Forensic Vet Report

gb12345

hachette wrote: »

That is how much I have paid for him when I have bought him for my mum. That is what they call economic value since in this country my dog is a "thing"

You're forgetting depreciation - you may have paid £X for Maxie Y years ago, but insurers will put you back in the same position as you were - that means the cost of a dog Maxies age - a lot less than you paid for him.

WTFH

So, you "bought" Maxie for £650 at least 8 years ago. (from the previous thread)
What age was he when he died?

hachette

WTFH wrote: »

So, you "bought" Maxie for £650 at least 8 years ago. (from the previous thread)
What age was he when he died?

9years old. Chihuahuas can live even until 20. The insurers have already offered £650 for Maxie. the price is not how much he was worth at the time of death but how much would it cost me to replace him.

WTFH

hachette wrote: »

9years old. Chihuahuas can live even until 20. The insurers have already offered £650 for Maxie. the price is not how much he was worth at the time of death but how much would it cost me to replace him.

So, you bought him off your mum when he was 1?
Chihuahuas can live until they are 20, but according to the Kennel Club, it's 12 years.
The oldest confirmed Chihuahua was 20 years, 265 days (called Megabyte). The average is between 10 and 14 years. There are people who claim to have dogs that are in their late 20s and even early 30s, but have no evidence to back that up.
There are many factors that affect how long a dog will live including- breeding, food, mental & physical exercise, weight, illnesses & injuries throughout their life.

I would tend to stay away from pedigrees, as they have illnesses bred into them.

So, now for a different question...
Is it your insurer or their insurer who is offering you the money? And if it's a mix of the two, can you tell us which insurer is offering what?

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

So in the end, this Goose chase was a lot of hot air.

hachette

WTFH wrote: »

So, you bought him off your mum when he was 1?
Chihuahuas can live until they are 20, but according to the Kennel Club, it's 12 years.
The oldest confirmed Chihuahua was 20 years, 265 days (called Megabyte). The average is between 10 and 14 years. There are people who claim to have dogs that are in their late 20s and even early 30s, but have no evidence to back that up.
There are many factors that affect how long a dog will live including- breeding, food, mental & physical exercise, weight, illnesses & injuries throughout their life.

I would tend to stay away from pedigrees, as they have illnesses bred into them.

So, now for a different question...
Is it your insurer or their insurer who is offering you the money? And if it's a mix of the two, can you tell us which insurer is offering what?

As I have already said the surgery practice insurers have made an offer for everthing I have claimed apart for the surgery that killed my dog and only 10% of my claim for shock and distress.

I did not buy him of my mum. I bought him for my mum when he was 2 months old. Sadly she died of cancer when he was just over two years old so I have looked after him ever since.

peachyprice

hachette wrote: »

9years old. Chihuahuas can live even until 20. The insurers have already offered £650 for Maxie. the price is not how much he was worth at the time of death but how much would it cost me to replace him.

Yes, agree completely, standard insurance terms involving pets would be the for the price of replacement, they don't deduct anything for 'wear and tear' or the age of an animal.

hachette

I had a contact from my insurer’s legal team this afternoon. Seems I have stumbled on a bit of a problem. We have taken the insurance in May 2013. I was not aware as my husband always deals with these matters that the insurance company is not the same as the previous year one. They say that as the incident happened prior to May 13 it would have to be my previous insurer’s responsibility to deal with it. However they said if I can proof that I did not know of negligence until after May 2013 then they will reconsider. Well I suspected negligence ever since it happened and have wasted 7 months by complaining to the RCVS with no intention at that time to take legal action. The proof of negligence did not happened until November 2013 so it is a bit of grey area. In any case if they won’t reconsider just have to go to the previous insurers. Just means more time before closure.

jacques_chirac

hachette wrote: »

I had a contact from my insurer’s legal team this afternoon. Seems I have stumbled on a bit of a problem. We have taken the insurance in May 2013. I was not aware as my husband always deals with these matters that the insurance company is not the same as the previous year one. They say that as the incident happened prior to May 13 it would have to be my previous insurer’s responsibility to deal with it. However they said if I can proof that I did not know of negligence until after May 2013 then they will reconsider. Well I suspected negligence ever since it happened and have wasted 7 months by complaining to the RCVS with no intention at that time to take legal action. The proof of negligence did not happened until November 2013 so it is a bit of grey area. In any case if they won’t reconsider just have to go to the previous insurers. Just means more time before closure.

'Closure' being when you get some money, yes? The longer this thread goes on, the more it is clear that you don't care one jot about what happened to your dog, all you're bothered about is what money you can get as a result.

hachette

jacques_chirac wrote: »

'Closure' being when you get some money, yes? The longer this thread goes on, the more it is clear that you don't care one jot about what happened to your dog, all you're bothered about is what money you can get as a result.

You can think what you want it not as they say "skin of my nose".

Why do you think I have spend a lot of money in order to find what had happened without having any quarantees that I can get that back. Quite opposite I have alwys been told how difficult it is to proof negligence.