Rolex Ceramic Daytona 116500LN Insurance Query
Discussion
Hi All,
Looking to get my 2016 Rolex Daytona (Steel/ Ceramic bezel) insured, previously had a policy for the last 12 months priced at £300 via Assetsure. Renewal time has come now and it’s £380 for the next year just wondering if anyone has any recommendations for a decent company that can offer a more competitive rate.
It doesn’t make sense to get it insured on my home policy as that has a limit of 10k, although I purchased the watch for 11,800 Swiss Frans (approx. 9k Sterling) the market value is around 13-15k due to the high demand for the piece.
If it gets stolen I’m not sure the insurance company would be able to replace due to it being such a hard watch to source, alternatively if they offer me the UK cash list price of approx. £9k value so I’d be losing out.
Any recommendations/ asset insures would be much appreciated.
Looking to get my 2016 Rolex Daytona (Steel/ Ceramic bezel) insured, previously had a policy for the last 12 months priced at £300 via Assetsure. Renewal time has come now and it’s £380 for the next year just wondering if anyone has any recommendations for a decent company that can offer a more competitive rate.
It doesn’t make sense to get it insured on my home policy as that has a limit of 10k, although I purchased the watch for 11,800 Swiss Frans (approx. 9k Sterling) the market value is around 13-15k due to the high demand for the piece.
If it gets stolen I’m not sure the insurance company would be able to replace due to it being such a hard watch to source, alternatively if they offer me the UK cash list price of approx. £9k value so I’d be losing out.
Any recommendations/ asset insures would be much appreciated.
Sandman77 is correct - you are wasting your time (and money) hoping an Insurance Company will ever pay you £14-£15k in the event of a total loss/theft of the Daytona.
Insurers will only ever pay to 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event. That means the RRP - the price you paid, and the cost to replace it.
So, if the watch is stolen, for example, you are correct that Insurers may struggle to provide you with another in-demand Daytona, so they will most likely just cut you a cheque for the RRP (minus Policy Excess amount) and walk away, leaving you to source another Daytona yourself.
That will perfectly satisfy their contractual duty under the Policy - it'll allow them to meet a claim with either replacement or cash.
Insurers likely have deals with preferred suppliers for jewellery etc., but even with that it might prove hard to source a new Daytona for you.
The exception to this is an 'Agreed Value' Policy, whereby an Insurer agrees to pay a set amount i.e. £15k in the event of a loss, but it'll be very hard, if not impossible, to source such a Policy - and even then, a canny Insurer would just try and delay a claim payment until they can source a physical Daytona instead of handing over £15k cash.
Also, those stand-alone jewellery Policies are expensive. That's why everyone recommends tucking it into a Household Policy, where the rate will typically be a lower £1% i.e. circa £100 per year. Your £10k Limit is pretty generous - just make sure your Policy includes 'All Risks' cover away from the Home, that the £10k Limit is per single article (not total), and that the Daytona is listed as a Specified Item on your Policy Schedule.
Insurers will only ever pay to 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event. That means the RRP - the price you paid, and the cost to replace it.
So, if the watch is stolen, for example, you are correct that Insurers may struggle to provide you with another in-demand Daytona, so they will most likely just cut you a cheque for the RRP (minus Policy Excess amount) and walk away, leaving you to source another Daytona yourself.
That will perfectly satisfy their contractual duty under the Policy - it'll allow them to meet a claim with either replacement or cash.
Insurers likely have deals with preferred suppliers for jewellery etc., but even with that it might prove hard to source a new Daytona for you.
The exception to this is an 'Agreed Value' Policy, whereby an Insurer agrees to pay a set amount i.e. £15k in the event of a loss, but it'll be very hard, if not impossible, to source such a Policy - and even then, a canny Insurer would just try and delay a claim payment until they can source a physical Daytona instead of handing over £15k cash.
Also, those stand-alone jewellery Policies are expensive. That's why everyone recommends tucking it into a Household Policy, where the rate will typically be a lower £1% i.e. circa £100 per year. Your £10k Limit is pretty generous - just make sure your Policy includes 'All Risks' cover away from the Home, that the £10k Limit is per single article (not total), and that the Daytona is listed as a Specified Item on your Policy Schedule.
Morning Op,
I can't agree with some of the comments in this thread. I have just replaced a stolen Rolex Daytona 116520 that I had sold a client a number of years back at c£7500. The cost of replacement £10000, was met without complaint by the insurance company.
I have regularly confirmed valuations with insurance companies for watches that are worth more than list price. Hiscox are good for high value insurance as are TH.March. I have no affiliation with either.
