Insurers get tough on 'barefoot' horse claims

[cptrayes]

I've worked with the actuaries of insurance companies and believe me, they aren't interested in whether anyone is qualified or not. They are only interested in minimising claim payments, and they can do this by restricting payouts on all sorts of bases. If they can wriggle out of a claim for a foot abscess because of the completely unrelated fact that your horse is trimmed by a non-farrier, they will.

When they finally discover that barefoot horses get less caudal hoof lameness than other horses, that horses with self balancing feet get less joint problems than other horses, that horses on carefully mineral balanced diets get less mud fever than other horses, that horses on low grass/sugar diets get less sweet itch than other horses, that horses with caudal hoof lameness can be cured without £5000 worth of investigations, medications and remedial shoes, etc etc, they'll be begging us all to use the barefoot trimmers who know about these things.


ps standard joke in the industry - why does someone choose to become an actuary? Because they find accountancy too exciting.

 

[Tinypony]

Yes they only do one day's training...7 hours to be exact - with a 30 minute lunch break.

And half of that day is learning about voodoo.

 

[Oberon]

I'm not against barefoot trimmers. I just think that if you look at it from an insurers point of view, these people dont really have any decent qualifications to be trimming horses feet and when that is the case, i feel they have every right to refuse payment.

My trimmers have trained in the US and the UK and trained with many different people.

They are members of the UKNHCP, who offer a high level of training and they continue to study and develop their practice even now.

I know I am getting the very best in hoof care for my horses.

Even my ubber traditional YO states simply that with a farrier her horses were lame. With my trimmer, the horses are sound.

I don't care what the NFU says. I'm sticking with what I've got thank you very much.

It really irritates me when people declare all BF trimmers as charlatans with only one day's training. Of course there are bad ones out there. But please don't tar everyone with the same brush. We Barefoot Taliban would never do that with the farriers...however sorely tempted

 

[criso]

No vitriol from me - just a complete understanding of where insurance companies are coming from.

They absolutely cannot pay out for treatment from any old guy. They HAVE to restrict payouts to treatment received from members of regulated bodies.

But that's not the issue in the statement they released.

What NFU are saying is if you make a claim for vets fees and have been using a trimmer instead of a farrier, then they can reject your claim.

They are also refusing to pay for barefoot rehab where other insurance companies are but that is a second and different issue.

 

[AlDestoor]

But that's not the issue in the statement they released.

What NFU are saying is if you make a claim for vets fees and have been using a trimmer instead of a farrier, then they can reject your claim.

They are also refusing to pay for barefoot rehab where other insurance companies are but that is a second and different issue.

I've hear ALOT about NFU recently. I, myself am not with NFU, but have heard about them increasing insurance rates ridculously recently. I was with them for 10 year untill 2 years back when they wanted £50 for my 12 yr old TB a month!!

No tar, i went somewhere else!

 

[Tinypony]

Blimey, I must be getting to be a grumpy old woman.
All these daft anecdotes about the bad trims people have seen, the bad shoeing that people have seen. When will people get the message that every horse owner needs to educate themselves so that they are able to recognise bad work when they see it? Bad work by a farrier or a trimmer?
I've seen some complete lash-up shoeings (some on here), but I don't say all farriers are rubbish as a result. If I did that would be as daft as saying that I'd seen the work of one or two bad trimmers and that therefore all barefoot trimmers were to be dismissed out of hand as well.
Wouldn't it?
Cptrayes has got it right. This is not about NFU making some sort of brave stand against barefoot trimmers. It's all about the bottom line and how they can squeeze in a clause that sometime down the line will mean they can refuse some poor sod's insurance claim.

 

[Goldenstar]

Blimey, I must be getting to be a grumpy old woman.
All these daft anecdotes about the bad trims people have seen, the bad shoeing that people have seen. When will people get the message that every horse owner needs to educate themselves so that they are able to recognise bad work when they see it? Bad work by a farrier or a trimmer?
I've seen some complete lash-up shoeings (some on here), but I don't say all farriers are rubbish as a result. If I did that would be as daft as saying that I'd seen the work of one or two bad trimmers and that therefore all barefoot trimmers were to be dismissed out of hand as well.Wouldn't it?
Cptrayes has got it right. This is not about NFU making some sort of brave stand against barefoot trimmers. It's all about the bottom line and how they can squeeze in a clause that sometime down the line will mean they can refuse some poor sod's insurance claim.[/


Yes that's the problem getting polarised at either end of this foot debate you need to keep an open mind keep learning and keep questioning what you do and why you do it.
As for the insurance thank god I dont

 

[Amaranta]

I've worked with the actuaries of insurance companies and believe me, they aren't interested in whether anyone is qualified or not. They are only interested in minimising claim payments, and they can do this by restricting payouts on all sorts of bases. If they can wriggle out of a claim for a foot abscess because of the completely unrelated fact that your horse is trimmed by a non-farrier, they will.

