Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

rental/insurance nightmare help.

Adrian Correia said:
my CPU got fried from the whole cable thingy thread that was in the complaint department - cable fucked my Red - sent in a claim on my insurance and there was no issue but it was definitively not an operator or wear and tear issue - it was a freak accident thing so it was covered. I sure didn't want to make a claim, but I also didn't want to pay six grand. Needless to say I tossed all my cables and bought new ones.....watch those cables people!
Click to expand...

Where is this thread? I don't recall reading about this issue, and I'd love to be aware of this as it sounds like it could be very expensive!
 
Johnny Friday said:
.....I might add that it's all friendly until money must exchange hands on these type deals. but this fault lies in your court and you wont make this mistake again.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying about making sure bases are covered and it being the responsibility of the owner of the gear to make sure he is covered...

But just wanted to give Mike a shout out and say this sucks. It's not your fault in general and I'm tired of this kind of "not my responsibility" behavior - especially from "friends"
 
I'd like to hear how this turns out. I'm afraid this sort of thing happens every now and then and its good to know the best options in how to deal with this and their associated success rate.
 
David Callahan said:
Where is this thread? I don't recall reading about this issue, and I'd love to be aware of this as it sounds like it could be very expensive!
Click to expand...

David,

It was in the thread about "Red cable fried my EVF" - Jared closed the thread. Basically it happened to me but it fried my CPU. All my cable connections were fine but something went wrong in the cable - basically I was told replace your cables every year.
 
OK, I am going to take another tack and accept the premise that the friend did have insurance and did file a claim and was rejected.

I'm interested in the actual cause for rejection from the insurance company: "technical failure". Really? How did they determine that? Is it possible that your friend used or failed to use a keyword in the claim description that triggered this? Did he file after 1st hearing from you, after hearing from RED as to the issue? (Just what is the issue anyway?).

REDs and EPICs are out there and being used at all levels of productions. If there is a technical failure that was a result of faulty RED hardware/software - shouldn't RED cover that under warranty? Alternatively, what did RED say the issue was overall? Certainly they can tell you what failed and perhaps why? Also, I cannot imagine that this is the 1st time an insurance company has dealt with a RED-related claim. Find out from RED what the problem was, post it, and see if others have made a claim for the same issue. If so, find out how the claim was resolved? This might be a wider problem than just your isolated case if insurance companies are coming up with excuses for denying RED_related claims for "technical failure".

After doing this homework, consider reapproaching your friend and/or his company about refiling the claim, or finding out what the policy terms are for appealling a prior claim.
 
Seriously, get everything together and organized to file in small claims court. Give him one final warning before you file and tell him that next business day you are filing unless he makes good on his obligations. If he ignore you FILE. If he tries to stall you FILE. If he decides to make good then get him on a payment schedule (assuming he doesn't have the cash) and get it in writing. If he misses a payment FILE.

All this is assuming you can't get your insurance company (or his) to cover it.
 
I'm curious as to exactly what kind of coverage someone should require if they are going to rent out their RED. I hope to buy a Scarlet, and I know film students that will want to rent it. So, is there any information out there on exactly what kind of rental policy I should require people to have and a primer on how to rent out equipment? I could wing it and assume I need to have a rental agreement, ID, credit card, and a copy of the insurance policy (that I would verify by calling the insurance company). Also, what kind of insurance should I have if I'm going to be renting it out to people. I know this is somewhat off the subject, but seems very relevant to this thread. And any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Does anyone actually have insurance that covers technical failure?
I'm pretty sure my insurance (insuremyequipment.com) does not cover that...
 
Daniel Soderberg said:
Does anyone actually have insurance that covers technical failure?
I'm pretty sure my insurance (insuremyequipment.com) does not cover that...
Click to expand...


Exactly, what is technical failure anyways? How did the insurance company determine that it was a technical failure? Tech failure sure sounds like a RED warranty issue, not an insurance company claim. Can you share what the actual damage/failure was?

Was this camera used at Burning Man and, if so, is it possible that is where the failure happened? If so, was it a dust storm or the heat that caused some internal damage? Help us out OP?
 
In Europe cover was available for "mechanical breakdown" mechanical breakdown cover included losses (ie rental and repair) caused by equipment breaking down outside of normal wear and tear.
This was particularly useful for strange failures to circuits in electronic cameras, where the failure can sometimes only be traced through the use of an electron microscope!. The cover was a regular part of accident insurance until a high number of claims began occurring. I claimed for losses (rental camera and business class flight , last seat last flight of the day, for it to be hand delivered in Italy) when the power supplied failed - a day after Sony had just replaced it.

In your case it seems your camera was damaged as part of an incident where a cable was accidently damaged so accident insurance should cover it.


