BEVA euthinasia guide and insurance company!!

S

smellsofhorse

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 April 2007
Messages
5,309
Location
New Forest
Visit site
My insurance company have refused to pay for the loss of my horse as the vet ticked the box that at that moment in time my horse did not meet the BEVA guide on euthinasia.

I have a copy of the guide and it states that the guide is mostly for emergancy situations. But in the case of long term illness especially lameness the horse should be euthinised if it will soon be unable to kept from pain even with standard pain releaf.

Ive spoken to vet and he said the guide is very hard to meet!
Even though my horse didnt meet
guide at that moment in time (as he was able to walk unaided to the field to be euthinised) he soon would have so we did the right thing to stop the horse suffering.

My vet is now writing a more detailed report and i hope the insurance compang will change their mind.
 
Firstly sorry for your loss. Secondly my horse was able to walk unassisted to be pts but insurance company never questioned it. I do hope your vet can sort this out for you x
 
My horse was also able to walk unaided to meet his fate and the insurance company didn't even ask the question. Who are you insured with?
 
NFU
I heard lots of bad things about them lately.
Its the fact the vet ticked the box saying he didn't meet the BETA guide lines at the moment in time

Instead of looking at the whole situation, the illness etc. They have seen that box and said no.
 
Insurance is getting ridiculous, can understand why people are not bothering to insure now. You pay such high premiums then when the unthinkable happens and we try to do right by our animals we have to fight for our money. Hope you get sorted.

I recently lost a young horse in a field accident, it all happened so quickly that I didn't get time to ring insurance company until after PTS. They were surprised I didn't ring and get permission, I pointed out that I was so upset and busy sorting vet that it really was the last thing on my mind . They did pay out no problem.
 
I think you'll find you are supposed to inform your insurance company if the horse is to be put to sleep

I've been insured with NFU for years and have never had any problems until recently. Rumour has it they want to get out of horse insurance but if that's the case, why don't they just stop taking on any more?

My insurance isn't due for renewal until next April, in the meantime I'm going to put the equivalent of my premium into a savings account to cover vet fees. My horses are probably well under insured for their value anyway. I've been insured with NFU for about 25 years now, and at £135 a month, that's an awful lot of money I could have in a savings account!
 
Sorry to hear that fizzer
its ridiculace.

I did what was best for my horse. Do they think i would have my horse put down for no reason.
Imagine devastated he has gone and now they want to argue over it.
 
Firstly, I am so so sorry for your loss. It is one of the hardest things in the world.

I'm sorry to say that I wouldn't be cross at your insurance company I would be bringing this up with your vet. Your vet must be well aware that ALL insurance companies will only pay out if it meets with BEVA guideline. The guideline is NOT that the horse has to be unable to walk!! It is basically that the horse is suffering that PTS is the only option.

My horse met the BEVA guidelines as he had had a chronic illness for months that finalised in his becoming constipated. The vet had to physically clear him out ever few hours and he was going to colic within the next 24 hrs. He was on HUGE amounts of painkillers but moments before he had the injection he was grazing quietly next to me in the field. Stood up! In fact I had been gently lunging him that morning to try and help with the blockage. He was certainly mobile!! My vet phoned the NFU and logged it over the phone (she may well have also filled in a form, I expect she did, but she is such a star she did it all for me) and told them he met BEVA guidelines and they paid up in full.

Your T&C's state it has to meet BEVA guidelines (and I can understand why as otherwise some people would just PTS for the payout). Your vet must know this.....?

ETA I did not call them beforehand. It was a weekend
 
Last edited:
I know you have to inform them but if your out hunting and horse breaks a leg, your hardly likely to call insurance company before doing anything are you. In some situations it's just not possible.

I also think that your vet should have just not ticked that box!
 
I think you are right.
The vet has caused this problem.
But thankfully he is willing to fight for me.
My horse was deteriorating fast. On alot of bute.
After ready the guide lines i think he did meet them at that point in time.
But vet has said he didn't at the time.
Even though he told me it was the best thing for my horse.
 
blucanoo1990 said:
I think you are right.
The vet has caused this problem.
But thankfully he is willing to fight for me.
My horse was deteriorating fast. On alot of bute.
After ready the guide lines i think he did meet them at that point in time.
But vet has said he didn't at the time.
Even though he told me it was the best thing for my horse.
Click to expand...

