Equicover (Amtrust) - is this the norm?

noblesteed

noblesteed

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 August 2009
Messages
1,872
Location
Up North
Visit site
Sorry just realised this is a long one...

Having issues with my insurance and wondered what are people's thoughts/experiences? Is this the norm as previously I have only dealt with NFU who were very helpful.
AFter years with NFU and no claims for my current horse I just couldn't afford to pay their premiums any more so changed to Amtrust Equine last spring. Slightly cheaper but basically the same cover. I read the reviews on here and heard good things about them. On commencing my new still pretty expensive policy, I was only asked for the certificate from my last policy, no vetting or anything. Just put a claim in for diagnosis/treatment for bone spavin. We went for steroid injections.

Since putting in the claim last month I have been asked for the following:
5 stage vetting cert from when I bought the horse.
Copy of his passport.
Full medical history.

So far all I have recieved are 2 snotty letters saying I failed to tell them about existing medical conditions and that the policy now has exclusions for melanoma, a 'mark on horse's face' and anything related to laminitis.

Now the only thing I have ever called a vet out for was the mark on his face - which was close to his eye. Vet didn't treat and it turned out to be a fly bite. At the time he noticed a couple of melanomas under his dock and said nowt to worry about, he's grey.
In terms of laminitis, one summer when the vet came to do injections horse was in the midst of a bout of footiness - which was never diagnosed as laminitis as he also had an abcess, so was treat by ME for both issues and came sound in a week or so. I asked vet for advice on getting weight off the horse - asked for advice on fat scoring, feeding, and also we did EMS and cushings tests which were negative. So he was never ACTUALLY diagnosed with or treated for laminitis. Being a careful owner I always treat the horse as lami-prone due to odd bouts of footiness - but who doesn't treat a native/Iberian cross as a lami risk? And how many horses of this type suffer from footiness now and again without it being full scale laminitis? Probably most of them!
Then last month when the vet suggested steroid injections he asked about lami - I said he may have had a mild case but it was never diagnosed and that he is managed accordingly.
Now lo and behold 'any issues caused by or related to laminitis' is now excluded from my policy!
Is there any point in having insurance at all these days? I mean I will now only EVER call the vet in an emergency... but then that could end up as a welfare issue for my horse! I thought the whole point of having an excess was so you could get the vet out for minor ailments and not have to make a claim... But if it's going to affect the policy well I may as well have had skin samples sent to Liphook and a full set of pedal bone xrays! Grrrr I am so cross!!!!

I am going to ring to complain today but am I being unreasonable? OK I had forgotten about the melanoma, so I should have mentioned that.
 
TBH if you haven't told them about the melanoma then I think that means they can do whatever the hell they like now, because you will be in breach of the contract.

FWIW, I'm with amtrust or whatever they are called now. Never really had an issues. They paid out for a lot of vet bills for my last horse. When I bought the one I have now, they wanted a copy of the vetting certificate (though I assume had I not had him vetted, they would have had to accept that). Whenever I have claimed, I have always had to send a copy of passport and medical history - even when I claimed for two things in one year for the same horse, they still requested it. Horse had a few things noted on his vetting cert (skin abrasions and a scar). They excluded "sarcoids and skin conditions" and when I queried it they told me that if they all came to nothing in 6 months/ healed, then if my vet wrote a letter stating that, they would lift the exclusion (as it happened, the scar turned into an occult sarcoid so I now have a permanent exclusion for that, but it is fair).

I would imagine that if your vet is willing to write a letter saying the horse doesn't have and has never had lami, they would lift the exclusion. I have always found them to be pretty reasonable TBF.
 
Thanks for that chestnut cob. I have only ever made a claim with nfu and that was about 10 years ago for a different horse! I thought it was all a bit strange as I didn't have to send all thepaperwork before.
I just think it's a bit out of order excluding things that were never medically diagnosed or treated. It's certainly a welfare issue to be unable to tell a vet when a horse has suffered a minor ailment that's come right by itself, because I am now going to think twice about calling a vet for anything at all!

I will give them a ring. I think I might have to ask for my vet records to be emailed to me as well so I know what the vets have been recording.
 
This has only started happening since they were taken over by this new underwriter, I am having a row with them now.. They want to exclude all 4 legs just cos left fore is excluded ( I agree with this one being excluded) they want me to jump thro hoops... Have a new 5 stage vetting done, without bloods, this will cost £300and vat and call out. Nearly as much as years insurance, and then they won't promise to lift exclusions on other legs, I've had mare insured with them for last year, but they looked again at the vetting from 12 months ago and decision made that I've got to do what they say or no cover for legs!!! So I am , on own vets advice am looking around for another insurance company, and my vet will give me a report showing they have not treated mare for anything in last 12 months . Mare is only worth £2000 and I know lots of companies will insure without a vet cert.
As I must say this is all down to the new underwriter trying to wriggle out of things... They just want your money and make you jump thro hoops to claim. I have never claimed from them in 5 years with amtrust.
 