In respect to the general question of insurance for rentals an insurance company will not honor a claim if the paperwork does not comply. For instance a friend A rented a camera from another friend B on the understanding that the kit would be insured by the owners friend B's insurance. The kit was stolen but the insurance company stated that since there was no rental contract the kit was not rented and so not covered as the kit was not insured outside of his premises unless it was in his care or under a contract.
So the paperwork has to be right, this includes checking kit before it goes out and after ti comes back. This stops rorting, including one mate claiming kit on another mates insurance.
Some of the big rental companies demand that their kit should be in perfect order three years after they have acquired it, with renters insurance paying for any minor scratches missing screws ect.
It is a good philosophy to have.

Mike Brennan


Mike Brennan
 
I am getting an emerging membership at a Photo-org which then will allow me to have great insurance up to 100K for about 800 a year. I will be adding a second body in a couple of months so hopefully it's a pretty easy fix, now that it's happened though, tough call for them, RED needs to protect their business model - always have insurance, extra if you need it.
 
Paul, I did a Google search but couldn't find any info on Photo-org memberships or insurance. Can you provide some more info? Thanks.
 
Insurance is a nightmare. Our RED Bricks got taken off a flight from Frankfurt and destroyed. Arrived back in Dubai with an Empty Flight case, (that Id paid $$$ for excess baggage AND cleared with german customs).

Insurance wont pay out because they were confiscated, rather than damaged or stolen.

Viva REDvolts.
 
so now he wants me sign a document that says that I won't sue him, and that he is not responsible for the damages. He will then pay for 1/4th of the damages...

should I do it, and just move on?

Maybe I will have you guys read what he wants me to sign....

thanks for all your support and ideas.

Mike
 
Obviously he's well aware that you have grounds to sue, so hell no, don't sign. Make him pay. I would...

Would be interesting to read what he's saying...
 
DON'T SIGN THAT.

By the sounds of things - given the email trail - you have ample grounds to hold him accountable for your losses. If he didn't think you could, he wouldn't be making that offer. You need to be in the driving seat here, so don't back down. Demand what is rightfully yours - full and complete payment for all damages and losses of earning. Talk to a solicitor/lawyer. It'll cost you a few quid (sorry, dollars!), but the best bet forwards is probably to fire off a legal document formally claiming the money from him and stating an intention to pursue legal recovery. Obviously a lawyer will give you accurate advice, but as a general path that is what I would look to do. If you want less hassle (personally I'd go for the jugular after being treated like that, but it's your call, of course), then this path should at least force him/them to settle for significantly more than 1/4 of the cost, which is a real low-ball offer.

In future:
- You must have a copy of the insurance documentation, as you have learned.
- If you don't know the hirer, RING THE INSURANCE COMPANY to check that the certificate is valid
- You should have a contract stating clearly what your responsibilities are (to make sure the kit is in good rentable state, contains everything hired, etc etc) and what their responsibilities are (to take due care of the kit whilst in their care, to insure it against damage, loss and theft whilst in their custody, to return it at the agreed date in the same state to that which is was rented, fair wear and tear aside, etc) and - perhaps most importantly - what the consequences of loss, damage or theft are (covering the costs of replacement or repair, and covering continuation of hire costs - that is, until the kit is returned to you in fully rentable form, they continue to rent it from you at full rate - regardless of if there was a discount on the original rental. This should be covered by their insurance as well as the replacement and repair costs).

Ultimately, you have learned a painful lesson, as we have a few in the past - the correct thing to do is to make sure that you are insured as a hirer of equipment (in that way your insurance should cover fraud - which is essentially what this is - and then they can go after reclaiming their money), and that you have had lawyers draw up all of your contracts and that your rental procedures adhere to your insurance company's requirements. All this costs a little, but one incident like this makes you all of that money back plus some. And peace of mind is worth real money too, in my books.

Really sorry to hear this has happened, it's a nightmare when people try to screw you over - but as others have said, don't take it lying down. Go after him, make him pay what is due. It'll make you feel better (not to mention have a healthier bank balance!) and it might just make him think twice before he fucks over the next guy....

Good luck and hope it all works out in the end,
Dom.
 
so..... the letter he wants me to sign is in!!!:



This is a letter confirming that "company name" will make a one time voluntary payment of $ 1,200 towards the repair of the "camera" used during the shoot of "shoot".

I confirm that I understand that by signing this letter and accepting this payment I will consider any and every responsibility of "company name" regarding any damage to my camera as resolved.

I understand that this payment of "company name" is in no way an admission of responsibility by "company name", but a voluntary goodwill gesture. I confirm that acceptance of the payment means that I will not make any further claims against "company name" in the present or the future.

I confirm that I am the sole owner of the "camera" and in that capacity able to sign this agreement and certify that I will not take any further action against "company name" neither in a court of law nor by undermining the standing of "company name/ person" with the Media Department of "organization name" with derogatory statements.


....

so ya. weird. right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top