Hope this is helpful.
I can't agree with some of the comments in this thread. I have just replaced a stolen Rolex Daytona 116520 that I had sold a client a number of years back at c£7500. The cost of replacement £10000, was met without complaint by the insurance company.
I have regularly confirmed valuations with insurance companies for watches that are worth more than list price. Hiscox are good for high value insurance as are TH.March. I have no affiliation with either.
Hope this is helpful.
Dominic H said:
I can't agree with some of the comments in this thread. I have just replaced a stolen Rolex Daytona 116520 that I had sold a client a number of years back at c£7500. The cost of replacement £10000, was met without complaint by the insurance company.
Hi Dom,The advice given prior is 100% correct.
The key difference is that in your example, the old SS Rolex Daytona 116520 is a discontinued model.
As I said before, Insurers aim to Indemnify i.e. 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event, but generally on a 'new for old' valuation.
With the old SS Daytona, they obviously aren't making them any more, so as they cannot buy one new, the best an Insurer can offer is either replacement with a similar quality 2nd hand SS Daytona, or BNIB model (if they can find one), or more likely (as it's much less hassle), just write a cheque to the equivalent value (or get a Dom H to go to the trouble of sourcing one, and pay you). In the case of a discontinued model, the old RRP is a near-useless reference, because no-one can walk into a shop and buy one new. So, the 2nd hand price then becomes the value, which is why the Sum Insured must reflect inflation, rising value, supply/demand etc., and why regular valuations or index-linking of Sums Insured are important.
That is the only reason why a £7,500 SS Rolex Daytona 116520 can attract a claim payout of £10,000.
It'll be the same for a lot of the older models you sell - the valuation must be either the current RRP, factoring in price increases since purchase date (if the particular model is still in production), or the 2nd hand valuation (if discontinued).
In the case of the Ceramic Daytona owned by the OP, it's still available for purchase as new from retailers (it doesn't matter that they are rare as hen's teeth), so Insurers can legitimately offer the RRP in cash, or a replacement new Ceramic Daytona.
That's the difference.
Of course, if Rolex were to effect a price increase again, then the OP would need to ensure his Insurance Sum Insured was also inflated to match the new RRP, lest he be underinsured.
When I was last in my AD, they commented about a customer who lost his new Rolex GMT II BLNR on holiday - he pitched up at the AD with his full RRP claim payout to buy a new one, but they of course couldn't just pull a replacement from their safe, so he has to wait.
The OP might be able to get some junior call-centre worker who doesn't know much better (or care - because how could they even know? And beyond giving the basic advice, they don't need to ensure the exact Sum Insured is precisely correct, that onus is upon the Policyholder) to note a £15k Sum Insured on the Policy, but it's a waste of time - in the event of a loss, Insurers will only pay the RRP, as per the Policy Terms & Conditions.
Trust this helps clarify somewhat.
UnclePat said:
Dominic H said:
I can't agree with some of the comments in this thread. I have just replaced a stolen Rolex Daytona 116520 that I had sold a client a number of years back at c£7500. The cost of replacement £10000, was met without complaint by the insurance company.
Hi Dom,The advice given prior is 100% correct.
The key difference is that in your example, the old SS Rolex Daytona 116520 is a discontinued model.
As I said before, Insurers aim to Indemnify i.e. 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event, but generally on a 'new for old' valuation.
With the old SS Daytona, they obviously aren't making them any more, so as they cannot buy one new, the best an Insurer can offer is either replacement with a similar quality 2nd hand SS Daytona, or BNIB model (if they can find one), or more likely (as it's much less hassle), just write a cheque to the equivalent value (or get a Dom H to go to the trouble of sourcing one, and pay you). In the case of a discontinued model, the old RRP is a near-useless reference, because no-one can walk into a shop and buy one new. So, the 2nd hand price then becomes the value, which is why the Sum Insured must reflect inflation, rising value, supply/demand etc., and why regular valuations or index-linking of Sums Insured are important.
That is the only reason why a £7,500 SS Rolex Daytona 116520 can attract a claim payout of £10,000.
It'll be the same for a lot of the older models you sell - the valuation must be either the current RRP, factoring in price increases since purchase date (if the particular model is still in production), or the 2nd hand valuation (if discontinued).
In the case of the Ceramic Daytona owned by the OP, it's still available for purchase as new from retailers (it doesn't matter that they are rare as hen's teeth), so Insurers can legitimately offer the RRP in cash, or a replacement new Ceramic Daytona.
That's the difference.
Of course, if Rolex were to effect a price increase again, then the OP would need to ensure his Insurance Sum Insured was also inflated to match the new RRP, lest he be underinsured.
