Insurance - grrr! Who do you use?

[Twiglet]

Am trying to get my new horse covered, and would prefer to go with SEIB as they've been decent in the past. However, their underwriters are apparently more qualified than my vet in deciding the state of my horse's front hooves and are excluding them from the policy.

Despite a signed statement from the vet that the feet are absolutely fine (other than being 3mm different in size), and that he can't see any reason why they've excluded nose and eyes from the policy, they are refusing to provide cover on those things.

I'm a bit hesitant to go with NFU as their cover includes less on vets fees, but for another £100 a year on the policy.

Is there anyone else I should consider? Have heard pretty bad things about Shearwater paying out on conditions, and Petplan don't seem to cover as much.

 

[YasandCrystal]

A good friend of mine bought a horse with one slightly smaller front foot and now several years on it has led to terrible problems and damage with the digital flexor tendons in both feet. She even had xrays prior to buying the horse. So you can see why the insurance companies can be wary. They are minimising their risk of any future claims. I know this doesn't help you, but the odd feet must have been mentionned in a vetting etc for them to be aware and if they were mentionned then the insurance will often exclude.

 

[maggiesmum]

I use scottish equestrian, i've made 2 claims in about 8 years and they paid out straight away on them both.

 

[Kat]

I'm with KBIS as I found that they offered a good level of cover at a price that was cheaper than most but not cheapest. They also had more workable conditions regarding vettings etc as I didn't have a vetting certificate and didn't want to have to get one.

 

[Natz88]

Mine are insured with KBIS & the last couple of years we have had to make a couple of claims & they have been fantastic with paying out. They are slightly more expensive, but I am not worried as they just been so good

 

[Twiglet]

A good friend of mine bought a horse with one slightly smaller front foot and now several years on it has led to terrible problems and damage with the digital flexor tendons in both feet. She even had xrays prior to buying the horse. So you can see why the insurance companies can be wary. They are minimising their risk of any future claims. I know this doesn't help you, but the odd feet must have been mentionned in a vetting etc for them to be aware and if they were mentionned then the insurance will often exclude.

Interesting. Was the tendon damage a direct result of the different sized feet?

I discussed the option of X-Rays with the vet at the time, we agreed that as the difference was minimal, the horse otherwise has good feet and conformation, it wasn't neccesary. He measured all the feet as part of the vetting and it was noted - but it was pointed out that it was merely an observation and in his opinion it didn't 'increase any risk factors for this horse developing feet or leg issues later on'.

 

[Twiglet]

Hadn't thought of KBIS - will look into them now.

 

[YasandCrystal]

Interesting. Was the tendon damage a direct result of the different sized feet?

I discussed the option of X-Rays with the vet at the time, we agreed that as the difference was minimal, the horse otherwise has good feet and conformation, it wasn't neccesary. He measured all the feet as part of the vetting and it was noted - but it was pointed out that it was merely an observation and in his opinion it didn't 'increase any risk factors for this horse developing feet or leg issues later on'.

In my friend's horse's case what happened was that there was no sinister reason for the difference in size showing in the xrays, but the horse had one leg fractionally shorter than the other. Again this wouldn't have mattered if the horse had been CAREFULLY tended to by the farrier. Sadly poor friend used a farrier and then another who just paid all their attention on the boxy upright foot forgetting the 'normal' one which was taking all the strain. This resulted in the terrible damage. If the horse had just been a happy hacker it likely would never have come to that, but he was a good amateur XC horse, so pretty fit and used for dressage etc too. She turned to pure dressage and then side saddle and sadly side saddle does place an uneven balance on a horse and the problems recurred. Months and months of rehab - terrible for the owner. My husband is a farrier and the advice I give to friends is if in doubt (or just do it anyway) ask your vet when they innoculate to look at your horses foot balance to confirm if your farrier/trimmer etc is doing a good job

 

[Twiglet]

In my friend's horse's case what happened was that there was no sinister reason for the difference in size showing in the xrays, but the horse had one leg fractionally shorter than the other. Again this wouldn't have mattered if the horse had been CAREFULLY tended to by the farrier. Sadly poor friend used a farrier and then another who just paid all their attention on the boxy upright foot forgetting the 'normal' one which was taking all the strain. This resulted in the terrible damage. If the horse had just been a happy hacker it likely would never have come to that, but he was a good amateur XC horse, so pretty fit and used for dressage etc too. She turned to pure dressage and then side saddle and sadly side saddle does place an uneven balance on a horse and the problems recurred. Months and months of rehab - terrible for the owner. My husband is a farrier and the advice I give to friends is if in doubt (or just do it anyway) ask your vet when they innoculate to look at your horses foot balance to confirm if your farrier/trimmer etc is doing a good job

What a sad sequence of events for her. Did she get the problems sorted in the end?

Had a looooong chat with the farrier (who happens to specialises in remedial and corrective) at first shoeing last week, and discussed it in detail. He took measurements too, and is going to work at evening the feet up, which he doesn't think will be an issue, and thinks otherwise the balance and structure of the feet are good.

 

[Puppy]

I'm a bit hesitant to go with NFU as their cover includes less on vets fees, but for another £100 a year on the policy.

Really? I thought they did different levels of max vet fees?! I did a lot of shopping around when I got Charlie because of all the threads on here saying NFU's new premiums were going through the roof (Maybe due to how much Be has cost them ) and actually after many hours I discovered that NFU gave the most comprehensive cover as well as slightly less than most.

 

[YasandCrystal]

What a sad sequence of events for her. Did she get the problems sorted in the end?

Had a looooong chat with the farrier (who happens to specialises in remedial and corrective) at first shoeing last week, and discussed it in detail. He took measurements too, and is going to work at evening the feet up, which he doesn't think will be an issue, and thinks otherwise the balance and structure of the feet are good.

Well if by sorted you mean sound - yes he is sound but he will never jump or event again. too risky that the tendons will break down again.

I think many horses have odd non matching feet and that is not normally an issue, only if the feet are poorly/badly shod or trimmed.

 

[ReggiePerrin]

I'm with KBIS and had an issue with exclusions. On the vetting my thorough vet mentioned lots of little things that they then excluded. One of the exclusions was because the vet noted a ocular discharge but with no associated problems. Being a special boy, Barney managed to get an ulcer on his eye after 2 weeks and ended up going to Liphook. At no point did KBIS mention the exclusion as a problem and I kept them fully up to date with what was going on. My vet, who also did the vetting assured me that the two things were in no way linked.

£2,500 paid in bills later and KBIS came back and said they weren't paying. Not only did they link his ocular discharge to his ulcer, they also said that because it had been noted that he had a patch of hair loss on his tail, he probably got the ulcer by rubbing his head on a hay net.

I wrote a letter of complaint that they should have made me aware that there might be a problem with the exclusion and my vet wrote the most amazing letter spelling out what rubbish they were talking. The day they received the letter from the vet, they said they'd pay out in full.

At the end of the day I wouldn't say don't use them, as the staff have been great but do make sure you push back on things. He's my first horse so can't say if any of the others are better/worse. I found their website very easy to use and they were way cheaper than Petplan if you wanted to do anything more than hack.