As the article notes, the recent brazen thefts from the Museum of Modern Art in Paris, where paintings were apparently wrenched from the wall during an ongoing security system outage, has had the blogosphere all atwitter for weeks. Not to mention the offices of art handling companies such as ourselves around the world.  A security system lapse, with no backup? No Rfid tags on paintings of that value? Not even a guy watching them?

Many hospitals today affix Rfid tags to newborns via leg bracelets or similar, and warn new parents not to stray from a designated area in the nursery zone lest alarms sound, exit doors close and lock, and gendarmes come running.  For babies, yes, but not for Matisse and Picasso? Incroyable!

I suppose there will always be ingenious theives who will find their way around whatever technologies are deployed against them, but we should at least give them a run for their money. Or I should say, for our money. Make it too easy and even the art theives turned bloggers may think again and go back into the trade.

Or maybe this is one of those tricky film plots where the good guys let the bad guys take the loot in order to trace the thieves back to their den of filched old masters, hidden in hollowed out loaves of,  but of course, french bread. Which are then recovered by Peter Sellers but left in the police van while he updates his blog, only to be, heartbreakingly, stolen from the unlocked van and and eaten by hungry college students incapable of discerning between aged canvas and charcuterie.

We wish the pros success in restoring these works to public view. And for all you art thieves who apparently spend a lot of time reading blogs like this, please know that you can drop off hot artworks at our dock any weekday by 5 PM. I’m not saying that we’re affiliated in any way with the Los Angeles Police Department Art Theft Detail, or have actually helped them solve any cases, but but let’s just say we know how to open a crate and look inside, if you catch my drift.

BetsyDorfman

So what is a CERT and why are they used?

CERTIFICATES OF ADDITIONAL INSURED are documents obtained by vendors such as art handlers which permit them to do work in many public and private buildings. They serve to assure the risk managers of the job site that the company coming onto their premises carries proper insurance on their crew and coverage for any damage that might be caused by that crew during the course of their work. Without proper CERTS in place, entry is denied to the vendor, so this is no minor detail.

What types of CERTS are involved?

Typically the building in question will ask for two types of CERTS: one which shows that the vendor has current Workman’s Compensation Insurance and one which shows proof of General Liability insurance and the amounts of that coverage. The CERTS in each case are issued by the vendor’s insurance carrier and name that specific building or location as a temporary ADDITIONAL INSURED under the terms of the vendor’s policy, for a specified date or date range. By obtaining this coverage the property owner is limiting their risk and essentially “piggy backing” on the vendor’s policy coverage.

So if FINE ART SHIPPING sends a crew into a condo lobby and one of our crew puts a nail into his thumb, the building is reassured that the worker is properly covered by our Worker’s Compensation policy and will make no claim against theirs. Similarly, if our truck backs into the dock and runs over a prized potted palm in the process, the claim will go to our Liability Insurance carrier and not to the building’s own insurer for recovery of costs.

Screening tool

In addition this is an expedient way for the property owner essentially to screen the credentials of companies. Many “one man and a van” art handlers and installers don’t have such policies and so cannot provide CERTS. We get many job referrals each year from such independent operators. It isn’t necessarily a matter of skills – many independent installers are professional and talented – but typically it takes a larger operation to maintain insurance coverages at the levels required by major major metropolitan properties.

What about individuals having work done at a home or office?

If you are a small business or residential customer, it is a good idea to inquire whether an art handler who will perform installation or other services at your location is properly insured.  Short of requiring a CERT, you protect yourself from possible liability if a worker is injured at your location, or from a claim against your own liability insurance in the event your property is damaged by the vendor. Consider this: if a worker sustains a serious injury at your location, and his employer has no worker’s comp coverage, who will he or she look to for payment of potentially serious medical bills? They may well claim that some condition existing at your property contributed to the accident, and you will be forced at the very least to defend against this. You may have exposure simply for not checking that the employer had the legally required insurance for his crew.

Or if a vendor’s truck parked in your driveway loses its brakes and crashes through your pool house, a business without liability insurance will leave you only two choices: an expensive lawsuit against a company with unknown assets, or a claim under your own liability policy which may well raise your rates for the future.

So while a CERT does not offer a rating of that company’s skills, it does signify that the company is operating legally, is most likely solvent (paying their premiums!) and that they are considered insurable in the marketplace. From a risk manager’s point of view, this is as good as fresh donuts on a rainy Monday morning.