When they finally discover that barefoot horses get less caudal hoof lameness than other horses, that horses with self balancing feet get less joint problems than other horses, that horses on carefully mineral balanced diets get less mud fever than other horses, that horses on low grass/sugar diets get less sweet itch than other horses, that horses with caudal hoof lameness can be cured without £5000 worth of investigations, medications and remedial shoes, etc etc, they'll be begging us all to use the barefoot trimmers who know about these things.


ps standard joke in the industry - why does someone choose to become an actuary? Because they find accountancy too exciting.

I tend to agree with your first paragraph, insurance companies do try to wriggle out when they can, sad but true. On the other hand, I can understand them insisting that only qualified people can attend to a horse that is not their own.

Has there been proper research carried out on the claimed benefits of barefoot? Has it been published and peer reviewed? If not that would be a good start, the WCF and, more importantly, the veterinary profession would have to take you seriously. Anecdotal evidence is simply not enough I'm afraid.

Chiropracters were at one time excluded, until the veterinary profession started to recognised them.

 

[amandap]

When will people get the message that every horse owner needs to educate themselves so that they are able to recognise bad work when they see it? Bad work by a farrier or a trimmer?

This, this and THIS


At the end of the day your horses are YOUR responsibility.

I'll go off and bang my head somewhere else.

 

[ester]

can you get papers amaranta?

I have just had a quick search in WOK.. not read it properly yet but will have a look at some point.

Title: Effects of barefoot trimming on hoof morphology
Author(s): Clayton H. M.; Gray S.; Kaiser L. J.; et al.
Source: AUSTRALIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL Volume: 89 Issue: 8 Pages: 305-311 DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.2011.00806.x Published: AUG 2011
Times Cited: 1 (from All Databases)

summary of results Results (although sample size was small- 7)

Establishment of the barefoot trim involved significant shortening of the toe, heel and medial and lateral walls, with increases in angulation at the toe, medial and lateral walls, but not at the heel. Maintenance of the trim resulted in a palmar/plantar migration of the heels, with increases in support length, heel angle and solar angle of the distal phalanx (P3).

Conclusions Bevelling the toe and engaging the frog and bars in the weight-bearing function of the foot resulted in elevation of the heel angle and solar angle of P3. These changes may be beneficial in treating under-run heels and negative solar plane angulation of P3.

That's the most relevant I can find atm, I assume that there is an intention to publish the project dexter results when they are finished.

 

[Flame_]

Chiropracters were at one time excluded, until the veterinary profession started to recognised them.

The insurance might not pay out for chiro treatment, but they wouldn't have said they wouldn't payout for veterinary KS treatment if the horse has received regular chiro treatment.

I can understand the insurance not supporting paying for barefoot rehabilitation treatment because AFAIC its still in its early, developmental stages and there isn't enough research and data to support it yet (although ironically if they did it would probably save them a lot of money), but what this is saying is that insurance for foot problems, or possibly even any problems like hocks or back for example, which could and do happen to any horses, could be void because people don't use registered farriers. That can't be right when a lot of people are confident that they are doing the best thing for their horses having their feet regularly cared for by a trimmer.

 

[ArcticIce]

I'm a vet.

No - honestly, I am!

Let me treat your horse and then I'll give you a bill and you can pay me and then claim off your insurance.

What do you mean they want me to be qualified and a member of some weird professional group that monitors standards of practice?

How odd that they won't pay out just because I say that I'm capable of doing what I'm doing.

How strange that they want me to be a member of some registered, governed body with standards and guidelines.

I just don't get it.

 

[Flame_]

Actually, having given this more thought, if insurance start going down the "only qualified professionals" route, could my insurance end up void because I hardly ever use a saddle fitter? For all their qualifications, I don't trust them and I usually fit my own horses saddles, so following this logic it would be a matter of time before my insurance was void too, wouldn't it?

 

[Littlelegs]

Like many others have said, its just yet another way of reducing the no of claims they have to pay out on. It's nothing to do with barefoot really, i'm pretty sure if a horse ended up with a back problem & you said you'd fitted the saddle yourself they'd try & back out of paying regardless of whether it was related. Same goes for teeth, worming etc.

 

[amandap]

Now I've calmed down and banged some slight sense into my head...

I think everyone agrees that trimmers (and all professionals) need a regulatory body but it seems this is taking time for various reasons...

The important thing is imo any regulatory body needs to be truly good at what it does and it therefore has to be knowledgeable not some sort of club where you just pay to be a member...

The main trimming orgs in UK have a strict CPD and peer review structure in place already, all trimmers have to be insured and each of the organizations has a complaints system already in place. Hopefully soon there will be a separate overall regulatory body to police them.

There are stories of poor trimming, farriery, veterinary care etc. etc. and even as mentioned on this thread farriers practicing who aren't quallified. These sort of people are in all walks of life and you can't tell by looking.

It is down to the owner to check for themselves, get references and have some knowledge and ability to observe your horses responses to hoof care and monitor the impact of any professionals intervention. Demand clear explanations and openness, the professional is not your enemy they are part of your team keeping your horse healthy and regaining health, communication between you and them is vital in my view.

Oh and don't forget you are paying for their services...