I really feel for you. :( Good luck!
 
Copperpot said:
I know you have to inform them but if your out hunting and horse breaks a leg, your hardly likely to call insurance company before doing anything are you. In some situations it's just not possible.

I also think that your vet should have just not ticked that box!
Click to expand...

This is the point of the guidelines, in certain situations such as breaking a leg, the guidelines are met and there is no need to contact the insurance company before euthanasia. In the case of the OP her vet should have advised that the company was informed if the euthanasia was planned, as I am assuming it was a long standing degenerative condition not an emergency.

These guidelines are in place to protect horses and insurance companies from the less than honest individual who may opt to destroy an otherwise healthy horse that for some reason is no longer useful in order to gain the payout, they may not always seem reasonable but your vet should be supportive and able to help when in a genuine situation a horses needs have to be put first.
 
be positive said:
This is the point of the guidelines, in certain situations such as breaking a leg, the guidelines are met and there is no need to contact the insurance company before euthanasia. In the case of the OP her vet should have advised that the company was informed if the euthanasia was planned, as I am assuming it was a long standing degenerative condition not an emergency.

These guidelines are in place to protect horses and insurance companies from the less than honest individual who may opt to destroy an otherwise healthy horse that for some reason is no longer useful in order to gain the payout, they may not always seem reasonable but your vet should be supportive and able to help when in a genuine situation a horses needs have to be put first.
Click to expand...

This!

I am really sorry for your loss, it's never nice when we have to make that decision. However, having worked as a horse insurance underwriter for several years I can see it from both sides and actually it isn't that complicated. Your vet has ticked a box he shouldn't BUT it was probably correct. Technically IF your horse could carry on for 'x' amount of years supported by painkillers etc then the horse then does NOT warrant euthanasia. If you have a planned euthanasia like it sounded like you did then you should contact the insurance company first to check their stance. If they state the horse does not meet BEVA guidelines then they will not agree to pay under DEATH cover. It would be deemed elected euthanasia by you (say down to economic reasons or what you felt were humane reasons). That would be covered by Loss Of Use cover IF you had it.

Believe me there are plenty of people who do decide they don't want to spend the time rehabilitating their horse or spending time and/or money on treatment so they think they'll have the horse PTS and the insurance will pay out. THIS is why insurance companies take a tougher stance on these cases. IF you follow the procedures correctly and your vet does the same you shouldn't encounter many problems. Unfortunately if you don't then this is what happens. In many cases though if the vet can prove destruction was necessary (Insurers may request their vet's 2nd opinion) the you will get a settlement.
 
The trouble is that insurance is priced to cover the BEVA guidelines. If cover where offered for a wider range of circumstances then nobody would buy it as it would be hugely expensive. If you had had loss of use you would have probably have been covered but most peole don't have it because of the cost.
 
I"m with NFU who paid out on 3 of my horses who met BEVA guidelines (2 were on the operating table and the 3rd had a stroke and couldn't move). I had 2 of my oldies electively pts due to long standing lameness issues. I knew the insurance wouldn't pay out for them as it wasn't essential to have them pts although both myself and my vet thought it was the right thing to do for them.

Amlin wouldn't pay out when we found one of the youngsters dead in her field as it was due to an abdominal tumour that they decided she already had when we bought her.
 
Basically I think unless the horse has broken a leg and needs destroying instantly, you won't stand much of a chance of getting anything out of the insurance.

I had one done recently that had very bad KS. I wasn't entitled to any money, as far as the insurers were concerned she could live quite happily in the field
 
The point is my horse could not live comfortably in the field.
He needed four but a day to be comfortable on his feet plus he had eye problems do was progressively going blind.
So going by the guide he did or soon would have been recommended euthanasia.
So the the insurance would cover this.
 
