From attorneys to adjusters, claims professionals oftenregale us with tales of how certain noteworthy caseschallenged and intrigued them. As the years goby, some claims resonate with our audience more so thanothers. The lesson learned from this recent contents claimswas clear: Not all appraisals are created equal.

The Situation

A claims adjuster received a call on contents claims specialists to review a claim of $185,000 for astolen painting. The painting was a depiction of a religious scenedating from the 17th century. The claim amount was based upon anappraisal from a prominent west coast art gallery. The art gallerystaff completing the appraisal had the additional credentials ofbeing associate members of the Appraisers Association ofAmerica. Despite the gallery's prominence and the staff'simpressive credentials, the claims adjuster handling the casewanted to investigate further before approving settlement andpayment of the full amount. He consulted with a team of specialiststo confirm the appraisal.

Case Background

Provenance is a key element when valuing art. Fine artsspecialists from the contents team interviewed the owner who reported that he hadacquired the art in a barter situation years earlier, in which hehad been led to believe that the painting was worth $165,000.

Further investigation revealed the painting in question was a20^th century copy, of a famous 17^th centurypainting currently displayed at the National Gallery of Art inWashington, DC. Careful reading of the appraisal revealed the copywas painted by an obscure artist who could not be found in any artdatabases. His work had never been listed for sale in any availableauction records. The appraisal also listed exhibitions credited tothe artist. The contents specialists' efforts to locate the listed venues foundthat they actually did not exist.

The Result

The painting can best be described as a late 20th century copyof a 17th century masterpiece done on canvas with oils by anunlisted artist. As the copy was “in the style” of the originalartist and well executed, it was determined that it would have aretail replacement value of approximately $14,660 inclusive ofcustom framing.