I did think it was a bit suspect. I would have expected to provide all of the above upon commencing my policy, not now. As for the laminitis exclusion I am going to argue that one as that's something that it's worth insuring for. Tho I most probably will be cancelling my policy once this claim is completed and finding someone else.

I have just got a letter from them saying they have paid the first £500 vets bill so that's one good thing at least. But I will have to speak to them about further treatment if it's needed. I was being 'good' and trying to avoid any unecessary costs...

It's not like horse insurance is cheap. I pay half as much to insure my husband and I on a £10k car. My horse is 15 and worth less than £1000. I only have him insured for his own welfare - in case anything happens to him that I can't afford to fix myself.
 
I think it gets to the stage where it is better to put the equivalent of premiums in a savings account to draw on in the event of a vet bill. A couple of mine are uninsurable anyway due to mutliple exclusions so I keep an empty credit card for emergencies. Of the two that are insured one is only kept on insurance because I have a nasty feeling that if I cancel something will happen to him! He is home bred, now 12 and has not so far had a claim! (I've probably put the mockers on him now!)
 
We I have just found insurance for mine with another company, who will include the three sound legs and the one she had injury on 4 years ago, all I have to do is get a report from my vet and get it emailed to them stating she has not had any treatments in last 24 months except inoculations . So amtrust can hop off... When other horse I have comes up for renewal I will put him with them, and the dog!!!
It's nearly the same price and cover is similar. All for 350 a year . Am happy now.
Op ... Look around, there are better quotes out there, and they don't ask for vet cert under 4k
The leg that had the injury is covered except anything connected to old injury, to me that's fair enough
 
Last edited:
This thread is really making me think. I've just changed to Amtrust from E&L(!!) and changed purely because I keep my boy on a large livery yard and the old company had a clause about not covering my tack if there were more than 10 horses on the yard. So now my tack is covered but they did ask for a full history and have excluded skin conditions for the horse because my boy had the vet to look at a funny rash on his face about 2 years ago now. It was treated at the time with antihistamine as vet thought it was an allergic reaction to something, and has never returned. On balance, I think the Amtrust deal is a good one. The premiums are a bit more than the other company but the cover is much better. I never thought about challenging the exclusion, as it was so long ago, but might do now.

The idea of having a fund built up from equivalent amounts per month to the premiums is a good idea, until the day you cancel the insurance and the horse incurs a huge injury shortly thereafter! Just had a chat with Mr GL about this and he feels we ought to continue with the insurance cover in case of that eventuality. But that's how insurance wins every time ... You don't need it until,you need it .... Also, if there is a pot of cash sitting there "just in case" the temptation is always there to "borrow" it for other things .....!
 
ROMANY 1959 said:
This has only started happening since they were taken over by this new underwriter, I am having a row with them now.. They want to exclude all 4 legs just cos left fore is excluded ( I agree with this one being excluded) they want me to jump thro hoops... Have a new 5 stage vetting done, without bloods, this will cost £300and vat and call out. Nearly as much as years insurance, and then they won't promise to lift exclusions on other legs, I've had mare insured with them for last year, but they looked again at the vetting from 12 months ago and decision made that I've got to do what they say or no cover for legs!!! So I am , on own vets advice am looking around for another insurance company, and my vet will give me a report showing they have not treated mare for anything in last 12 months . Mare is only worth £2000 and I know lots of companies will insure without a vet cert.
As I must say this is all down to the new underwriter trying to wriggle out of things... They just want your money and make you jump thro hoops to claim. I have never claimed from them in 5 years with amtrust.
Click to expand...

Actually they are the same underwriter - just a change of broker :)
 
I changed to animal friends in April from amtrust, because they excluded all four legs on sasha!!! Why they would not explain. Said it was because of the write up the vet did at her vetting in march 2013. I knew one foreleg was excluded from old injury from 2010, but I never found out why other three were too. So I went to animal friends, explained all this, sent a copy of vetting from 2013 and they only excluded the one fore leg, funny that it they never excluded them for the whole of 2013, just when they were taken over and reviewed it I assumed. Still I am happy with animal friends, and still have Dublin with amtrust, insurance is a minefield!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top