Not declaring claims history when applying for horse insurance

W

Warieno

New User
Joined
14 February 2018
Messages
5
Visit site
A friend of mine recently sold her horse with full vet history and claim history disclosed. She has recently found out the the horse has been insured but with no mention of of it having any claims history - i.e. it has no exclusions listed on the policy.

Has anyone any advice - for example should she whistleblow? Would the insurance company really be that interested?
 
I would do nothing personally. It’s not her problem and if the current owner made a claim it may well be that the history has been passed from previous vet to current one so she’d get rumbled anyway.
 
It's fraud, and if she gets a pay out as a result, that cost filters down to everyone paying premiums and sticking to the rules.

I'm sure the insurance company would be interested; they take this sort of thing pretty seriously as far as I am aware.
 
Theocat said:
It's fraud, and if she gets a pay out as a result, that cost filters down to everyone paying premiums and sticking to the rules.

I'm sure the insurance company would be interested; they take this sort of thing pretty seriously as far as I am aware.
Click to expand...

I really doubt this one person is going to change the premiums for the rest of us. Insurance companies are hardly struggling for cash due to having to pay out claims that they could have wriggled out of.
 
meleeka said:
I really doubt this one person is going to change the premiums for the rest of us. Insurance companies are hardly struggling for cash due to having to pay out claims that they could have wriggled out of.
Click to expand...

In general terms, people claiming fraudulently push up premiums for all of us. This single person might not affect our premiums, but the point is that it isn't just this single person - lots of people commit fraud, and we all pay for it.
 
I agree with both sets of views. It's not her business but on the other hand for those of us that do tell the truth its seems wrong. No different to a lot of the fraudulent "whiplash claims" that keep being given as an excuse for our car insurance premiums going up. Its a tricky one.
 
If I sold a horse the fact the new owner insured it for any health issues would be enough, I certainly wouldn't be trying to follow up whether they done, this, that or the other.
I would probably think at least they will get the vet out and stop me worrying about the horses future - not sure how the previous owner is finding out all this info and why she would wish to
tell the insurance company, the day money was exchanged and the horse was signed over is the day she should stop worrying about the horses health insurance

It may be just hearing gossip from someone who has too much time on their hands, I wouldn't spend time on it. Unless the previous owner has seen the new insurance documents how does she know this is true
 
meleeka said:
I really doubt this one person is going to change the premiums for the rest of us. Insurance companies are hardly struggling for cash due to having to pay out claims that they could have wriggled out of.
Click to expand...

Who do you think pays the cost of insurance fraud - the other policy holders .
Personally I think insurance companies are nuts they should not cover any horse without a five stage vetting .
 
I seem to recall that when making a claim one of the boxes you tick or fill in asks what the previous owner shared or told you about any illnesses or health issues
or what you were aware of. The new owner can't claim on a new insurance policy for a while anyway and hopefully the previous owner hasn't sold her a horse with ongoing health problems
 
Not the previous owner's business, she made a full declaration. The horse might never need a vet with the new owner. And if the horse does need a vet and the insurance company find out about the history, then they will wriggle out of paying up and the owner will have paid out an insurance premium for no cover.
 
Orangehorse said:
Not the previous owner's business, she made a full declaration. The horse might never need a vet with the new owner. And if the horse does need a vet and the insurance company find out about the history, then they will wriggle out of paying up and the owner will have paid out an insurance premium for no cover.
Click to expand...

This ^^^ Nobody's business, and certainly not ours. The insurance industry has entire offices full of people dedicated to finding ways of not paying out.
 
OP you still havent answered how you can be so sure the new owner has not declared anything? I must admit I find it un creditable you would know what was on the proposal form.
 
Cortez said:
This ^^^ Nobody's business, and certainly not ours. The insurance industry has entire offices full of people dedicated to finding ways of not paying out.
Click to expand...

Chicken and egg. They weren't like it when I insured forty years ago, it's happened because there had been so much fraud.

Would the people who think this is nobody's business but the new owner just sit and watch someone try to steal a purse?

And if not, why do you consider one form of attempted theft different from the other ?

OP if you have seen evidence, not just heard hearsay, and know for a fact that the new owner is going to use a different vet, then I would tell the insurance company (which you would also obviously know) if the new owner attempts to make a claim for a pre existing condition which you told them about when you sold.

I would hope anyone would report an attempted theft they saw taking place of hundreds or thousands of pounds.
 
Cortez said:
This ^^^ Nobody's business, and certainly not ours. The insurance industry has entire offices full of people dedicated to finding ways of not paying out.
Click to expand...

Chicken and egg. They weren't like it when I insured forty years ago, it's happened because there has been so much fraud.

Would the people who think this is nobody's business but the new owner just sit and watch someone try to steal a purse?

And if not, why do you consider one form of attempted theft different from the other ?

OP if you have seen evidence, not just heard hearsay, and know for a fact that the new owner is going to use a different vet, then I would tell the insurance company (which you would also obviously know) if the new owner attempts to make a claim for a pre existing condition which you told them about when you sold.

I would hope anyone would report an attempted theft they saw taking place of hundreds or thousands of pounds.
 
Cecile said:
The new owner can't claim on a new insurance policy for a while anyway and hopefully the previous owner hasn't sold her a horse with ongoing health problems
Click to expand...

Lots of horses have to be sold with ongoing health problems. Some health problems are incurable.
 
ycbm said:
Chicken and egg. They weren't like it when I insured forty years ago, it's happened because there has been so much fraud.

Would the people who think this is nobody's business but the new owner just sit and watch someone try to steal a purse?

And if not, why do you consider one form of attempted theft different from the other ?

OP if you have seen evidence, not just heard hearsay, and know for a fact that the new owner is going to use a different vet, then I would tell the insurance company (which you would also obviously know) if the new owner attempts to make a claim for a pre existing condition which you told them about when you sold.

I would hope anyone would report an attempted theft they saw taking place of hundreds or thousands of pounds.
Click to expand...

I should imagine question 3 would sort the wheat from the chaff or start the ball rolling within the insurance industry,
trying a new vet won't work
https://www.petplanequine.co.uk/downloads/equine-vet-fees.pdf

I would certainly confront someone who I actually saw with my own eyes trying to steal a purse but unless the new owner is actually handing out photocopies of the insurance documents to all and sundry it really is just guess work/gossip and if she is trying to defraud she would actually have to be one sandwich short of a picnic to be passing this information on to Jo Public so will be caught very quickly
 
If she never makes a claim, then she hasn't really defrauded the company of anything. If she does make a claim, the vet will have to write a report and it may then come out that it was a reoccurence or related to a previous problem and she won't get paid.
 
Caracarrie said:
If she never makes a claim, then she hasn't really defrauded the company of anything. If she does make a claim, the vet will have to write a report and it may then come out that it was a reoccurence or related to a previous problem and she won't get paid.
Click to expand...

But she has committed fraud though if she lied. And chances are if the company knew about the issues they would have offered cover under different terms and premium rating.

It’s up to your friend what to do. She can anonymously tip the insurers off then it’s in their hands.
 
Goldenstar said:
Who do you think pays the cost of insurance fraud - the other policy holders .
Personally I think insurance companies are nuts they should not cover any horse without a five stage vetting .
Click to expand...

Depends upon the horse - a youngster with full vet history and properly registered can be insured on a suitable two-stage vetting.
Public liability insurance is different to vet fees insurance - and is essential for any animal whether it is young, ridden or the venerable old companion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top