 

[DragonSlayer]

...I'm still wondering who the heck decided an ANGLE GRINDER that is purely for CUTTING METAL is suitable for the use on a living creature??

Barefoot trimmer/farrier, whoever you chose, using an angle grinder in my book, is quite, quite dreadful, and oneday, there is going to be hell of an accident....

 

[YorksG]

...I'm still wondering who the heck decided an ANGLE GRINDER that is purely for CUTTING METAL is suitable for the use on a living creature??

Barefoot trimmer/farrier, whoever you chose, using an angle grinder in my book, is quite, quite dreadful, and oneday, there is going to be hell of an accident....

This^
Plus it is possible that the NFU, while possibly looking for means to exclude claims, are also concerned about practices such as above. The woman promoting the angle grinder claims to be a foremost performance barefoor trimmer, it is people like her and those who defend her, who call the whole practice into question.imo

 

[Littlelegs]

In fairness, as I said on the other thread, the idiot with the angle grinder isn't someone I'd associate with the general practice of barefooters, anymore than I assume rolkur is a fair example of all dressage trainers.

 

[YorksG]

In fairness, as I said on the other thread, the idiot with the angle grinder isn't someone I'd associate with the general practice of barefooters, anymore than I assume rolkur is a fair example of all dressage trainers.

That is fair enough, but I have never come across an e-book promoting rolkur. Also there are many sites 'educating' owners as to how to trim their horses hooves themselves. Until the barefoot trimmers/equine podiatrists have a regulatory body, which precludes anyone just setting themselves up, with protected title, then I think the insurance companies will take this route.

 

[Littlelegs]

YorksG- agreed. Although I doubt nfu's stance has anything to do with the interests of protecting horses welfare, its just a handy way to wriggle out of claims.

 

[Amaranta]

YorksG- agreed. Although I doubt nfu's stance has anything to do with the interests of protecting horses welfare, its just a handy way to wriggle out of claims.

I suspect you may be right. I no longer insure with NFU for many reasons the biggest of which is the cost of their premiums. I don't think they are trying to get out of equine insurance as they tried like hell to keep my business, however, although mine are unshod, they are seen by a farrier every 6 weeks or so, so this clause would not have affected me.

I also agree with Yorksg, the lady with the angle grinder is one of many and until there is a proper regulating body who polices these people, then the barefoot movement will continue to cause consternation.

 

[amandap]

It's not just that woman that uses angle grinders to trim hooves btw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fV5jhzL8rw
I'm sure it's not unusual at all tbh. It's the training owners to trim using one that is so scary to me. Add to that the distance/unsupervised learning aspect and...

 

[LadyRascasse]

Yes they only do one day's training...7 hours to be exact - with a 30 minute lunch break.

And half of that day is learning about voodoo.

This is why I would never use one. I have no objection to horses being barefoot but i would prefer someone who has studied the equine foot and has do CDP to keep said qualification. I have had a horse crippled by bad shoeing, currently have my horse shod all round but she may be having them off very soon (not for anything relating to the shoes) I will still have my farrier out to trim her.

 

[Littlelegs]

It is indeed scary. I think I find the fact these nutters promote it worse than the fact they do it themselves. Just so wrong.

 

[JFTDWS]

The only time I've ever felt the need of an anglegrinder around my horses was when I lost my hitchlock keys and had to cut the flippin' think off the trailer

 

[amandap]

This is why I would never use one. I have no objection to horses being barefoot but i would prefer someone who has studied the equine foot and has do CDP to keep said qualification. I have had a horse crippled by bad shoeing, currently have my horse shod all round but she may be having them off very soon (not for anything relating to the shoes) I will still have my farrier out to trim her.

I am sure oberon was being sarcastic.

UKNHCP are actually accredited to provide CPD to farriers.
It's all such a jumble and farriers really must get together with trimmers formally.

 

[Amaranta]

It's not just that woman that uses angle grinders to trim hooves btw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fV5jhzL8rw
I'm sure it's not unusual at all tbh. It's the training owners to trim using one that is so scary to me. Add to that the distance/unsupervised learning aspect and...

Jesus those feet! Looks like that horse had not had it's feet done for a very long time!

The other thing that struck me was that the farrier had lovely hair

 

[indie999]

My farrier today had up to 5 years of training and exams and I would rather use him than someone who thinks its like cutting toe nails!

Yes he agreed vets do recommend barefoot trimmers but is at a lost to understand why as he does barefoot too? But he said the reason farriers became registerd in first place was to stop bad practice.

I think NFU are right. Would you go to see a GP that had a crash course in medicine?

 

[amandap]

Would you go to see a GP that had a crash course in medicine?

I'm wasting my typing time but repeat, many trimmers have done much more than a crash course. Perhaps if your farrier looked at say for eg. UKNHCP training or did some of their CPD he might find out why some vets use 'good' trimmers.

 

[lannerch]

Many trimmers may have done more than a crash course but many have not! And those that have done more than the crash course I bet those that have done the equivalent of 5 years training with exams are in the minority.
And unfortunately they are all called bare foot trimmers!