Pet insurance rip off

pinochio

Pet insurance rip off! I have mythoughts what’s yours

Sixteen yr old small terrier/Jack Russell cross lost to incurable disease,organs failing causing suffering as painful to watch as was the ultimate decision.

Last renewal premiums raised the year of Jacks demise and the excess doubled yet weonly claimed for small amounts three times in the period of many yrs of cover.Seems they raise the prices hoping you cancel and not complain, we complainedthe excess put back to £60 and premium rise a few quid off.
All so read those T & C and what's covered and not covered no matter how boring, they rely on it being boring so you don't read that important bit they've slipped in to T&C or the part you missed in the what isn't covered. A pet being treated one year for ailment that does not continue will not be covered by many insurers if it re-occurs as they class it as 'Existing'. You have to decide what's best for your pet so to repeat do please read T&C - What's Covered and What's Not covered.

krlyr

Every insurance company will do this. Higher chance of claims being made, equals higher premiums. It's why young drivers' insurance is more expensive than an experienced older driver, why house insurance costs more if you're in a flood-risk zone, why life insurance costs more for smokers and so on.

As a 16 year old dog, the chances of claiming for a medical condition will be higher. The rise may also reflect a higher volume of claims in your postcode, more high-value claims (possibly due to the advances in vet treatment and the availability of high-cost treatment) and several other factors. The exclusion of pre-existing conditions by new insurers is for similar reasons - the chance of it reoccuring makes an insurance company reluctant to take on a policy which may run at a loss for them.

It is difficult, but it is certainly not solely limited to one company, or to the pet insurance industry by itself. It's the nature of the insurance business - they are businesses, not charities, after all.

rising_from_the_ashes

I am so sorry for the loss of Jack - 16 is a very good age for a dog and it must be so hard that he's not here now


I'm afraid I don't see what the insurance company has done wrong?

So sorry if I've missed something but premiums will always go up with age (and if claims have been made) and, as with every insurance policy, the T&Cs must be read in depth to ensure it covers everything needed - it is our responsibility to do this as the policyholder. Yes maybe the insurers do think people won't bother to read them which is why it's vitally important that we do!

phill99

Remember, the majority of pet insurances are run by profit making companies. They want to take your money but are always reluctant to pay out as their primary concern is profit, not animal welfare. The dice are always rolled in their favour.

If you work out how much you paid in premiums over the years and how much you had claimed, you will be out if pocket.

People take out insurance as the marketing uses emotions to make us buy a product. We buy it as we are scared that if the worst happens and there is a major emergency, then we will be covered. It's just like house insurance. Most of us have it but never claim off it.

I gave up on pet insurance a couple of years ago for the very reasons you described and opted for self insuring and a credit card!

krlyr

phill99 wrote: »

If you work out how much you paid in premiums over the years and how much you had claimed, you will be out if pocket.

Not always - I've had 3 dogs with insurance.

For one, I claimed far more than I paid out in premiums. Perhaps partially due to her shortened lifespan, though had she been a more suitable candidate for it, she could have gone through 2 hip replacements and I'd have claimed far more than I did.

The second, I think I've about broken even. She has an on-going condition and I think her claims work out to be about as much as her premiums. I think with her, we will reach a point where it moves back into the insurer's favour as the premiums rise, but a recent injury goes to show how quickly it could fall back in my favour - fortunately she's not required surgical treatment but it was on the cards.

My third dog has definately been the most profitable for the insurance company - he's only ever had minor illnesses so nothing I've claimed for. But being a breed prone to hip problems and issues like bloat, again, it could easily change overnight with him requiring several thousand pounds worth of surgery. Say that operation cost £4000 - it could be more, even double if both hips needed doing - even rounding his premiums up to an average of £35 (he's slightly below that and was cheaper the past two years, but I'm allowing for gradual increases), it would take 10 years to save that up if I self-insured by putting his premiums aside. Yes, there's a chance he'll never need those operations, and I could have £4000 in the bank, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take.

phill99

krlyr wrote: »

Not always - I've had 3 dogs with insurance.

For one, I claimed far more than I paid out in premiums. Perhaps partially due to her shortened lifespan, though had she been a more suitable candidate for it, she could have gone through 2 hip replacements and I'd have claimed far more than I did.

The second, I think I've about broken even. She has an on-going condition and I think her claims work out to be about as much as her premiums. I think with her, we will reach a point where it moves back into the insurer's favour as the premiums rise, but a recent injury goes to show how quickly it could fall back in my favour - fortunately she's not required surgical treatment but it was on the cards.

My third dog has definately been the most profitable for the insurance company - he's only ever had minor illnesses so nothing I've claimed for. But being a breed prone to hip problems and issues like bloat, again, it could easily change overnight with him requiring several thousand pounds worth of surgery. Say that operation cost £4000 - it could be more, even double if both hips needed doing - even rounding his premiums up to an average of £35 (he's slightly below that and was cheaper the past two years, but I'm allowing for gradual increases), it would take 10 years to save that up if I self-insured by putting his premiums aside. Yes, there's a chance he'll never need those operations, and I could have £4000 in the bank, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take.

You're absolutely right. There will always be people whose pets are sadly ill or injured who will receive more than the premiums. But for most people that will never be the case. That's how insurance works - everyone pools money and it's there if someone needs it.

But as you say in your case, the premiums will rise and the insurer will be back in profit. Insurers will never loose. But for every one person like you, there are another 30 that put in far more than they get out. In the 5 years I had my 2 dogs insured, I spent out £1500 and got back £250. Then they doubled my premium even after no claimed for 3 years. That's when we parted company.