I'm sorry for your loss, and i understand how difficult dealing with insurance companies can be at times like this.

There is quite a bit of misunderstanding regarding the beva guidelines and what they represent. basically they are a list of extreme acute situations whereby a vet can euthanase a horse without first contacting the insurance company and a mortality payout will be made. Insurance companies differ in how srtictly they interpret/stick to the guidelines, and to be honest I find that in most situatikns it is possible to speak to them before putting a horse to sleep without compromising it's welfare.

Unfortunately in your situation BC although your horse may have been very ill it does sound as though your vet was correct in stating that he didn't meet the BEVA guidelines, and as such, confirmation that he would be covered under a mortality payout should have been sought from your insurers before he was put to sleep. It is certainly worthwhile getting your vet to make a case for you and he may be successful depending on the finer details of your horses condition, but equally it may well go the other way. I know how awful this must be for you, but hopefully it will highlight to others the importance of communicating with your insurers in these situations.
 
I should not have to get permission to have my horse put to sleep.
It was the correct thing to do and speaking to an uncaring person on the phone was the last thing in my mind.
The guide lines are mainly for emergency situations.
Each case is individual and should be treated as such.
I have paid my premiums for years. I expect them to pay out now i have made a claim doing the correct thing for my horse.
 
blucanoo1990 said:
I should not have to get permission to have my horse put to sleep.
Click to expand...

You don't, however if you want the insurance payout you have to conform to the terms and conditions you agreed to when you took out the policy.

The vet did not do wrong, and you can't expect him to lie; the BEVA criteria for immediate humane destruction are quite clearly set out. The insurance company is only following its own rules. Definitely worth following up with a letter from your vets, and fingers crossed that they agree to at least a partial payout.

Yes it's upsetting but that's why you need to know the terms of your insurance, and not take out insurance with a company if you don't agree with their terms. Sorry :(
 
I hope my reply didn't sound callous, it wasn't intended to, and i understand how difficult your situation is.

You are right; you do not have to get the insurance company's permission to put your horse to sleep, but in doing this may not qualify for a mortality payout.

Unfortunately when you enter into a contract with an insurer they then have an interest in your horse, and will hold you to certain conditions if you want them to keep their end of the bargain.
 
The BETA guide is mainly for emergency situations and only meant as a guide.
NFU are being to restrictive one the guide and not looking at the case individually.

My sister had no problem with a pay out when her horse was put to sleep.
He was just 8, had an eye condition and was going blind. He was put to sleep before he suffered.
How is my case any different?

My horse was 20, had leg and eye problems. Couldn't be retired to a paddock. He was on more than normal pain killers and was going down hill quickly.
So he was put to sleep.

This is why i expect a pay out.
I don't need the money. Im not buying another horse.
Its the principle.
He wasn't insured for much and the money will pay for his cremation.
10 weeks after he was put to sleep i can't believe this isn't sorted.
 
I've had 2 horses PTS with the conditions I was claiming for. I didn't call NFU before they were PTS in both cases only after, they were both within the BEVA guidelines and they paid out no questions asked. So sorry that you are having to deal with the insurance company when you've suffered a loss. It is annoying when you pay your premiums and they refuse to payout.
 
Another point.

Remember the rspca couldnt help an animal until it was actually suffering?
The law was updated and now they can help an animal before it suffers.

If nfu say he didn't meet the guide at the time ( but i believe he did) but he definitely would have soon.
All we did was acted before he suffered.
 
This is the sort of thing that's really worrying me. My horse is going for X-rays and nerve blocks next week due to ongoing unexplained lameness. I was wondering if they would put him down if he is only going to get a lot worse and if the insurance company will pay out. I've never heard of BEVA guide lines. Il be sure to talk to the vet about them if he does get pts.
 
My horse ringbone and I'd only owned him 11 months. I claimed for treatment when he went lame after only 2 months of owning him. The treatment didn't work and he was clearly in a lot of pain, the vet made the decision to PTS. He couldn't even walk from the field. But he had to nerve block his feet first to prove to the insurance that it was caused by the ringbone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top