When I was last in my AD, they commented about a customer who lost his new Rolex GMT II BLNR on holiday - he pitched up at the AD with his full RRP claim payout to buy a new one, but they of course couldn't just pull a replacement from their safe, so he has to wait.
The OP might be able to get some junior call-centre worker who doesn't know much better (or care - because how could they even know? And beyond giving the basic advice, they don't need to ensure the exact Sum Insured is precisely correct, that onus is upon the Policyholder) to note a £15k Sum Insured on the Policy, but it's a waste of time - in the event of a loss, Insurers will only pay the RRP, as per the Policy Terms & Conditions.
Trust this helps clarify somewhat.
I can only speak from the viewpoint of a dealer and not as an insurance provider.
I have supplied lost/stolen Daytona 116520 prior to Basel 2016 (and the launch of 116500) when they were the current model at the 'Grey market' price which would always have been higher than rrp.
DomUnclePat said:
Hi Dom,
The advice given prior is 100% correct.
The key difference is that in your example, the old SS Rolex Daytona 116520 is a discontinued model.
As I said before, Insurers aim to Indemnify i.e. 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event, but generally on a 'new for old' valuation.
With the old SS Daytona, they obviously aren't making them any more, so as they cannot buy one new, the best an Insurer can offer is either replacement with a similar quality 2nd hand SS Daytona, or BNIB model (if they can find one), or more likely (as it's much less hassle), just write a cheque to the equivalent value (or get a Dom H to go to the trouble of sourcing one, and pay you). In the case of a discontinued model, the old RRP is a near-useless reference, because no-one can walk into a shop and buy one new. So, the 2nd hand price then becomes the value, which is why the Sum Insured must reflect inflation, rising value, supply/demand etc., and why regular valuations or index-linking of Sums Insured are important.
That is the only reason why a £7,500 SS Rolex Daytona 116520 can attract a claim payout of £10,000.
It'll be the same for a lot of the older models you sell - the valuation must be either the current RRP, factoring in price increases since purchase date (if the particular model is still in production), or the 2nd hand valuation (if discontinued).
In the case of the Ceramic Daytona owned by the OP, it's still available for purchase as new from retailers (it doesn't matter that they are rare as hen's teeth), so Insurers can legitimately offer the RRP in cash, or a replacement new Ceramic Daytona.
That's the difference.
Of course, if Rolex were to effect a price increase again, then the OP would need to ensure his Insurance Sum Insured was also inflated to match the new RRP, lest he be underinsured.
When I was last in my AD, they commented about a customer who lost his new Rolex GMT II BLNR on holiday - he pitched up at the AD with his full RRP claim payout to buy a new one, but they of course couldn't just pull a replacement from their safe, so he has to wait.
The OP might be able to get some junior call-centre worker who doesn't know much better (or care - because how could they even know? And beyond giving the basic advice, they don't need to ensure the exact Sum Insured is precisely correct, that onus is upon the Policyholder) to note a £15k Sum Insured on the Policy, but it's a waste of time - in the event of a loss, Insurers will only pay the RRP, as per the Policy Terms & Conditions.
Trust this helps clarify somewhat.
The insurer will pay not necessarily pay the RRP. It will depend on the specific terms of the policy.The advice given prior is 100% correct.
The key difference is that in your example, the old SS Rolex Daytona 116520 is a discontinued model.
As I said before, Insurers aim to Indemnify i.e. 'put you back in the place you were' prior to the loss event, but generally on a 'new for old' valuation.
With the old SS Daytona, they obviously aren't making them any more, so as they cannot buy one new, the best an Insurer can offer is either replacement with a similar quality 2nd hand SS Daytona, or BNIB model (if they can find one), or more likely (as it's much less hassle), just write a cheque to the equivalent value (or get a Dom H to go to the trouble of sourcing one, and pay you). In the case of a discontinued model, the old RRP is a near-useless reference, because no-one can walk into a shop and buy one new. So, the 2nd hand price then becomes the value, which is why the Sum Insured must reflect inflation, rising value, supply/demand etc., and why regular valuations or index-linking of Sums Insured are important.
That is the only reason why a £7,500 SS Rolex Daytona 116520 can attract a claim payout of £10,000.
It'll be the same for a lot of the older models you sell - the valuation must be either the current RRP, factoring in price increases since purchase date (if the particular model is still in production), or the 2nd hand valuation (if discontinued).
In the case of the Ceramic Daytona owned by the OP, it's still available for purchase as new from retailers (it doesn't matter that they are rare as hen's teeth), so Insurers can legitimately offer the RRP in cash, or a replacement new Ceramic Daytona.
