BEVA euthinasia guide and insurance company!!

Snorkey
Download a copy of the guide lines.
They are very helpful but as I've found to restrictive and the insurance company stick to closely yo it instead of looking to it as an individual case.

Black horse white.
My horse had ringbone swell as other problems in all legs and going blind.
So i can't see why they are disputing it.
 
This taken from the BEVA website. I don't know if I'm looking at the exact guidelines document or at an explanation to the guidelines, but either way it is very clear:

Paragraph 3 of the BEVA guidelines 1996 states that an affected horse will need to meet the following
requirements to satisfy a claim under an ARM Policy:
“That the insured horse sustains an injury or manifests an illness or disease that is so severe as to warrant immediate
destruction to relieve incurable and excessive pain and that no other options of treatment are available to that horse
at that time.”
This essentially deals with the EMERGENCY situation, for example on the racecourse, event or at a road accident,
where immediate action must be undertaken by the attending veterinary surgeon. The decision to advise an owner to
destroy a horse on humane grounds must be the responsibility of the attending veterinary surgeon, based on his or her
assessment of the clinical signs at the time of examination, regardless of whether or not the horse is insured. The
veterinary surgeon’s primary responsibility is to ensure the welfare of the horse.
For LESS URGENT cases in particular chronic illness or lameness cases where the horse’s condition is deteriorating to
the point at which euthanasia will be required, it is essential to keep insurers informed of the situation and to
mutually agree or negotiate an appropriate course of action, if necessary involving their veterinary adviser. Such
cases may require a second opinion on behalf of the insurers before euthanasia is undertaken.
Click to expand...

So although I am sympathetic to you OP, it very much looks as though your insurance company is in the right. Your horse was not an emergency case, whereby the vet was called out and then declared that the horse needed to be PTS immediately, but what the above extract describes as a "non-urgent" case. I.e. the horse's condition was deteriorating to the point that it would need to be PTS, but you were able to plan for this and consult the vet. Unfortunately, the above makes it clear that as part of this process you should also have notified your insurance company. This isn't something that just applies to you, but to all people with insured horses that need to be PTS due to illness or chronic lameness. Sadly, you don't have much ground to stand on - you can simply hope that once the NFU have the full details they change their mind, although, from what I have read of the guidelines, they are under no obligation to do so. I don't want to sound unsympathetic to you, because I am, but from what I can see the insurance company have every right not to pay out in this case.
It would also appear that the vet was correct to tick the box he did, because your horse didn't fit the guidelines. What I do feel, however, is that he should perhaps have ensured you were aware of the need to contact your insurance company before your horse was PTS.

ETA follow this link http://www.beva.org.uk/_uploads/documents/1ARMGuidelinesproof6May08.pdf. The vet should definitely have made you aware that you needed to contact the insurers (from what I can see). This is perhaps your best argument with the NFU.
 
Last edited:
Sorry you're having to go through this.

Really, at the end of the day, claims assessors aren't vets, therefore they rely on the vet who has examined and destroyed the horse to correctly mark the claim form with 'yes' or 'no'. Although the assessors would know the claim history, who are they to say (sitting in their office) that your horse warrants euthanasia? That is for your vet to say.

Your vet should be able to produce a report advising that the condition was chronic and would have met the criteria shortly (as in a months time, not year).

Maybe ask if the insurance companies vet can call your vet to discuss.
 
Hash rouge
I have read the guide many times over.
And i still know i am right.

The guide is mostly emergency situations.
My horse would have soon met the guide lines. So was put to sleep to prevent suffering. Just because i didn't let them know before is irrelevant.
They are welcome to look in my horses notes and get a second opinion but i know i am right.
 
In non urgent cases it is pretty standard for an insurance company to ask for a 2nd opinion. By not notifying them you prevented this. If you think about it - what would somebody whose claim was maybe a bit borderline do? You may get somewhere but you will have to fight hard because by not notifying them you have acted suspiciously. It will have been in your insurance documentation that you should have notified them & it is not their fault that you didn't.
 
The horse wasnt an emergency so in all honesty you should have spoken to your insurer. I have an oldie that is insured for third party, accident/injury and death. God forbid I ever have to use BEVA given that he is pretty much retired and a field ornament/happy hacker but was he unable to to be on field rest/happy in a field and the time had come then I would have to speak to the insurers.

I have had a vet DELIBERATELY mess me about and leave me with big bills and NO payout but it wasnt the insurance companies fault it was the vets.

If your vet is willing to do this for you then great but honestly I wouldnt hold my breath for a change in decision. Good Luck though :)
 
I'm so sorry for your loss. I lost my horse nearly 4 months ago so I know what you are going through
Unfortunately this is not your insurance company, they are doing exactly what they said they would in your policy guidelines
Your vet has ticked the
Box. He should have told you that would mean insurance would not pay out on death of animal
My vet was very specific about it. He treble checked I knew what he
Meant
I think maybe your vet mistook ticking the box to mean it DID meet with the
Guidelines. I hope so anyway
Hugs
 
Copperpot said:
That is ridiculous. Who asks permission to get their horse pts. Especially if it's an accident and needs to be done ASAP to end suffering.
Click to expand...

If it's a planned (such as old age or chronic lameness) PTS then you have to speak to the insurance company first and notify them but in an emergency situtation to prevent further suffering of the animal (horse, dog etc) then you are just supposed to notify them as soon as possible. It's the same with any vet treatment, any planned investigations or treatment has to be approved in advance but emergency treatment or investigations you just tell them as soon as possible.
 
OP, you have my deepest sympathies.
I feel its hardly worth insuring - certainly if horse not worth over £5k, we just dont.And one the horses are past 11 or so we stop anyway.
The amount paid over the years to insurers for around 4 horses , in order to compete,hunt etc , was getting ridiculous, and that was without cover for vet fees ,etc. Though we did have loss of use on the stallions - one of which we claimed against and fought for about a year for pay out.
I also believe that a year off is better than invasive surgery, so wouldnt go down the expensive vet route anyway. Have had a friend in a situation similar to yours - and they had to FIGHT to get money .Dont give up.
Also, when we once had a horse in for backing and he broke a leg careering round the field, the owner was more worried about getting permission from insurers to PTS than for the vet to be brought in quickly and dispatch the horse. I was disgusted the owner thought about the £££ and not the horses discomfort.
So all in all, I m not a fan of insurance companies - their job after all is to make money. Their small print on policies makes it hard to get payouts.
 
Insurers can't do right for doing wrong! Unfortunately you entered into a contract and part of that contract stipulates that under rthe death section the horse has to comply with BEVA guidelines in order for the insurer to agree to pay out. I think you will probably get a settlement although my friend didn't and he was with NFU. Although tobe honest in that situation I think his vet was in the wrong but that's another story.

You would not believe the amount of fradulent claims there are for horses being PTS (sometimes the horse was never put to sleep - maybe never existed!) because people want the money.

If you are ever in doubt about claiming under a section of the policy then you should contact your insurer. ANY situation where a horses has to be PTS as an emergency would be covered under Death (unless maybe a veteran horses covered for accident only) but if the horses was not suffering and did not present an emergency case then the situation should be discussed with the insurer, they may get a 2nd opinion vet but they may well say the horse can live 'comfortably' even if on 'x' amount of painkillers a day. In MOST cases though in a situation like yours when a horse has to have that many painkillers to get by then most vets would agree thatl on welfare grounds the horse needs to be PTS. The insurance company then would have no qualms about paying out. Ok, it could have taken maybe a week or so longer to get the decision but you wouldn't be fighting after the event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top