Betsy Dorfman

The most recent and local controversy over museums de-accessioning artworks involves a decision by the Orange County Museum of Art to sell multiple artworks to a private collector. Having learned of this transaction only after the fact, the Laguna Art Museum lodged a protest, upset that they were not offered an opportunity to acquire the artworks in advance of the offer to a private citizen.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2009/06/ocma-sells-paintings-to-private-collector-prompting-criticism.html

Without knowing the details, and having a working relationship with both museums, we have no interest in taking sides, except to say that hopefully the new owner of these artworks will see fit to lend them early and often. As is obvious the basic difference between works held so-called publicly, in museums, and those held privately, does often come down to a matter of access. But there are museums who hold art off public view and, likewise, some private lenders whose artworks are out on loan more often than not. Some lenders loan freely, some sparingly, and some grudgingly. In 25 plus years of dealing with lenders and borrowing institutions we have pretty much seen it all. We thought you might enjoy a peek into this process which is not as cut and dried as you might suppose.

In some cases purchasers of high end artworks agree to loan the work to bona fide requestors as a part of the acquisition process. In other cases no guidelines apply and it is simply up to the borrowing institution to contact owners of prospective works and convince them to participate. Such convincing can be a simple phone call or a long process involving delicate negotiations over many weeks or months.  Luckily, that’s not our turf.  If these efforts are successful a loan agreement is drafted which sets forth various stipulations such as term of the loan, conditions of transport, insurance, etc.  We generally come into the picture once the loan agreements are in place; we receive an inventory of artworks and a corresponding list of lenders. It is our responsibility to contact the lenders to arrange packing and transport to the exhibition venue. On paper, this is all very organized. In real life, not so much.

Hi, this is FINE ART SHIPPING and we’d like to arrange a date this week to pickup the Prestigious Artwork which you are kindly lending to the Prestigious Museum Exhibition next month.  Hello ?  Hello?

Some lenders, having agreed to the transaction some time ago, change their mind or, let’s say, their enthusiasm diminishes once the reality of giving up the artwork becomes apparent through our phone call. We leave messages, they don’t call back. Or they do call back, and claim the loan agreement is faulty in some way. More delay. Or, the artwork it turns out has been taken to their ranch in Montana, and the caretaker can only be reached there on alternate Thursdays by meeting him in town at the feed store. Where there’s a lack of will there’s no way.

Other lenders could not be more helpful, but experience separation anxiety once our art handlers actually arrive to collect the piece. In one case, a lender actually cried, seeing the bare space left on the wall where her favorite “child” had lately hung. We moved another favorite over from an adjoining room to compensate, calming her down and making the room livable again. At the other extreme, we’ve shown up only to be waved into the living room with an offhanded “take whatever it was you came for…” as the housekeeper or spouse went on with more pressing business.

I once had the personal trainer of a lender who was out of town sit me down at a table and go over every comma in the loan agreement, occasioning many calls back and forth to the museum representative, before “Hans” would release the piece. We were supposed to wrap the painting, but I was so fearful Hans the Inquisitor would change his mind that I simply picked it up “naked” and carried it out through the lobby. The (by now new) security officer on the desk apparently had no problem with a person he had never seen before carrying a valuable painting off into the sunset.

Then there are the occasional lenders who try to get our crews to do extra work, tacitly or even not so subtly expecting that such activity will be billed to the borrower or organizer of the exhibition. Take the artwork off the wall? Sure. Put another painting quickly in it’s place? Reasonable, if essentially a switch of like sizes. Bring the two heavy framed antique mirrors and the chandelier in from the garage and install them “so the room will look nice again”?  I don’t think so. Upon return from exhibition, some lenders see this as a chance to re-position all the art in a room or to have us unpack and install a few new paintings that have arrived in the meantime. Generally this works out, and lenders are able to separate (and be willing to pay for) services beyond what is included in their agreement with the borrowing institution. Sometimes the institution agrees to pay even for quite outlandish “extras” based on the deep pocket status of the benefactor in question. Basically, “do whatever they want and try to get the hell out of there” is the instruction, delivered with a sigh. Every art handler has stories of moving the refrigerator out to the pool house, or switching dressers in upstairs bedrooms, all in the normal course of putting a 20 x 20″ framed artwork back on the wall in the den. Lenders have to be made happy, on this the art world depends.

Betsy Dorfman

 Sample condition report format:

Rule 2:  Report what you see. The most important quality of a condition report – and what allows it to function at all – is clarity. Photography, drawings and verbal description should be employed effectively to document any exceptions that you find. Identify the exception, locate it on the artwork and indicate its scope. Strive for short and precise notes, and limit your use of relative terms; such as bad, small, severe, etc. The standard industry jargon should help you sidestep generalities and lengthy descriptions to address specific conditions concisely.

There are numerous guides and sample condition reports only a web search away. You can reference several of them for guidance in formatting your own report, and gathering inspection tools such as special lighting and magnifying lenses. That being the case,  I’ll limit the following to a short glossary of exceptions.

These are the most common bogeymen of art objects:

Abrasion – a type of erosion often caused by the friction of rubbing or scraping the surface.

Accretion – the accumulation of foreign material on the surface, not always dirt.

Blanching – a milky stippling in a painted surface, often caused tiny faults puncturing the surface.

Bleeding – a post-production migration of pigment, often caused by exposure to water.

Bloom – a milky area where the clarity of the paint or varnish has been compromised, but more superficial damage than Blanching.

Blush – like Bloom, but in lacquer.

Check – a gap along the grain of a piece of wood, smaller than a Split.

Chip – a Dent that involves a broken piece of material.

Cleavage – a type of Crackle involving the separation of a material’s strata.

Cockling – a set of small parallel waves in a sheet of paper, in which the surface is not creased.

Corrosion – a chemical reaction between a surface and a foreign agent, accompanied by a slow process of Loss.

Crack – a linear or planar fault in a surface or a form that does not involve Loss.

Crackle – an area of perpendicular cracks that does not involve Cleavage.

Craquelure – a fine network of Crackle often caused by a material’s reaction to climate changes.

Crevice – a narrow but deep type of Crackle

Dent -  a concave distortion in the surface that does not include Loss.

Dig – a Dent that includes Loss or Displacement.

Discoloration – any change in color.

Dishing (aka Draw) - a distortion in the canvas of a painting caused by unequal tension around the stretcher.

Disjoin – a separation of elements or portions of an object, in which the separation can be complete or incomplete.

Dust- self-explanatory

Embrittlement- self-explanatory, a loss of plasticity in the object, often caused by exposure to heat.

Erosion- a loss of material, usually due to Abrasion or Embrittlement.

Fading – this type of Discoloration is the loss of saturation or value.

Fingerprint- self-explanatory; Grime in the form of a specific kind of Smear.

Foxing – the Corrosion of a paper element, often caused by mold or iron rusting within the pulp.

Gouge – a Dig where material has been lost in a scooping action.

Grime – dust sticking to the surface with a oily medium.

Lacuna (aka Loss) – a specific depression where a portion of the surface material is missing, such as a painting’s varnish.

Rift – a wide but shallow type of Crackle.

Run – a dried rivulet of a foreign liquid.

Smear – a specific instance of grime, such as a fingerprint or other contact with surface.

Spatter – a type of dried splash from a foreign liquid.

Split – a Check in wood grain that runs the entire length of that element.

Stain – this type of Discoloration usually involves both Fading and a darkening of the surface.

Stretcher Crease – a literal crease or line of fine cracks along an edge of a painting’s stretcher.

Tear- self-explanatory, usually applied to cloth or paper.

Chris Barber

Besides being the rumored title of a forthcoming Thomas Pynchon novel, inherent vice is a legal term of importance to shippers and insurers of fine art and antiques. The term refers to items which, by the very nature of their composition, are subject to degradation or deterioration over time and/or in handling. Most insurers and fine art policies specifically exclude coverage for loss due to  inherent vice, so it is important to understand what types of materials and fabrications can fall into this category. The disclaimer also applies to hidden defects not visible to the carrier but which are found to be the cause of damage or loss.  You don’t want to think you have coverage only to find that you have tumbled into the black hole of this clause.

Some examples of inherent vice we have run across include:

– sand paintings where the sand dislodges from the face or edges of the artworks

– artworks  with “glued on” elements that come loose during handling or transport

– artworks or antiques made of old wood which can crack or where existing cracks can extend or widen

– marble & limestone slabs or artworks which can shatter along internal fault lines

– wet paintings where the paint runs or pools

– weak soldering at joins in metal sculptures

– “hinged” works on paper which are not declared as such at the time of shipping, and so are subject to slippage within the frame

– top heavy fabrications where a heavy top crushes the level below due to insufficient support

– artworks incorporating liquid or other unstable elements which can expand or leak in shipping

– sharp folds in textiles or fabrics which suffer deterioration or breakdown at the folded edges

The exclusion also applies to damage arising from insufficient packing by the shipper where the customer has released the shipment to the carrier already packed. Here is some language from a case comment by a marine attorney:

The “inherent vice” exclusion is also used to describe a loss that, due to the manner in which the cargo is shipped, is regarded as inevitable. For example, fresh eggs shipped without any packing or protection are likely to sustain damage no matter how carefully they are handled. Chocolates shipped in an ordinary container in the summer are bound to melt. Damage that occurs in the course of ordinary handling and transportation of cargos, without the intervention of fortuity, is due to inherent vice and must be excluded from coverage. http://www.whitelawtwining.com/pdfs/555928_1.pdF

Your best bet is to give the carrier full information about the item to be shipped. If the carrier accepts the item, packs it, and selects the mode of transport then the exclusion may not apply. For example if the carrier packed those chocolates in a sturdy box and then shipped them via climate controlled truck, which then broke down so that the chocolate melted, the claim would likely be honored.  In essence the carrier accepted liability for the shipment due to full disclosure of the inherent nature of the product.

