Another dog insurance question...

The Bouncing Bog Trotter

The Bouncing Bog Trotter

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 December 2008
Messages
2,044
Location
East Sussex
Visit site
Have just had the renewal through for my 6 year old springer and they want an increased premium of 45%, this is despite making no claims ever for this dog since I took insurance with them in 2012! They now want an annual premium of nearly £520. I have shopped around and can get better cover for significantly less - £234.48. I have called my current insurers to discuss this with them and got fobbed off with introductory discount, 14 days with no cover on a new premium blah blah blah. No recognition of customer loyalty, no offer to reduce the suggested new premium.

Before I insure with an other provider are there any to avoid?? Shall I just get a credit card for vets bills and find 3rd party insurance only?

Thanks in advance.
 
Who were you with? Having nagged everyone for dog insurance advice on a recent thread, it sounds like E&L might be one to avoid (actually that's putting it mildly). Also Petpals to be avoided it would seem. General recommendation from almost everyone was to go with PetPlan, but of course that doesn't help if you were already with them. Tesco seems pretty good from what I've seen of it, but lifetime premiums (for my quote anyway) were not dissimilar to PetPlan.
 
We've just learnt that the petplan cover for life, although it advertises as covering physio/hydro etc, doesn't. It's only the vet fees that reset each year... given how expensive it is seriously considering if it's worth insuring at all.
 
The problem is as soon as you stop insuring your dog may decide to land you with a 2000, 4000, 6000 bill... So it depends if you can afford to pay that as to whether you insure or not.
There is no problem with changing but you need to be aware any illness be it as simple as a small bit of vomiting etc. will exclude that body area from your new insurance..
 
Avoid E&L like the plague. I would have no qualms about switching even if I'd always been with the same insurer. NFU lost my custom when they wanted 50% more for a young, healthy horse after my old boy was PTS. Yes, they paid out, but the new policy was eye watering for a 5 staged youngster.

I'm too paranoid not to have insurance, no help there, sorry.
 
I gave up insuring my 10yr old. The premiums rocket at that age and the excess is ridiculous.Vets often ask if your dog is insured and will bump up the charges if it is. My new 3yr old dog will not be insured. I have spent about £150 on blood tests and a full exam which shows he is very healthy apart from a slight heart murmer. For anything like a major accident I have founds vets to be very reasonable anyway and allow one to pay in installments. I think the insurance companies prey on our insecurities of what might happen to our pet if we are not covered. What you suggest is a good idea.
 
Mister Ted that's fine if you can afford it.. but what if he gets hit by a car and needs 2000 of surgery? Or more? If you can afford it.. great. If you can't then I can't see why you expect your vets to treat your pet without getting paid :/
A health check is like a vetting.. only good on the day!
 
Thanks for the replies. On reflection we are going to insure but most conditions are only covered for a year, the excess on most is around £100 and the cover is limited so a huge bill won't be 100% covered anyway. I will have a shop around and make a decisions. Out of principle I won't go with my current insurers... but I may go back to them next year as a new customer....
 
SusieT said:
Mister Ted that's fine if you can afford it.. but what if he gets hit by a car and needs 2000 of surgery? Or more? If you can afford it.. great. If you can't then I can't see why you expect your vets to treat your pet without getting paid :/
A health check is like a vetting.. only good on the day!
Click to expand...

I have had a bill for over that amount and the vet agreed without any pressure to let us pay in installments at £400 a month.My friends horse also thousands for a foot problem, paid over time.Its not the case of the vet not getting paid of course they are.When a large bill is suddenly presented for unexpected illness on the pet owner it can be daunting. Vets know their clients are not made of money and if they know they are not insured I have found them very understanding and the vets assurance he will keep costs to the minimum beforehand ,with insurance the bill would be nearly double that ".What if" is the insurance companies trump card. I have kept horses and pets for over thirty years and various vets. Notice requesting payment at the time on the consultation room door is fine( and I certainly pay promptly on manageable bills but vets they also realise a job well done on a sucessful op. or saving an animals life means a grateful owner who recommends them and a valued client too. Time to pay a substantial bill establishes good relations.They are not heartless ogres.
 
The Bouncing Bog Trotter said:
Have just had the renewal through for my 6 year old springer and they want an increased premium of 45%, this is despite making no claims ever for this dog since I took insurance with them in 2012! They now want an annual premium of nearly £520. I have shopped around and can get better cover for significantly less - £234.48. I have called my current insurers to discuss this with them and got fobbed off with introductory discount, 14 days with no cover on a new premium blah blah blah. No recognition of customer loyalty, no offer to reduce the suggested new premium.

Before I insure with an other provider are there any to avoid?? Shall I just get a credit card for vets bills and find 3rd party insurance only?

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

That's a bit rude of them! I would recommend John Lewis, they have a few lifetime policy options. Admin is a bit rubbish but they have always paid out thank goodness.

My policy went up 50% last year, but as my dog was in the middle of treatment for a condition I couldn't change companies at the time.

They did tell me that the cost is based on the dogs breed and age (and claim history!) but 6 isn't old so I can't see how that would have caused the price increase.

I've used Petplan in the past too and they were very good.
 
