-290 is "subject to" the Special Limits of Liability on the policy. While you would still have Replacement Cost Coverage, the limit of your claim would be $1500.

I'll read my policy again
Also look for the increased limits form in case you happen to have it attached to your policy. It should look something like this:

https://omp.mutualofenumclaw.com/site/features/Forms/HO65 Current.pdf
 

utsug

New member
The HO-3 is a booklet of approximately 24 pages. The number of pages may differ slightly based on the edition date.

The HO-290 is "subject to" the Special Limits of Liability on the policy. While you would still have Replacement Cost Coverage, the limit of your claim would be $1500.
I understand now. So it would be still be $1,500 limit for jewelries.
But why they would offer that HO-290, if they will say that it is subect to special limits and pretty much it goes back to what HO-3 policy limit which is $1500.
I hope I'm wrong but i guess insurance company always win.
 

not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
I understand now. So it would be still be $1,500 limit for jewelries.
But why they would offer that HO-290, if they will say that it is subect to special limits and pretty much it goes back to what HO-3 policy limit which is $1500.
I hope I'm wrong but i guess insurance company always win.
It's not that the insurance company always wins, it's that the insurance company is only going to cover what you paid to cover.

If you had more than $1500 worth of jewelry, and wanted it covered, you should have gotten additional insurance coverage.
 

adjusterjack

Senior Member
I understand now. So it would be still be $1,500 limit for jewelries.
Yes.

But why they would offer that HO-290, if they will say that it is subect to special limits and pretty much it goes back to what HO-3 policy limit which is $1500.
Because the Replacement Cost coverage applies to everything you own subject to the Special Limits. If they stole all your TVs, computers, appliances, etc the $1500 limit would not apply. If your belongings were damaged by fire or other covered causes, the $1500 limit would not apply unless a limit applied to particular property regardless of cause. In fact, if your jewelry was damaged by fire, the $1500 limit would not apply.

To add to this, does the deductible applies to this?
The deductible applies to the total of the loss and then the limit is paid. Example:

$10,000 loss -$500 deductible = $9500.

Special Limit $1500.

$1500 paid.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top