That's the difference.
Of course, if Rolex were to effect a price increase again, then the OP would need to ensure his Insurance Sum Insured was also inflated to match the new RRP, lest he be underinsured.
When I was last in my AD, they commented about a customer who lost his new Rolex GMT II BLNR on holiday - he pitched up at the AD with his full RRP claim payout to buy a new one, but they of course couldn't just pull a replacement from their safe, so he has to wait.
The OP might be able to get some junior call-centre worker who doesn't know much better (or care - because how could they even know? And beyond giving the basic advice, they don't need to ensure the exact Sum Insured is precisely correct, that onus is upon the Policyholder) to note a £15k Sum Insured on the Policy, but it's a waste of time - in the event of a loss, Insurers will only pay the RRP, as per the Policy Terms & Conditions.
Trust this helps clarify somewhat.
Prabs91 said:
Renewal time has come now and it’s £380 for the next year.
Seems expensive? I recently changed my house insurance (Tesco Bank Home Insurance) and added both my Omega and the Wife's Rolex onto the policy. IIRC only cost around £40 - £50 for both, insured for new cost to replace (around £13k total).Of course I don't know how they'd be if I had to claim? (hopefully never find out) but it makes your £380 seem on the high side.
Dominic H said:
HI Pat,
I can only speak from the viewpoint of a dealer and not as an insurance provider.
I have supplied lost/stolen Daytona 116520 prior to Basel 2016 (and the launch of 116500) when they were the current model at the 'Grey market' price which would always have been higher than rrp.
Dom
Fair play, Dom, I don't doubt your account for a second, and that's a good result for your client after their loss, which is the main thing. I can only speak from the viewpoint of a dealer and not as an insurance provider.
I have supplied lost/stolen Daytona 116520 prior to Basel 2016 (and the launch of 116500) when they were the current model at the 'Grey market' price which would always have been higher than rrp.
DomHowever, I would question the Insurer's sense in taking that approach - they all have deals with approved repairers/suppliers to get work/items in bulk-buy, which gets them a discount and keeps their own costs down. That's why they will often replace items, or provide vouchers for a particular approved outlet (where it's reasonable to the Policyholder).
From the perspective of their own costs, it seems a bit silly for an Insurer to needlessly fork out for a higher Grey Dealer SS Daytona price if they could have just as easily obtained one through their usual channel at RRP minus their discount.
Hard to know without knowledge of the ins & outs of the individual circumstances. They could have just got a lazy claims handler who waived the invoice through, or maybe the 116520 was too hard to get e.g. at the end of production run.
Insurers aren't always especially sharp or efficient - my own In-Laws have been out of their home for over a year now due to a simple, open & shut fire loss. The entire house could have been rebuilt from scratch in that time, yet it took them 12 months to even appoint a contractor. Why aren't my In-Laws kicking-off about the delay? Because they are very much enjoying being put-up in a way nicer beach-front home in a far swankier area, and the Insurer is haemorrhaging money by paying the rental cost in full. Madness!
If of interest (!) here's an extract from the Association of British Insurers Home Insurance Guidelines:
'Most insurance policies allow the insurer to settle a claim by repairing, replacing or paying for the items that are loss or damaged. Most insurers will choose to repair or replace items using their own network of suppliers. This helps to keep their costs and means lower premiums for customers. However, if you don’t want your insurer to replace an item, for example because it had a sentimental value that can never be replaced, the insurer will normally agree to make a cash payment. However, this payment will be limited to the amount it would cost the insurer to replace the item . Some insurers will settle a claim by giving you vouchers rather than cash so that you can replace the item with one of your own choice.'
sidicks said:
The insurer will pay not necessarily pay the RRP. It will depend on the specific terms of the policy.
I referenced the RRP within my specific example above, in the context of trying to claim for a higher notional Sum Insured on a currently available model. As I have outlined above at (probably too much...
) length, Insurers will incur/pay whatever claims cost is dictated by the individual circumstances - could be less than RRP, could be more - and yes, of course all Policies differ as to the t&c's. Like anything in life, you get what you pay for.
UnclePat said:
sidicks said:
The insurer will pay not necessarily pay the RRP. It will depend on the specific terms of the policy.
I referenced the RRP within my specific example above, in the context of trying to claim for a higher notional Sum Insured on a currently available model. As I have outlined above at (probably too much...
) length, Insurers will incur/pay whatever claims cost is dictated by the individual circumstances - could be less than RRP, could be more - and yes, of course all Policies differ as to the t&c's. Like anything in life, you get what you pay for.Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff