Insurance query - loss of horse in last 3 years

R

RHGR

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 August 2018
Messages
75
Visit site
Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on legal stuff to advise whether I can get insurance for my pony! The insurer I trust best states that to take out horse insurance you must not have had a loss/loss of use of a horse in the last three years. The pony my mum bought me as a teenager was insured by her, financed by her, all livery and vet fees paid by her until the ponies death 2 years ago, legally she was my mothers, but I took care of her.
I am no longer a teenager and have bought a new horse which I fund myself. I am wanting to take out vet fees insurance but with the 'loss of horse' stipulation I'm unsure whether or not I'd be covered
 
If it wasn’t in your name then I believe you’d be okay but ideally you would ask the insurer first.
 
I’ve not heard of this before and I’ve had animals die but been able to insure the next purchase, mind you I don’t insure for loss of use.
 
HopOnTrot said:
If it wasn’t in your name then I believe you’d be okay but ideally you would ask the insurer first.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't do that, they will likely count it against you.


What's the actual wording of the question? If you didn't pay the insurance or own the horse or pay the bills then you did not claim and you can truthfully say no. Unless the question refers to the horse being in your care or is worded to read that way.
.
 
I had Kia pts and still got insurance for Faran 👀 so I can’t see how this is enforceable 👀 old horses die. Same as old people does that mean I can’t get life insurance if my parents die? Rather a bizarre insurance clause really 🙄
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
I had Kia pts and still got insurance for Faran 👀 so I can’t see how this is enforceable 👀 old horses die. Same as old people does that mean I can’t get life insurance if my parents die? Rather a bizarre insurance clause really 🙄
Click to expand...


They will have spotted a pattern in the data that people who lose one horse are more likely to lose another.

Some people are much more likely to take risks buying horses than others, especially if they can get them insured.

It's unfair to people who don't make risky purchases, but they can only spot patterns, not individuals and everyone pays.
.
 
ycbm said:
I wouldn't do that, they will likely count it against you.


What's the actual wording of the question? If you didn't pay the insurance or own the horse or pay the bills then you did not claim and you can truthfully say no. Unless the question refers to the horse being in your care or is worded to read that way.
.
Click to expand...
The wording is 'you have had no losses in the past three years' then goes on to explain the term 'losses' as loss or loss of use of a horse, vets fees other than routine, liability to any third party due to an accident, or loss or damage to tack or trailers. To me that reads more as financial losses and I had not financed the old horse in any way shape or form, I never lost any money.
 
Last edited:
RHGR said:
The wording is 'you have had no losses in the past three years' then goes on to explain the term 'losses' as loss or loss of use of a horse, vets fees other than routine, liability to any third party due to an accident, or loss or damage to tack or trailers. To me that reads more as financial losses and I have no financed the old horse in any way shape or form, I never lost any money.
Click to expand...


I think you can truthfully answer no to that question. It does, though, suggest that the insurance company you would like to use might be more picky about paying out. If there's another one that you can use that doesn't ask that question then I'd probably insure with them.
.
 
ycbm said:
They will have spotted a pattern in the data that people who lose one horse are more likely to lose another.

Some people are much more likely to take risks buying horses than others, especially if they can get them insured.

It's unfair to people who don't make risky purchases, but they can only spot patterns, not individuals and everyone pays.
.
Click to expand...

A pattern? Really so because my 30+ yr old horse died of old age complicated with Cushing my youngster is likely to as well? That’s just nature 🤣🤣🤣 I mean if he gets to 30+ he might out live me 🤣🤣🤣

Never even bothered declaring Kia died. He wasn’t insured and his passport wasn’t worth the paper it was written on. Said Black cob gelding on it and an estimated birth date that was wrong 🤣

I think that’s a ridiculous clause and again never even saw that or would have bothered with it when I got farans insurance.
 
I lost Homey in 2022 and bought Bert in 2023. I was with NFU they still agreed to insure Bert. My excess is higher at £450 and monthly premiums are higher at £125 a month than when I had Homey.
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
A pattern? Really so because my 30+ yr old horse died of old age complicated with Cushing my youngster is likely to as well? That’s just nature 🤣🤣🤣 I mean if he gets to 30+ he might out live me 🤣🤣🤣

Never even bothered declaring Kia died. He wasn’t insured and his passport wasn’t worth the paper it was written on. Said Black cob gelding on it and an estimated birth date that was wrong 🤣

I think that’s a ridiculous clause and again never even saw that or would have bothered with it when I got farans insurance.
Click to expand...

You are one person. One person isn't a pattern. They are looking at patterns across their entire base of data. And seeing them.
.
 
Years ago when I got another horse having retired one with a long history of claims, NFU weighted the premiums to such a high level it wasn't viable. Think £700 when other quotes were half that. A friend in a similar situation got the premiums down by putting in her father's name. So looking at the owner not just the horse has been happening in the background for a while.

In this case I would truthfully answer No, you haven't made any claims or suffered losses.
 
ycbm said:
You are one person. One person isn't a pattern. They are looking at patterns across their entire base of data. And seeing them.
.
Click to expand...
Crikey I lost four in under 7 years, none were my fault, ridden accident, field accident, heart attack, untreatable wobblers.

They might have classed me as a bad risk but they never did as I wasn't even present with three of the four incidents and never had insurance cancelled or revoked.

