Champdogs Information Exchange - Not logged in
Forum Board Index Breeders Active Topics Help Search Register Login
Previous Next Up Topic Dog Boards / General / Terrible Insurance Company. I give up!
By CherylS (***) [gb] Date 08.04.13 11:10 GMT
Following was sent last October:

"I have considered the documentation regarding my dog's policy and I continue to dispute the exclusions.

Firstly, you have excluded any claims for the respiratory system.  Last year repeat visits to the vets and thorough investigations found nothing wrong with the respiritatory system whatsoever.  The problem that was causing me concern cleared up itself without further treatment.  (name)Vetinerary Surgery rang you back in February/March to confirm that nothing was found wrong.

To reiterate, nothing whatsoever was found regarding the respiritatory system and I am, therefore, disputing this exclusion.

Secondly, I dispute the exclusion for growths, cysts and tumours because this category is unfairly broad and exhaustive.  It is unreasonable to group unrelated conditions such as these in order to ensure that I cannot potentially claim for one of them in the future.  I cannot claim for a condition that has been claimed for before, so it seems you are breaching your own rules as I have not claimed for these. Cists and tumours are clearly defined and distinct from one another.

*Cyst. A cyst is a sac that may be filled with air, fluid or other material.

*Tumour. A tumour is an abnormal mass of tissue.

To include 'growth' as an exclusion suggests that the author of the exclusions has no medical background or is simply trying to impose a generic term to ensure that no claims are made for either a cyst or tumour.  This is unacceptable as only claims for conditions that have been claimed for before should be excluded according to your own policy details.

To reiterate, I dispute the exclusions for growths, cists and tumours until revised in accordance with my dog's medical records.

480.74 is an exorbitant amount to pay for insurance."

I have now cancelled the policy which I realise I should have done years ago, or rather should not have taken in the first place.  I could have had a nice holiday on the money saved from not having insurance.  I would have been far better off in the long term to have saved the money in an ISA account.  Lesson learnt. 
~ GSPs are bouncier than Tiggers ;-) ~
By LJS (****) [gb] Date 08.04.13 11:26 GMT
I agree with cancelling it as I refused to carry on with the insurance for my rescue boy after the premiums came through as something completely ridiculous. I asked to be the two conditions excluded so I could carry on with the policy but they said even with exclusions the premiums would be the same as he was deemed to be a risk.

Insurance now both for dog and human health is beyond a joke now.
By CherylS (***) [gb] Date 08.04.13 11:57 GMT
What's so annoying is that before that email I had tried to instigate a discussion about the policy but they are clearly such an outfit that all they are interested in is your money; no professionalism whatsoever. My vet surgery agreed with me but even they were ignored by this outfit who are well known for this.  If only I knew then what I know now .... (wanders off whistling John Wayne film tunes)
~ GSPs are bouncier than Tiggers ;-) ~
By WolfieStruppi (***) [gb] Date 08.04.13 15:08 GMT
Good for you CherylS, you are able to put into words what I think!

I'm pretty peed off with a couple of insurance companies - last summer I rang to cancel a policy that had gone up by over 100/mth despite no claims for 2 years. I agreed to downgrade to a cheaper policy as I felt that there might be a claim in the not too distant future and was promised continuity. Due to life getting in the way and other things I failed to notice for some months that they were taking the amount for the policy which I'd cancelled. They were apologetic when I rang and a refund is on its way but why is it you can't just assume they will do their job properly?  The other insurance company wanted to exclude, amongst other things, oral growths because a dog I took back had one removed in 2002 and again 10 years later.  I mistakenly thought it would be helpful for all concerned if the dogs health history was forwarded to my vet &, in time, the insurance company. If he'd been in rescue he wouldn't have had any history to exclude.
By CherylS (***) [gb] Date 08.04.13 15:54 GMT
The policy does state that you can only claim for any one condition once.  However, I haven't claimed for anything regarding respiratory but because I queried an ongoing backward coughing weird thing going on at the same time she was being treated for infected anal glands they have put respiratory on the exclusion.  I claimed the anal glands but the vets did a thorough examination and couldn't find anything wrong with her respiratory system. I didn't claim for respiratory because she hadn't had anything done other than the vet consultations which I have to pay for anyway. Nothing was found and so she wasn't treated.  It cleared itself up over a number weeks.  My dog had a lump on her leg which turned out to be fluid filled and was drained.  Cists are not tumours.

I am passed angry now but just wanted to warn anyone new that's considering taking out insurance to make sure that they get personal reviews of the companies being considered.
~ GSPs are bouncier than Tiggers ;-) ~
By Roxylola (**) [gb] Date 08.04.13 16:13 GMT
Truly I will never insure for vet fees I was badly stung with my horse, my insurers refused to pay for the recommended treatment, I ended up 4k out of pocket, unable to pay for further courses (there was improvement but not cure) and I lost my horse anyway.  I would rather put the money in the bank
By Nikita (***) [gb] Date 08.04.13 19:29 GMT
Sounds familiar.  Remy has "growths, cysts or tumours" excluded on his policy, presumably because he has a number of fatty lumps which he's had for years (policy is only a couple of years old) and one peculiar folliculitis thing on the back of his head.

Never a cyst in his life, and fatty lumps are a world away from cancerous tumours or, god forbid, the dreaded osteosarcoma.  I really must write in about it.

They also excluded any heart problems because his heart was tested in 2006 - never mind that it came back perfect!  I have spoken to them about that one, if I forward the results from the last test in 2008 (also perfect) they'll remove it.  So that's something.
Remy, Opi, River, Saffi, Paige,
Raine, Linc, Phoebe & Willow :-)
Previous Next Up Topic Dog Boards / General / Terrible Insurance Company. I give up!
About Us - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy

Powered by mwForum 2.12.1 © 1999-2007 Markus Wichitill