insurance for pieces

[jerry cousins]

would like to know if folks who put pieces in galleries get their own insurance for the pieces. and if you do what kind of coverage do you have?

just had another bad xperience with a gallery - a wall piece fell on a cabinet and for all practical purposes made it unsellable - and pointed out that on the consignment form (that i signed) it was i who was supposed to carry insurance and the gallery is held harmless.

it's not unlikely i will move out of that gallery -but would like to learn more.

thanks for your help

jerry

[JohnT Fitzgerald]

I'd look into that more if I were you. Just because it's written down does not mean that it's "legal", or all-encompassing. I doubt that you signing a form in any way releases them from responsibility due to negligence. If the wall piece was hung incorrectly......

[David DeCristoforo]

Insurance law is very tricky. Contract law is a whole different issue. You have at least some protection against an unfair contract even if you signed it. But with insurance, it gets really complicated. The one thing you can bet on is that any insurance company, be it yours or your gallery's will try and avoid paying the claim. So that means lawyers which cost money win or lose. But, your "consignment form" is a contract with the gallery, not with an insurer. So, your best bet might be to have a lawyer look it over and see if there is any "wriggle room" there. Of course, that will cost money too but maybe not too much just to look over the document. As to whether or not your insurance (if you had it) would pay if there were a 3rd party (the gallery) involved or if they would try to "pass the buck" to them is anyone's guess. It might depend (as always) on the "fine print" and how the policy was written, what was specifically included or excluded. Big "can of worms".....

YM

YM

[Eric Fuller]

How much are we talking? If it's under the small claims court amount in your state I'd file. Easy and they might even pay you rather than duke it out in court. This is assuming they were negligable and it was not an honest, random event out of their control.

[jerry cousins]

i think you're all kinda right - it is about a $1700 piece - it's probably like those
"i won't sue for malpractice" forms we fill out at the docs - sounds good but really has no standing. but this is small town stuff and i'm not sure i really want to push it legally.

wondering if anyone is providing their own insurance for pieces placed out? and where they go for it.


jerry

[Vernon Taylor]

Have you checked into what coverage you have under your homeowners policy for personal property?Coverage depends on what form of policy you have. May also depend on whether or not you are considered a business as oppossed to being an artist. It would also come under a bailment relationship, the gallery should have a Commercial Liability policy which should cover goods of others in their possession. particularily when there is consideration involved which I would assume would be the case here as there exists an expectation that they are exhibiting the work in anticipation that if the item sells they will derive a commission. The fly in the ointment here is obviously the waiver which you signed and its enforceability in your jusidiction.it may be construed as a contract of adhesion which is where a contract is offerred on a take it or leave it basis, and your insurance company may deny coverage based on the fact that you have denied them the right of subrogation(ability of the insurance company to persue indemnification from the gallery or their insurer) I would at least contact your agent and see how your insurer responds. This is just my take on this and I am not a proffessional
so take it for whats its worth.

[John Michaels]

Is the piece repairable? I'd approach this in one of two ways. If you aren't that keen on continuing to sell at that gallery and the prinicple of the matter (that they have refused to pay) upsets you, then make a stink and try to get them to pay up. If you'd rather not make waves, try to fix the piece if possible and think about the future money that gallery could make you.

[Andy Pratt]

This is a difficult situation that I've considered a lot in my future plans. I'll be living in a rural area where damaging a relationship with a few stores/galleries would geographically eliminate consignments as an option for me entirely. That being said, I've tried to think of ways to avoid ruining the business relationship while still resolving the issue.

On the shop's end, they probably should pay you for the damage, but it sounds like that's not going to happen. What they might do is offer you some other form of compensation if you politely push the issue. Maybe they will allow you a better consignment rate in the future, or at least a drastically discounted one for this particular piece (if repaired) or your next major piece (if no repair). If nothing else, maybe you can get better positioning in the gallery for your items or get them to do a feature on your stuff. Anything that doesn't directly cost them money should be a somewhat easy sell, and could get you your money back indirectly.

Andy

[Scott Haddix]

I like Andy's take on this. As with any negotiation, if you are giving up something, you want to ask for something in exchange. Your preference might be $$$, but if that isn't going to happen, you should look for the most valuable 'thing' you believe they'd be willing to agree to without hurting your relationship. If they believe you are trying to deal fairly with them, especially if it doesn't cost them money today, they'll probably work with you, since the relationship is mutually beneficial - they want your business too!

[jerry cousins]

good thoughts - appreciate everyone's input. like andy i live in a rural area and don't want to damage the relationship (too much). i went back to the gallery director and xplained my feelings - not even offering to cover the time to repair (which others have done & i have not billed for) - that basically the message is we'll be glad to make money off of you - but don't xpect anything in return. there was agreement and the director shared that the disconnect is telling artists that there work is valuable and then not standing behind that message when it's on them.

she is waiting to here from their insurance - and said - we will make it right. we'll see.

jerry

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

As a general proposition the terms of the written agreement are what guides and directs the court in interpreting how any dispute should be settled.

The many exceptions arise when there is substantial delta in bargaining power such as in consumer lending and debt issues. However as to arm's length transactions - which is how I'd characterize yours - the terms are usually enforced to the letter.

I'm betting that you still have room to move. I'll bet the agreement doesn't speak to negligence gross or otherwise. That may give you room to argue - but you should do it using a lawyer. But still any given judge - any given day ~ ~ ~ ~

I had a small matter recently where my guy ploughed, salted and sanded a commercial lot based on an emergent request made over the phone.

Sure enough the guy welched and decided that he was entitled to set the costs after the fact.

Off to court we went where the judge all but ordered me to have them arrive at a negotiated settlement - OR ELSE~!! The judge wanted to play golf. We were his last case of the day it was Friday and he wanted out.

At any rate for insurance I'd go with Chubb. They always pay and they always pay fast.

[David DeCristoforo]

"But still any given judge - any given day..."

Boy you got that right Cliff! You get a judge that got up on the wrong side of bed and up in smoke you go! I had a deal with a guy to install a kitchen for me and he wanted five grand. For reasons I will not go into here, I wanted the installation bid to be four grand or less. So I told the guy if he bid four, I would kick him back the extra grand. But he went in and bid five anyway and got the job. Then the little puke took me to court for the extra grand I "promised" him, claiming that we had a "verbal contract", and the judge, who was in a hugely bad mood, sided with him! Go figure....

YM