Pet Plan exclude entire gastro-intestinal system after gastric ulcer claim - fuming

H

Horsewitterer

Member
Joined
2 September 2012
Messages
23
Visit site
Hello,

I never usually post on here, but I wanted to let people know about my recent bad experience with Pet Plan to see if anyone else has had the same issue and to warn others. My horse got diagnosed with grade 2 gastric ulcers and has since been treated and has been re-scoped and is thankfully all clear.

Pet Plan have been fine paying my initial claim, and I think they will pay my next claim for the re-scope without quibble, but they have excluded her entire gastro-intestinal system from the policy - not just ulcers. They have advised that all gastric issues (so this would include colic), are excluded for a period of 24 months of her being free of ulcers. I’m gob smacked - has anyone else experienced this?

My vet seemed to think this exclusion is not usual, yet Pet Plan have told me this is their standard approach after an ulcer diagnoses. My vet has said this is unfair as gastric ulcers are not related to colic.

At no point did Pet Plan write to me to explain that it was a 24 month exclusion for all gastro-intestinal problems, they just added the blanket ‘gastro-intestinal/digestive system’ exclusion to my policy.

I really want to make people aware of this as you could easily be caught out by this and not consider that this means colic is excluded for 2 years.

I’m absolutely fuming and am amazed that they think this is acceptable.
 
IME that's pretty normal.

Once you claim for something it and anything related to it is usually excluded for two years. After the two years you need a letter from the vet for the insurer to review the exclusions.

I had a horse scoped for ulcers and only very minor ones were found. He was an exracer and was scoped due to a strange collapse; vet didntnhave a clue as to cause so wanted him scoped. He wasnt a "ulcer type" horse in any way even although he was treated as an ulcer horse simply because he was an ex racer.

I too had anything gastro excluded after he was scoped. I was expecting it because that's how animal policies work after a claim has been made
 
That's what insurance companies do. If there is an issue with a leg they tend to exclude said leg and sometimes all legs.... (poor example but you see what I mean). Unfortunately for us they are a business.
 
Incredibly normal.

I use petplan, really happy with them. I've had to claim for sarcoid surgery, paid out with no issues. Sarcoids are no longer covered but I didn't expect them to be. I think that they have only stopped your cover the next 24 months is pretty decent actually, a lot of insurers wouldn't.
 
I understand why insurers exclude things you’ve already claimed for or any other pre-existing issues, but I can’t see how it’s fair to exclude problems that have never occurred. My Welsh Section A had laminitis, but it’s only laminitis that is excluded, not both of his front feet.
 
Horsewitterer said:
I understand why insurers exclude things you’ve already claimed for or any other pre-existing issues, but I can’t see how it’s fair to exclude problems that have never occurred. My Welsh Section A had laminitis, but it’s only laminitis that is excluded, not both of his front feet.
Click to expand...
Your lucky with your Welsh then as many will excluded EMS, cushings, abscesses amongst other things after lami and that would be all four feet excluded.
 
Honestly this is standard, I don't think you will find anyone who had had ulcers and not had colic excluded.
I did question why mine's mouth was excluded having not had any mouth related issues/or claims. That was because the code was very similar to the one for genitals, and they weren't sure so included both for good measure.
 
One of mine trod on a nail, not near any sensitive structures thankfully, vet out and all ok with no lameness etc. Insurance wanted to exclude the whole leg.

I managed, with vets letter stating it was an accident and did not make horse susceptible to anything else, to get the restrictions removed. I dont fancy your chances with ulcers/gastro
 
Yes perfectly, normal, I claimed for a ligament in one front leg and had both front legs excluded full stop, not just tendons/ligaments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPO
Horsewitterer said:
That’s outrageous! Maybe I’m more militant than most but I can’t agree with the insurer’s point of view!
Click to expand...

I expected the laminitis to be excluded but I felt a bit cheated with the exclusion of colic which I’ve never ever claimed for and cushings which he doesn’t even have! I cancelled the policy with them.
 
I’m obviously very naive - but I can’t sit back and just accept and agree with insurance companies on their frankly unfair approach. It makes me question the value of insurance.
 
holeymoley said:
I expected the laminitis to be excluded but I felt a bit cheated with the exclusion of colic which I’ve never ever claimed for and cushings which he doesn’t even have! I cancelled the policy with them.
Click to expand...
Don’t blame you! Did you find another insurer who would cover the colic ? I guess laminitics often end up with cushings, but still, I would never defend an insurance company!
 
Horsewitterer said:
I understand why insurers exclude things you’ve already claimed for or any other pre-existing issues, but I can’t see how it’s fair to exclude problems that have never occurred. My Welsh Section A had laminitis, but it’s only laminitis that is excluded, not both of his front feet.
Click to expand...
I would double check that. My sec D had abscesses in both front feet, had a large vet bill, petplan paid no problem but excluded her front feet.
 
Horsewitterer said:
I’m obviously very naive - but I can’t sit back and just accept and agree with insurance companies on their frankly unfair approach. It makes me question the value of insurance.
Click to expand...
Plenty of us have ditched equine insurance and now self insure, apart from 3rd party liability.
 
One of mine has M&S, treated by an annual dectomax. Her insurer asked to see her records at renewal and promptly excluded all of her skin and any allergies.
 
teddypops said:
I would double check that. My sec D had abscesses in both front feet, had a large vet bill, petplan paid no problem but excluded her front feet.
Click to expand...
So if she got laminitis in her front feet that isn’t covered? If that is so, I would argue that as there is no link between the 2.
 
I think this is fairly standard practice across insurance groups.

My mare was highly allergic to penicillin (badly enough to kill her), we didn't know this until we administered it and she reacted badly presenting with colic like symptoms, vet came etc found the course(penicillin) and treated all ended up on insurance as horse already had an open claim (this is why on penicillin) so all vet notes went straight to insurance.

So roll on a few months and insurance renewal came through and her entire digestive tract/system had been written off?‍♀️.

The mare was fine in the end but large notes were made on her medical history and passport etc of her allergic reaction to penicillin, as vet believed if she was given it again it wouldn't be a good out come
 
Had a pony with surgery on her anualar ligament on her front leg the insurance company excluded all 4 legs and as I would never do colic surgery I cancelled the insurance the next day. I now have an interest free credit card for the horses and a savings account
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top