Times have changed I suspect.
 
ycbm said:
I think you can truthfully answer no to that question. It does, though, suggest that the insurance company you would like to use might be more picky about paying out. If there's another one that you can use that doesn't ask that question then I'd probably insure with them.
.
Click to expand...
Oddly it's one of the insurance companies that's considered the best at paying out and everyone I know that's used them rates them very highly as they pay direct to vet with no issues. My mum claimed on the insurance a couple times and they were fantastic hence how I'd like to go with them. Just feels like such a grey area as legally I don't think I would be considered the last ponies owner as I wasn't her registered owner, never had my name on any insurance policies, never paid for anything for her (beyond pretty coloured saddle pads 🙈) and she was registered under my mum's name at the vets
 
RHGR said:
Oddly it's one of the insurance companies that's considered the best at paying out and everyone I know that's used them rates them very highly as they pay direct to vet with no issues. My mum claimed on the insurance a couple times and they were fantastic hence how I'd like to go with them. Just feels like such a grey area as legally I don't think I would be considered the last ponies owner as I wasn't her registered owner, never had my name on any insurance policies, never paid for anything for her (beyond pretty coloured saddle pads 🙈) and she was registered under my mum's name at the vets
Click to expand...
Then you can honestly answer No.
 
ycbm said:
If your parents died young then your premium would be higher and might well be refused if they died of a heritable disease.
.
Click to expand...
What happens to people who don't know their birth parentage? I suspect a lot of people don’t know that me included.
 
RHGR said:
Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on legal stuff to advise whether I can get insurance for my pony! The insurer I trust best states that to take out horse insurance you must not have had a loss/loss of use of a horse in the last three years. The pony my mum bought me as a teenager was insured by her, financed by her, all livery and vet fees paid by her until the ponies death 2 years ago, legally she was my mothers, but I took care of her.
I am no longer a teenager and have bought a new horse which I fund myself. I am wanting to take out vet fees insurance but with the 'loss of horse' stipulation I'm unsure whether or not I'd be covered
Click to expand...
You didn't have legal ownership of the your childhood pony so you tick no to that box.
 
ycbm said:
You are one person. One person isn't a pattern. They are looking at patterns across their entire base of data. And seeing them.
.
Click to expand...

They must be pulling info from just the one person though as adding all the one persons together gives them a subject pool. Only one person insures at a time usually.

If you haven’t made an insurance claim for death or had your previous horse insured then you could just say no and carry on. How would they check? They are only entitled to the information about the horse you are trying to insure 👀 you could have horses insured with different insurance companies at one time. I never declared Kia died as above. It will be 7yrs this Nov he went to sleep.

I just think it’s a ridiculous clause unless you’re claiming constantly for death pay outs. There were no insurance losses for me so as far as I’m concerned the insurance company doesn’t need to know business not pertinent to their policies 🙂
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
A pattern? Really so because my 30+ yr old horse died of old age complicated with Cushing my youngster is likely to as well? That’s just nature 🤣🤣🤣 I mean if he gets to 30+ he might out live me 🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...

They are looking more for people that say:

Buy a horse for under the purchase price of needing a vetting, spend £££££ claiming on this horse before PTS

Then buy horse B but againn spend ££££ investigating and then claim LOU

Then buy horse C and D etc

They've paid out far more for this owner then they've made in premiums but likely as a result of patterns like this, all premiums for customers have risen across the board have risen. I'm not adverse to T&C's like that for that reason.

It's v. unlikely a person would be refused cover because they had their elderly horse they've owned for 15 years PTS and claimed for the odd thing over that time period, with most insurers.
 
Last edited:
Roasted Chestnuts said:
They must be pulling info from just the one person though as adding all the one persons together gives them a subject pool. Only one person insures at a time usually.
Click to expand...


They definitely are analysing the whole base. They are spotting a pattern that people who have lost a horse in the last 3 years are more likely to lose another.

This will be for multiple reasons. Because people will tend to keep the next horse the same way and do the same things with it which contributed to the risk of death last time. Because people who take a risk on buying a horse that they can see may be not quite right are likely to do the same again next time because they aren't risk averse. Because people who can't spot a lame horse when they buy one are likely to buy another lame horse next time. For examples.

Insurance is a numbers game, they look at the whole base and that particular insurance company is spotting a pattern of higher risk in insuring a horse within 3 years of the death or LOU payment of a previous one.
 
Roasted Chestnuts said:
They are only entitled to the information about the horse you are trying to insure 👀 you could have horses insured with different insurance companies at one time.
Click to expand...


This isn't true. They are entitled to ask for whatever information they want and decline your business if you won't answer. If you lie and they can find your lie by looking at social media (oh yes they do) or a claims record shared between companies (like the car insurers do), then they won't pay out.

Lying is insurance fraud.
.
 
Birker2020 said:
What happens to people who don't know their birth parentage? I suspect a lot of people don’t know that me included.
Click to expand...


You just tell the truth B.

Your premiums will be higher than people who can declare that they have healthy parents or ones who died at a good old age and lower than people with, for example parents who give them a higher risk disease.
.
 
When I insured one of mine, a few years back, I was asked about any claim I'd made EVER!!!

I have had horses since '79! Insured my own from '83.

I have made a few claims, but can't remember when over such a long time period. I told them I could only answer to the best of my ability and it may, or may not, be accurate!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top