Who insures their animals?

Hintza

lowis wrote: »

that's not contentious, that's just your own personal opinion, i don't even think it warrants a debate, in a situation where your pet is diagnosed with cancer, what one person thinks is completely irrelevant to your own thoughts and opinions around the issue.

Could go into a debate on allocation of scarce resources etc. This debate goes on in the NHS everyday, who gets treatment and who doesn't.

So I think it is more than a personal opinion and if the recession goes on for a while yet, it might become a reality for more and more people.

lowis

you could debate the above point, but that is going completely off-topic and not relevant to what i had posted (if you were indeed referring to my post about cancer treatment). if you are referring to what should not be paid for by the Blue Cross and PDSA (and other animal charities) who help people on low incomes / benefits then that is a whole separate issue.

unlike the NHS private veterinary care is not a 'public' service - the resources are there if you (or your insurer) can pay. they are certainly not scarce as far as I am aware. no more scarce than a car is for someone who has the money to afford one...

LittleMissAspie

Our cat isn't insured, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, we have a lot of savings and could pay for a big operation or monthly medicine if need be. So I'm taking the risk with our savings rather than her health.

Secondly, the lower priced insurance doesn't seem worth it. I've seen one "bronze" scheme where you have to pay 40% of the bill anyway. There are large excesses and so many restrictions on what they cover.

The more expensive insurances that do cover everything are quite a lot, £20-30. Save £25 a month for 15 years and you've got £4,500 over the lifetime of a cat. That might be a little short for some treatments, but it's offset by the cats that never need a big treatment.

If I had more than one cat and little savings I would consider getting insurance.

Hintza

lowis wrote: »

you could debate the above point, but that is going completely off-topic and not relevant to what i had posted (if you were indeed referring to my post about cancer treatment). if you are referring to what should not be paid for by the Blue Cross and PDSA (and other animal charities) who help people on low incomes / benefits then that is a whole separate issue.

unlike the NHS private veterinary care is not a 'public' service - the resources are there if you (or your insurer) can pay. they are certainly not scarce as far as I am aware. no more scarce than a car is for someone who has the money to afford one...

I wasn't actually referring to your post.

My point is not whether your resources are scarce but that money in general is a scarce resource. The world is changing and it has to be debatable whether using money in this fashion is a sensible use (in general) of this scarce resource.

It is more of an economic and ethical debate. One could start using emotive examples of where that money could be better spent.

lowis

well, personally as long as i can afford it, i will continue to pay for insurance. there are many things i would rather cut back on than the pet insurance. at the moment my resources are OK though so economically it is not an issue for me.

ethically...in general i am completely at ease with how i spend my money, how i live my life and the decisions i make. in terms of money being a limited resource, i can't see an ethical problem in treating a sick animal if a person can afford it.

mangie

Hintza wrote: »

I know we are very lucky with our vet's charges and am horrified by some of the charges I see on this forum for vets treatement and I can understand that down south especially the fees charged are very high and will reflect such things as property values but even so they seem very scary :eek:

But, i would be more horrified by the cost of insurance for two dogs and two ponies and as such we self insure. Now, I have had big bills but I find they smooth themselves out over time and I am pretty sure we are a lot better off not insuring.

Is this a country bumkin attitude or a tight Scots attitude or a naive attitude we have?

:Twell done! and read the small print 2 coz most wont pay out after ur animal iz ova a certain age [eg my german shep] at 5 and thats thro kc reg insurance!cheek wots the point of gettin it wen the animal iz young an fit,an refusing them wen they get older!its a CON

Tribulation

mangie wrote: »

:Twell done! and read the small print 2 coz most wont pay out after ur animal iz ova a certain age [eg my german shep] at 5 and thats thro kc reg insurance!cheek wots the point of gettin it wen the animal iz young an fit,an refusing them wen they get older!its a CON

Most insurance companies wont insure older animals, ie if you phone up one and ask for a quote for a 10 yr old dog, they aren't interested

But if you insure the dog when young, and keep the payments up, all that I know of happily keep the insurance going regardless of the pets age.

Direct Line always paid out promptly for my 13yr old retriever.

KxMx

Peace of mind for my cat comes in at £8.41 a month. Can understand the horses would cost alot to insure, but not the dogs surely? Some places even give you a discount if you insure more than one pet!

loobylou2

I'm about to claim for my kitten on the cat insurance I purchased when we got her. I'm very glad I did get her insured now because even though the bill is affordable, its money I can't really afford to spend on animal treatments. I got a shock this morning when I found out how much it was for a pain killing injection and some eye drops for he poorly eye!!!

Spirit_2

Spirit wrote: »

Dog insured with DBA £16 per month. He is 10 now and the premiums have never been hugely inflated so it is very good value. He has had two squamous cell carinoma in two seperate paws so a toe amputated from each.

He has been treated for a skin condition for the last 13 months, the insurance is time limited for one condition though to 12 months, so we are now commencing covering all costs for further treatment.

The focus of this insurance policy is acute, not chronic conditions.

No other pets are insured, but I need to act on this. This week alone we have paid £27 to have a chicken pts:o (I posted on another thread so wont say why here), and yesterday one of the three bunnies my daughter rescued 3 weeks ago developed an eye ulcer -£57 yesterday and a return visit on Monday. This morning when I picked up the cat who adopted us 6 weeks ago he cried and seems to have a tender chest, so I think he is going to the vet too.

We have always had our horses insured, but DD currently has one on loan and it is covered by the loan agreement.

I posted the above on 15 March since then :

Rabbits eye healed well total cost - £86
Very sadly our beloved dog was taken ill on the 19th, had surgery and died the same day £506 (plus cremation £160)
A bunny has a snotty nose today - £135 for antibiotics and blood tests a return visit required on Thursday.

DBI will re-imburse us for most of the £506. I am glad we did not have to worry about money before trying to give him a chance.

I never got as far as getting anything else insured, the cats tender tummy resolved itself, but I am acutely aware that if Bunny has liver or kidney problems we may have to take cost of long term care as one of the considerations .