For the first time in years and years I've taken out insurance policies on my dogs. It feels a little like closing the barn door after the horse is bolted because one of them is older and has some issues, the other has allergies which will not be covered. However, my border terrier had a condition which over time cost me a lot - it wasn't like a lump sum of £5k, it was on average a running cost of about £300/month. My older poodle now has a condition which is pretty expensive to manage as well (the actual diagnosis probably cost me about £1200 though). So while these aren't shock amounts all at once, they still put a large drain on day to day expenses due to chronic health problems.
 
This is not aimed at any particular above poster, sorry PnP that it comes up after you, but is there anyone who would not spend more than a set amount monthly to keep a dog alive?
I feel I am in a minority of one here but if my dog needed over £100 (say) a month to keep it going I would have it PTS. All that medication is bound to have side effects and they can't tell us when it stops working so well. Even £100 a month I would only do for a limited period, if the dog was 2 and by spending £100 a month I could keep it going for 10 years, well I just couldn't justify that.
 
I get what you're saying Clodagh but for me personally pet insurance gives me the freedom to make treatment choices based on what is best for the dog, without having to worry about the cost. I appreciate that some people go too far and do things just because they can, not because they should. Difficult line to draw!

For those who've seen premiums shoot up at age 6/7 it's because 7 is the cut-off for new lifetime policies for most insurers and as a result they seem to use the policy year in which the dog turns 7 as an opportunity to bump the premium up. I would take great care in shopping around as I've seen so many people be caught out by pre-existing conditions as a result.
 
Clodagh said:
This is not aimed at any particular above poster, sorry PnP that it comes up after you, but is there anyone who would not spend more than a set amount monthly to keep a dog alive?
I feel I am in a minority of one here but if my dog needed over £100 (say) a month to keep it going I would have it PTS. All that medication is bound to have side effects and they can't tell us when it stops working so well. Even £100 a month I would only do for a limited period, if the dog was 2 and by spending £100 a month I could keep it going for 10 years, well I just couldn't justify that.
Click to expand...

depends on what it is. When the setter first had the skin issues it was costing that in vaccine and antibiotics, feed suplements etc etc . Luckily the vaccine worked, he was only two and we got to a point whereby we could manage it without pumping him full of drugs (he had his own vaccine made up for him which was administered every two months, cost about £200 every other year plus antihistamines). I would be wary of taking on another breed with skin issues mind as vaccination doesnt work for all and knowing what I know now, I would approach diet etc differently.

Other than that, yes my small animals are all insured, but they also all have a price on their head depending on prognosis etc. I don't think I would insure older dogs again (ie over 8) but we are lucky in that we can afford to self insure to an extent these days.
 
I would not base the decision on cost as some meds (e. g gastroguard for horses) are v v expensive but do a great job. I wouldn't put a dog on long term medication if the medication was doing harm or quality of life was poor or only middling but cost wouldn't come into it as its just a number- and so often the 'dont like them being on medication' is used as an excuse for ' I dont want to pay this' - which is fine by the way, just admit to everyone around you you are killing your dog because you don't want to or cant pay, dont make excuses about quality of life etc. imo.
 
Clodagh said:
This is not aimed at any particular above poster, sorry PnP that it comes up after you, but is there anyone who would not spend more than a set amount monthly to keep a dog alive?
I feel I am in a minority of one here but if my dog needed over £100 (say) a month to keep it going I would have it PTS. All that medication is bound to have side effects and they can't tell us when it stops working so well. Even £100 a month I would only do for a limited period, if the dog was 2 and by spending £100 a month I could keep it going for 10 years, well I just couldn't justify that.
Click to expand...

Depends on the condition, rather than the expense for me. I'm hoping that in my poodle's case I can get him off the drugs - which at the moment aren't the expensive bit (steroids are cheap, omeprazole isn't that expensive either). But the food is very costly, but if it will help his chronic IBD that's just part of the expense of keeping him going.

My border terrier was a good old age when I lost him, but he had liver problems which meant frequent blood checks. The drugs are expensive but the bloods were.

For me it's about the quality of life. Not the cost of keeping them that determines how to treat, or not.
 
I think it is manily the cost with me, I only earn £500 a month do spending a quarter of that on meds seems excessive.
Also my lurcher was on loads of drugs for the last two years and I am sure it lulled me into a false sense of securtiy that I was doing all I could. I accept that is different to a condition suffered by a younger dog.
My young lab has cost me a fortune this last six months but not for chronic things but for injuries she has sustained working for me.
 
Clodagh said:
This is not aimed at any particular above poster, sorry PnP that it comes up after you, but is there anyone who would not spend more than a set amount monthly to keep a dog alive?
I feel I am in a minority of one here but if my dog needed over £100 (say) a month to keep it going I would have it PTS. All that medication is bound to have side effects and they can't tell us when it stops working so well. Even £100 a month I would only do for a limited period, if the dog was 2 and by spending £100 a month I could keep it going for 10 years, well I just couldn't justify that.
Click to expand...

I have never insured any of our dogs, we have nine at the moment.

It would definitely depend on the dog and condition for me, if I had limited funds and could not afford to give long term treatment to one of my dogs, then yes, I would pts - however my husband probably wouldn't let me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top