Insurance Exclusions - all colic/digestive systems

C

charliecrisps

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 February 2008
Messages
321
Location
Dover
Visit site
My horse suffered with atypical myopathy in November, and after 10 days at the equine hosp luckily pulled through. Vet gave us the all clear a couple of weeks ago (bloods back to normal etc.)

Now my insurance company has excluded atypical myopathy (fair enough) and all digestive systems/colic. Does anyone else think this second exclusion is a bit unfair or had any similar experiences.

I don't mind it stating 'excluded if related to atypical myopathy' but think all colics a bit unfair... or as you cant really prove what would be related is there exclusion they've put on fair enough?
 
It is unfair but insurance companies will try and wriggle out of anything they think is going to cost them money.

When I brought my mare she passed a 5 stage vetting with flying colours but because the insurance company couldn't read the vets writing, they excluded her from heart and lungs. When I mentioned this to them their exact words were 'well if there is nothing wrong with them then there shouldn't be a problem with is excluding them'. Then they said that if I didn't make a claim on them within that year then they would put them back on the following year.

Because I was young and didn't know my rights and the fact that they had paid out on my previous horse with no questions I just rolled over instead of fighting it.
 
Its not really wriggling its assessing risk .
They have decided that as a result of the condition your horse suffered it is at higher risk of digestive issues in the future therefore they don't wish to assume that risk .
Insurance is a buisness that's how it makes a profit.
 
Money grubbing greedy b***ards, I think is a more accurate description. My horse got tangled in a fence some years ago and cut her hock, which healed 100% but did entail an insurance claim. Now that hock is excluded. So if she were to get kicked now, say, something which had absolutely nothing to do with getting caught in a fence in 2008, that hock would be excluded. It's really stupid.
 
Caol Ila said:
Money grubbing greedy b***ards, I think is a more accurate description. My horse got tangled in a fence some years ago and cut her hock, which healed 100% but did entail an insurance claim. Now that hock is excluded. So if she were to get kicked now, say, something which had absolutely nothing to do with getting caught in a fence in 2008, that hock would be excluded. It's really stupid.
Click to expand...

Sorry but this isn't the case at all. Insurance isn't there to cover the inevitable. In respect of your hock exclusion I am pretty sure you could get the exclusion amended if you asked or you could change to another company who may not exclude it or only exclude any further issues connected to the original injury.

As for the OP, I can see why they've done this and for now I think you may just have to live with it. If your horse has no further incidents then at next renewal you could ask that they review it. Horse insurance really does not make any money for insurers - think average premium approx £350 and average claim these days is somewhere around £1500.
 
Years ago I had both hind legs excluded from cover on a filly who had had a slipped patella - but they still expected the same premium. At renewal one year on I applied for it to be lifted but they refused. I was telling a well known equine vet about this and how I was small fry to them and he said their business is made up of small owners, so advised me to apply a little pressure.
I wrote and told them I was prepared to write to the equestrian press describing how they refused to cover a major part of my horse but still expected the same premium. They lifted the exclusion. There is one thing they dislike more than losing money and that is bad publicity.
Worth a shot?
 
Agree with others that it is worth querying the exclusion at some point. My cob had a spasmodic colic (1 vet visit, no claim) and a mild conjunctivitis (no claim) not long before his recent renewal date. I had to declare the conditions to SEIB, and they excluded all colic and all conjunctivitis. I queried it, and was told that I could reapply to have the exclusions removed in six months time.

Btw, SEIB ask for a complete veterinary history of the horse since it has been in your ownership if you put in a claim, so it is not worth not reporting any vet treatment, as you will be found out!

I think that I will self insure once the cob's current period insurance runs out as the small print is getting ridiculous, and I prefer to deal directly with the vets rather than having to factor in the insurance company's involvement.
 
Coal ila if there was a kick or separate injury to the hock they would cover it but anything mechanical ie arthritis they won't. This is how it works with Kia's hock, his arthritis is excluded, along with any mud fever symptoms due to the lymphocytic vasculitis, but if he had to get cut or a kick or any other externally caused injury it would be covered :)
 
My cat had pancreatitis and they excluded anything related to the digestive system, I ended up just cancelling the insurance as she doesn't go out.
 
Roo choked 18 months ago and developed aspiration pneumonia, the point we left for the Dick vets was when she started showing mild colic symptoms due to dehydration. She was pretty sick and the bill came to over £2500 which the insurance were great at paying out on - I fully expected choke to be excluded but they have excluded any colic/entire digestive tract completely - what I find really daft is there is no exclusion on her lungs!
 
My mares entire digestive system, all 4 hooves, teeth, jaw, one hind leg are all excluded. Don't know why i bother with insurance to be honest!
 
I would speak to the treating vet, if they think it is a fair exclusion all well and good, if not they may be willing to write to the insurance company for you and agree a more specific wording to cover to any future colic/digestive problems which in a vet's opinion was unrelated to this claim. This is something I suspect vets must see regularly and, whilst I have some sympathy with insurance companies with all the fraud that goes on, companies still have to treat people fairly.
 
My horse colicked a couple of years ago when I took her out in my box for the day (worst trip out ever) and ended up at Liphook. She was there for 3 days but luckily didn't need surgery, they just put her on fluids and she sorted herself out, thank God. When I made an insurance claim I thought that after they paid out they wouldn't cover her again.

However, I was told that colic is a symptom and not a cause, and that as long as she stayed colic free for a year (which she has) they would cover her again, which she has been so we've got it back on our policy.
 
My horse has the same exclusion - after a bout of perontinitis (sp?) several years ago. I was shocked at first but then thought it was fair enough. At the time the insurance paid out an awful lot of money (she was hospitalised), costing well over a years premiums, nearer two. So seems fair to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top