Insurance Valuations – Are you Covered Adequately?

A couple of years ago, I committed myself to an ancillary aspect of my antiques retail business – offering a valuation service for insurance, family dispersal, (including divorce), superannuation, and assessment of claims for loss.

I have been kept quite busy with this side of the business, to the point where a considerable number of my mornings (before the shop opens at 10.00) are taken up by such work.

It is however, of considerable interest that while I am busy, and my several colleagues also involved in valuations of antiques, are equally busy, we are simply scratching the surface of the total of such work which should be done.

Any reading of a domestic insurance policy will almost certainly show that items of antique or collectable value need to be specified on the policy in order to attract their full replacement value in the case of loss. In most cases, unspecified items will attract only the minimum amount payable – usually $1000. The insurance companies require such “specifiable” items to be valued by an acceptable antiques valuer.

Every week I am confronted by people who have suffered a loss of one sort of another; and who have found their loss compounded by finding, that they had not specified their antiques, and were therefore grossly underinsured.

Fig 1 is a Royal Worcester vase whose replacement value is $2450, Fig 2 is a roll top desk which will cost $3200 to replace. If you have one of these or something similar, it needs to be specified on your policy.

Jewellery is perhaps the area of our business best dealt with in insurance cover. Most reputable antique jewellery dealers supply an insurance valuation with substantial pieces of jewellery sold. These valuations are produced by members of the National Council of Jewellery Valuers, highly qualified gemmologist valuers who work independently.

However, there is a vast amount of jewellery in households which, often inherited, is not listed on insurance policies, and it would not be an exaggeration to say that at least once a week we are faced with someone who has lost a piece or pieces of jewellery for which  they will receive a mere fraction of its true replacement value.

Fig 3 is a 9ct gold bracelet with a replacement value of $2400, and Fig 4 is a 1930’s diamond ring which will cost $3065 to replace.

Family dispersal has two quite different aspects. Where the assets of a household are to be divided up among beneficiaries, we are called in to supply a comparative price across the contents so that an equal distribution can take place. The second aspect, similar in nature, is valuation for divorce. Much of the difficulty, thankfully, has been taken out of this otherwise stressful task, by the Family Court requiring both parties to agree on the one valuer.

We are also called upon to value antiques which have been bought as part of the assets of a superannuation fund. I have not noticed a real increase in this area with the collapse of the stock market, but I suspect people who hold antiques in  their portfolios are pleased with themselves.

 We believe that the service we offer is a worthwhile, and in many ways, an essential one. If you take the time to look around your home, it is very likely you will see a considerable number of items which ought to be specified on your policy. Fig 5, a nice bronze cupid, Fig 6, a coromandel wood jewel box, are just two examples, and virtually any item of antique furniture will be worth more than $1000 in today’s market.

This is not an expensive exercise and may be, indeed, a worthwhile investment.

Graham See
Brisbane Antiques Pty Ltd
Member Australian Art and Antique Dealers Association
Member Queensland Antique Dealers Association

Reg. Member National Council of Jewellery Valuers (Antiques Specialist)