MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Insurance  (Read 3742 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 30, 2012, 05:10 »
0
Dear readers, I have a paid gig with a couple of clients to teach them basic DSLR skills and beyond, which I will be doing in a local public park. All well and good but I'm new to this and wonder if I need some kind of liability insurance? I mean what if one of my clients suffers an injury in the park would I be liable? Or if one of them damages their camera?

Very difficult to track this stuff down online so I would really appreciate any advice/links please. I live in the UK

Cheers.


tab62

« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2012, 09:27 »
0
Do you have an LLC? Also you might want to do a single page contract that basically states that you are not responsible for equipment damage or injuries that might occur in your class- I assume that you are not running a Marine Boot Camp lol! 

« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2012, 11:36 »
0
Do you have an LLC? Also you might want to do a single page contract that basically states that you are not responsible for equipment damage or injuries that might occur in your class- I assume that you are not running a Marine Boot Camp lol! 

Thanks tab62 - I'm working out a contract of work to be carried out that I can adapt to each job, but wasn't sure if putting a line or two in about liabilities would be enough. Thanks to money-grubbing legalistas in the UK, people will litigate if they so much as bend over and split their trousers.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2012, 11:40 »
0
Do you have an LLC? Also you might want to do a single page contract that basically states that you are not responsible for equipment damage or injuries that might occur in your class- I assume that you are not running a Marine Boot Camp lol! 

Thanks tab62 - I'm working out a contract of work to be carried out that I can adapt to each job, but wasn't sure if putting a line or two in about liabilities would be enough. Thanks to money-grubbing legalistas in the UK, people will litigate if they so much as bend over and split their trousers.

Were they double stitched?   ;D ;)

ShadySue

« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2012, 12:02 »
0
@RedDove: if you find insurance at a decent price, could you post back, please?
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford - and would make jobs like the one you mention a lossmaker, unless you were doing it virtually full time. They usually include a lot of things I don't need, but when I recontact them to say, how about if I cut out X, Y and Z they've said it's all or nothing - even when they advertise themselves as 'bespoke' insurers or suchlike.

« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2012, 13:43 »
0
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford

How much is too much ? I use ImagingInsurance which is a UK company. My policy includes 2 million public liability.

I have minimal equipment cover (only about 4000 home + UK + EU & 60 days worldwide). The policy costs appx 200 PA excluding UK insurance tax.

I find them easy to deal with and helpful.

« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2012, 13:51 »
0
A friend uses Package Choice.  http://www.packagechoice.com/  You can also get insurance through the Professional Photographers of America (PPA).

ShadySue

« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2012, 14:04 »
0
A friend uses Package Choice.  http://www.packagechoice.com/  You can also get insurance through the Professional Photographers of America (PPA).

These appear to be US companies.

ShadySue

« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2012, 14:06 »
0
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford

How much is too much ? I use ImagingInsurance which is a UK company. My policy includes 2 million public liability.

I have minimal equipment cover (only about 4000 home + UK + EU & 60 days worldwide). The policy costs appx 200 PA excluding UK insurance tax.

I find them easy to deal with and helpful.

I think that's one of the companies I contacted before, who wouldn't do the liability insurance without the equipment cover, as I'm happy with my equipment insurer. I'll check back.

« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2012, 16:58 »
0
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford

How much is too much ? I use ImagingInsurance which is a UK company. My policy includes 2 million public liability.

I have minimal equipment cover (only about 4000 home + UK + EU & 60 days worldwide). The policy costs appx 200 PA excluding UK insurance tax.

I find them easy to deal with and helpful.

I think that's one of the companies I contacted before, who wouldn't do the liability insurance without the equipment cover, as I'm happy with my equipment insurer. I'll check back.

Liability on its own is obviously going to be relatively much more expensive vs eqipment cover and liability packaged. So I think it would be odd and probably pointess to buy equipment cover and liability separately and would likely cost you much more.

But I am surprised that you cannot get liabity added on to your existing cover for a nominal fee. Actually I am surprised that your existing cover does not automatically include liability. I thought that all policies which are suitable for paid work (ie do not specifically exclude using the cameras for any sort of paid work) include liability as part of the package.

Who are you with currently ?

ShadySue

« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2012, 17:17 »
0
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford

How much is too much ? I use ImagingInsurance which is a UK company. My policy includes 2 million public liability.

I have minimal equipment cover (only about 4000 home + UK + EU & 60 days worldwide). The policy costs appx 200 PA excluding UK insurance tax.

I find them easy to deal with and helpful.

I think that's one of the companies I contacted before, who wouldn't do the liability insurance without the equipment cover, as I'm happy with my equipment insurer. I'll check back.

Liability on its own is obviously going to be relatively much more expensive vs eqipment cover and liability packaged. So I think it would be odd and probably pointess to buy equipment cover and liability separately and would likely cost you much more.

But I am surprised that you cannot get liabity added on to your existing cover for a nominal fee. Actually I am surprised that your existing cover does not automatically include liability. I thought that all policies which are suitable for paid work (ie do not specifically exclude using the cameras for any sort of paid work) include liability as part of the package.