Another example: if the very fine mesh you used to support a heavy bead on your collage gives way in shipping — inherent vice. However if the carrier inspected the artwork and was made aware of this issue, you might prevail if it is shown that the carrier could have mitigated the damage by shipping the package flat, improving the packaging, or other available means.

So, for the best possible chance of recovery declare the precise nature of the item to your carrier or fine art shipper and allow them to inspect it fully. Discuss any unstable elements and have them recommend a suitable packing and shipping approach. Inherent vice may still get you, depending upon the situation, but you will have improved the odds of a happy ending for both yourself and your art shipping provider.

Betsy Dorfman

Here is a link to the complete article with further details:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/southflorida/story/794402

Needless to say a situation like this is what every art shipper and art handling company works every day to avoid. Worse, there are potential problems collecting from insurers as the timing of the damage is unclear and the basic policy held by the artist apparently does not cover the full value of the artwork under all circumstances. Unfortunately these are critical but all too common mistakes. And while there is never a guarantee that artwork in transit will arrive safely, there are steps that can be taken both to minimize risk and to maximize the likelihood of recovery in the event of a loss.

This article raises many issues and in the next several posts we will examine a few of them, starting today with chain of custody and inspection protocols.

EVIDENT VS CONCEALED DAMAGE

In many cases when artworks are damaged in transit the cause of the damage is clear and matches up to corresponding damage seen on the exterior of boxes or crates. Boxes arrive with a corner crushed or with punctures, crates show evidence of forklift tine intrusion, seams or tops have popped, wood feet have come off etc. These are basic signs of possible mishandling enroute. These “exceptions” are noted on the carrier’s paperwork on arrival, and the damage is assumed henceforth to have occurred in the custody of that carrier who last received the packages in good condition. This is similar to the chain of custody used in police and forensic work. Once received the compromised package is then unpacked in a documented process with photos taken and witnesses at hand; if there is actual damage then to the artwork within, the insurer of record is contacted and the claims process begins. Sad, but at least there is financial recovery possible through insurance.

CONCEALED DAMAGE WAIVER

In the case of the Feuerman sculpture however, there appears to have been no obvious damage to the exterior of the crate. Upon opening the crate however the sculpture was found to be destroyed beyond repair. In shipping terms this situation is called “concealed damage”. Many types of insurance carry a disclaimer or waiver for concealed damage where the goods have been packed by the shipper and are uninspected by the carrier or insuring agent. If the airline had provided insurance, it likely carried such a waiver and so would not respond to a claim under these circumstances. This makes sense, logically, as they would have no way of knowing what was in the crate or its condition prior to taking custody. Big gray area there.

CHAIN OF INSPECTED CUSTODY

While there was a clear chain of custody for handling of the crate, there was no inspection of the artwork itself each time the crate changed hands. The crate apparently left custody of an overseas art handler, was shipped via air freight, handled at Newark airport, then trucked all the way to a receiving warehouse in Miami where it was put away until inspection at a later date by the art handler who was to deliver it to the exhibition. Hence a mammoth gray area i.e. when and where did the damage occur? And who is liable under these conditions?

YOU BROKE IT, YOU PAY, RIGHT? WRONG.

In shipping liability comes down to insurance and specifically, declared value. It doesn’t matter if the airline broke the sculpture if they did not insure it. They are responsible only for what is essentially salvage value unless insurance was purchased and a value declared. In fact most airlines and other freight companies do not insure original fine art. They are protected in their paperwork, signed at the time of shipping, from liability for damage caused in transit where they have not insured the goods. There are always nuances in insurance, and it is true that such an airline might have liability if they can be shown guilty of extreme negligence. If, for example. they left the crate at the wrong address or at a closed dock, or left it out in the rain. But so long as they performed the contracted service i.e. moved the crate from point A to point B according to the terms established with the booking party, they generally have limited liability. Hey, these are freight guys; they are paid to move freight and they moved the freight. Whadda ya want?

IN TRANSIT VS STATIONARY — not as simple as it sounds.

Next in line is the artist’s own policy, which states she can collect $100,000 maximum in transit and $400,000 maximum if the artwork was “stationary.” Oh boy, the attorneys are going to have fun with this one. Stationary usually means in storage, not being moved, in a stable and protected environment. Technically a shipment that has arrived at a warehouse along the way, but which has not yet been delivered to its final destination, is considered IN TRANSIT. Even if it isn’t being moved for a period of time. Under our fine arts all risk policy, in transit status can exist for up to 90 days. Gray area anyone?

Could this situation have been avoided? We’ll take a look at some possible remedies in a future post. In the meantime our sympathies to everyone involved; it is always awful to lose an artwork, period

Betsy Dorfman / FINE ART SHIPPING