I have a lot of specified items, including watches, with an agreed value on some items on my insurance and I was requested not to issue pics on social media on any of them. The Broker said it may not invalidate my insurance but it could make negotiations difficult in the event of a claim.Originally Posted by bwest76
It’s a shame that Rolex have stopped offering this. Was quite a nice change up. From memory the 16710 boxes designated the original bezel.
16710 = Coke
16710NR = Black
16710 = Pepsi
Rolex swapped over my Pepsi insert for a Coke in 2021 for about £100
Interesting. I thought the default was a like-for-like swap on the bezel insert. This makes more sense given how stingy RSC is in general.
The 16710 is a great version watch and even better with a quartet of bezels. The original bezel insert colour (in the UK early 2000's was always on the barcode swing tag)
16710 BLRO - Pepsi
16710 LN - Black
16710 - Coke. (unless someone has evidence otherwise I would have though ROLN)
Faded LN bezel too.
For the Coke I'd suggest RO/NO (Rouge / Noir) or NO/RO?The 16710 is a great version watch and even better with a quartet of bezels. The original bezel insert colour (in the UK early 2000's was always on the barcode swing tag)
16710 BLRO - Pepsi
16710 LN - Black
16710 - Coke. (unless someone has evidence otherwise I would have though ROLN)
Faded LN bezel too.
RONR.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Your insurance company stipulates your not to show your watches on social media really. Smells funky that one to me
Sent from my SM-A245F using TZ-UK mobile app
I have a policy that has many named items within in it and the Broker advised me not to display the items on social media because some companies will argue a lack of responsibility and seek to reduce the payout.Your insurance company stipulates your not to show your watches on social media really. Smells funky that one to me
Sent from my SM-A245F using TZ-UK mobile app
Instead of coming here making snide comments, why not just contact your own insurance company for advice.
I have absolutely no doubt that any insurance company would use a public showing (social media) of valuable items held in your house as grounds for reducing or denying a claim based on the increased risk to them.
Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using TZ-UK mobile app
Why you spitting your dummy out how touchy are you show us it thenSent from my SM-A245F using TZ-UK mobile app
Last edited by bokbok; 29th October 2023 at 18:07.
He is just a whiney ass bitch.Why you spitting your dummy out how touchy are you show us it then
Sent from my SM-A245F using TZ-UK mobile app
Nobody knows where he lives and nobody has his name so he is just making it up.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Fancy a bet ?
Prove you got more Balls than the last gutless wonder.
What should I bet? That you won't share a picture of your watches? I already won.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Well for a start, you got a far better income than Chris in the UK, so the stakes go up.
Basically you think I don't own six Rolex (5 mine + wifes)
So when are you next in the UK?
You and I meet, when I show you the six watches, you put £5000.00 into the charity fund.
If I fail to produce the watches, I put £5000.00 into the fund.
The result of this is that you will then hold the record as being the largest donator to the fund. Nice little ego booster for you.
We then get photographed together with the watches and pics displayed here.
We will not mention names so no comeback on insurance and your business life.
This takes place when I am in the UK.
I am in the UK for the month of December and then February - April.
How does that sound?
Mick can we do the meet at the wolsley over breakfast please? Haven’t had their kedgeree for a few months now.
Is it in London and if so it makes sense. You are a trusted member here to ensure fair play. Thanks for your suggestion.
Just got to wait for Raffe to say yes or no.
Actually I bet he's a decent guy in the flesh.
Why would I want to meet you and play your stupid game? You probably have bad breath and are most likely as unpleasant in real life as you are on the forum.
And no, I have no idea whether you own any watch nor do I care. I only find it funny that you keep bragging about your watches, yet you are the only member on the whole forum who has never posted a photo.
My theory is that you are simply too stupid to do it. But that's nothing but an educated guess.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Yes you have exited with even less class than Chris in the UK.
Takes some delusion to think I ever entered.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
I am surprised this conversation is in watch talk.
I was going to make a breaking news story about a Walt using watches borrowed from 5-mates to win a bet, but there are no personal vendetta allowed.
So I won't.
You make a fair point, but I think for many, we got into the brand and Rolex changed the rules. Not quite the same thing.
How is this different, insurance wise, to just posting pictures yourself?
Because someone else with no connection with me would post an anonymous pic with two men holding a bunch of watches in London.
I bought my first Rolex in 2014 and if my recollection is correct, the same rules applied then. I bought the second watch later in the same year and had it serviced immediately and the rules certainly existed then.