Who are you with currently ?
With my home insurer. They do cover using it for paid work, but don't/can't include liability. It's a package for my camera equipment plus my birding optics and equipment and to my husband's non-photographic equipment. It's in a banded rate, and taking my photo gear out wouldn't take it down to the lower bracket, so I'd still effectively be paying twice.
At the moment, I don't do anything with my camera that I didn't do before I was selling as stock. If, e.g. I happened to step back and break someone's toe, why would my liability be different now than before? If different, how would the unfortunate person know? (Oh I know, litigatious lawyers of the type that text me at regular articles to suggest thousands of pounds they can get me for my non-existent "recent accident"s.)
Does the cover include your liability abroad? E.g. if you were to step on someone's toe while photographing Mt Everest?
(Wonder how much difference it would make if you didn't submit the actual photo you were taking when you stood on someone's toe to an agency - "it was just a tourist shot".)
Is insurance tax-deducatable? I should pop into my accountant's tomorrow to find out, I guess.
Another thing was that there didn't seem to be any difference between the cost for someone who might occasionally have need for it, and someone who is using studio equipment and models all the time. At least, none that I contacted quoted differently, though the risk must be less for me than for many others. Also most of the packages included a lot of stuff that was really for contractual photographers, like covering failure of equipment leading to not meeting a deadline, thus incurring penalties, which just isn't an issue for me.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2012, 19:38 by ShadySue »

« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2012, 18:37 »
0
A friend uses Package Choice.  http://www.packagechoice.com/  You can also get insurance through the Professional Photographers of America (PPA).

These appear to be US companies.


Yes, they're both in the US.  Didn't know where the OP lives, so just thought I'd throw it out there. 

When I Googled "photographer insurance," Package Choice comes up first here, so if the OP does the same, a reputable company wherever he lives will likely come up.  Not many companies deal specifically with photographer's insurance.

« Reply #12 on: May 01, 2012, 01:59 »
0
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford

How much is too much ? I use ImagingInsurance which is a UK company. My policy includes 2 million public liability.

I have minimal equipment cover (only about 4000 home + UK + EU & 60 days worldwide). The policy costs appx 200 PA excluding UK insurance tax.

I find them easy to deal with and helpful.


That seems reasonable and less than I expected. Is it tax deductable?

Cheers for the info.

« Reply #13 on: May 01, 2012, 02:02 »
0
@RedDove: if you find insurance at a decent price, could you post back, please?
I've contacted several insurers who deal with this sort of thing, and the prices are all far above what I could afford - and would make jobs like the one you mention a lossmaker, unless you were doing it virtually full time. They usually include a lot of things I don't need, but when I recontact them to say, how about if I cut out X, Y and Z they've said it's all or nothing - even when they advertise themselves as 'bespoke' insurers or suchlike.

I'll post what I find mate.

« Reply #14 on: May 01, 2012, 02:04 »
0
A friend uses Package Choice.  http://www.packagechoice.com/  You can also get insurance through the Professional Photographers of America (PPA).


I'm in the UK - but there must be something similar I can track down.

Appreciate the input.

« Reply #15 on: May 01, 2012, 05:58 »
0
Is it tax deductable?

It is for me but it may depend how you have your affairs arranged - i.e. whether as a company, as a full-time / part time sole trader or simply declaring royalties as additional income. You would need to ask the tax people or an expert.

If you are simply declaring royalties as additional (i.e. I think essentially passive) income then I think that they might raise their eyebrows at you deducting for insurance which implies ongoing work in progress - i.e. full-time / part time trade. But I may be wrong so ask for advice.

« Reply #16 on: May 01, 2012, 17:33 »
0
@Shadysue: I'm in Australia but I have PLI cover that is underwritten by Lloyds of London, so it might be as simple as approaching a broker in the UK.

I only have that for the shooting events I organise though, where other photographers and models etc are all coming together. I try to get them all to sign an indemnity waiver as well.

If it's just for your own business shooting though, it's possible the contents insurance you have for your equipment already as a liability clause in there - best to check with your provider as the laws on what can/can't be included are quite different by jurisdiction.

ShadySue

« Reply #17 on: May 01, 2012, 17:58 »
0
Oh yes, very different by jurisdiction. Indemnity waivers usually have no status here, other than if people don't know that, they might think that by signing one, they've signed their rights away if they had an accident so they don't claim. In fact, we cannot sign any legal rights away here. However, an injured person would need to prove negligence, not just a simple accident, caused their injury.

I really am only thinking of a simple accident that anyone might have when out and about shooting which might involve a third party, and them or their lawyer somehow getting wind that you take photos for gain sometimes.
It came into focus last month when I thought I had the possiblity of a model, but it looks as if she won't sign an MR when she can't know where/how her image is going to be used (like everyone else I've approached, but this one is on MM and I've photographed her en passant), so the issue is fading again.

I'm looking into a general public liability policy, not particuarly photographer's. Also will check whether my travel insurance public liability clause would cover me in the event of an accidental bump into someone else when I'm abroad, in the event someone would somehow discover I might be shooting stock.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 18:17 by ShadySue »

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #18 on: May 03, 2012, 08:12 »
0
in short: yes, you need insurance.
If you are operating as a business you may have some limited liability so those poor blighters with the split pants will "only" have access to your business and equipment. not your house and other important stuff. You could be super clever and put the equipment and your spouses name and then hire it off him/her, so you own nothing as a business. *sigh* the things we do to protect ourselves from bogans who probably have more cashflow than we do!!

if you aren't operating as a business but as yourself....... yikes!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
3152 Views
Last post March 11, 2008, 18:51
by yingyang0
18 Replies
5500 Views
Last post December 31, 2009, 07:39
by FD
18 Replies
5253 Views
Last post April 09, 2010, 09:27
by bosharpe
7 Replies
2814 Views
Last post February 25, 2011, 11:19
by Caz
2 Replies
1238 Views
Last post July 19, 2012, 12:44
by tab62

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results