Subject:
|
Re: Valueations for Insurance
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Aug 2002 13:50:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
354 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.loc.au, Paul Baulch writes:
> "Benjamin Whytcross" <b_whytcross@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:H049sz.CzJ@lugnet.com...
> >
> > Actually, according to the RACV, you're best to just bung it in under
> > general contents, as there doesn't seem to be many people who want to • insure
> > it as a collection...to most people it's just a kids toy.
>
>
> That's what I did... as it happened, I only bothered declaring what I had
> reciepts for - although that was the majority of my collection. It would
> make it heaps easier come claim time though. It also makes an interesting
> (sometimes scary) record of one's Lego spending... :-)
>
> Now, if only LUGNET set lists:
>
> 1. allowed you to assign arbitrary monetary values to the sets in your list,
Just a thought...have you tried to add values to private comments about sets ?
Benjamin Whytcross
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Valueations for Insurance
|
| I fronted my insurance company with a spreadsheet of all the sets that we have instructions for (not necessarily full sets with boxes, but a start). It listed the number of pieces in each set (most of them) and where possible the purchase price. (...) (22 years ago, 7-Aug-02, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Valueations for Insurance
|
| "Benjamin Whytcross" <b_whytcross@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:H049sz.CzJ@lugnet.com... (...) insure (...) That's what I did... as it happened, I only bothered declaring what I had reciepts for - although that was the majority of my (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jul-02, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