Not wishing to add fuel to the fire Mick, but didn’t you give two or three of your Rolex watches to your children (with the proviso that they had to keep them and pass them on to your grandchildren IIRC)?
If that is the case then you don’t really still own them do you? Or have you bought more to replace them?
He is just making it up as he needs it. A Tory.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
A wise thief would be amongst us and read this.
Balls? I thought this was about Rolex.....
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
I’m going to be having breakfast at the Wolseley (porridge, the English, side of kedgeree, large Bloody Mary) with a sawn off shotgun in my briefcase every morning for the next twelve months. Just in case.
It's because his insurance company stipulated in terms and conditions do not show any watch pictures on social media... Anyone met up with him? bought or sold anything? Why not go to the next meet up and show off your collection
Sent from my SM-A245F using TZ-UK mobile app
Yes I was going to pass them on. This was a Daytona/ Sub / GMT11 because they were too conspicuous for me to wear at 70+ years of age. The 3 sons did not want them now but would take them on my death. Those three are kept in a safe and won't see the light of day until I snuff it. I now wear the Explorer1, Explorer11, JLC and Omega, all of which are inconspicuous.
What I am finding annoying is that I am being called a liar time after time (not by you) and I can think of better ways of spending my time arguing with the same gang hut mob.
They know I have the watches because that's why they won't take the bet because they know they will loose and yet it still goes on, so really I cannot see any point in continuing any more. Even if I post some pics of the things, the usual crowd will scream "fakes" so there just isn't any point in pursuing this.
Yes I could that when I am in the UK.
I bought a GMT11 in London back around 2015. The chap was Smokey99. We both made reference to it a couple of weeks ago in the watch section.
Last edited by Mick P; 30th October 2023 at 13:05.
I met Smokey99 when I bought his GMT11 off him. He confirmed this a couple of weeks ago in the watch section.
I just wonder where you have been called a liar, let alone time and again?
You are just making it up.
Here's the bet: we meet in rural Belgium, at a secret place of my choosing, that I will disclose to a middleman three hours before we meet. If I can prove that I have at least three but no more than four Timefactor watches, you pay £17,000 into the fundraiser. If I don't, I will pay £100 into the retirement fund.
Are you too chicken to accept? Thought so.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
What doesn't help you is the way your story alters, you've always said you won't post pictures because you were told that they could be traced to a location, now its your insurance company saying you can't.What I am finding annoying is that I am being called a liar time after time
Odd that on a forum like this where many members have very expensive watches nobody has ever mentioned a clause like that before, wouldn't you agree?
Pretty sure at some point - he clarified that it was the broker who advised that in event of a claim, the underwriter may reduce payout if they could prove that he highlighted to the world - ownership and location of expensive watches.
But he certainly downgraded the claim
It was the insurance broker who advised that pics sent onto social media could be traced to the location. They also stated that if the insurance company got wind of us, it would compromise any claim made. That has been made clear before.
As I have said before, just ask your insurance company and see what they say. Most people never read policies and only find out about restrictions when they make a claim.
How do you trace pictures to the location, unless you have switched on location tagging (which is still being automatically removed by most picture hosting services, including Tapatalk)?
Excuses, excuses.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Given the insurer’s paranoia about a risk-remote activity like posting pictures on the Internet, one has to wonder what their view would be about carrying six Rolexes on your person in central London. If there was a mugging they might want to know why someone would be doing that, and they might not find “to win a bet on a watch forum” to be a good explanation.
Last edited by Fullbreakfast; 31st October 2023 at 10:27.
I don't think that has been made clear before and furthrmore you have changed your story.
You originally stated:R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Yep, there has never been mention of the insurance broker giving him that advice before.
Even when it has been pointed out he could post a screen shot, it's a totally new angle. It's like it's been made up on the spot.
In Micks defence Ralphy, both of the posts you have quoted effectively say the same thing. They certainly don’t contradict each other.
Both were the opinion of the broker that the insurance company may use photos on social media as a reason to reduce or refuse a payout.
Sometimes self insuring is the best option
He shoots, he scores............................. Crowd goes wild !
It is against the terms of my insurance to post pictures of my insurance.
I have to confess I have never owned a watch in my life because I don't know how to read the things.
There that is now the end of the subject.
So, no insurance and no watch?
World's gone mad.
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
I am increasingly of the opinion that he is a troll.
I am increasingly of the opinion that I have had a gut full of this. If no one believes me, then that's my tough luck and I will live with it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
