To insure or not insure...thats the question!?!

[LadyLexicon]

Hi all,

How many people dont insure theyre horses?

Im considering getting BHS Gold and just putting 50 quid aside per month for a "vet fund" rather than paying insurance...However im not sure if this is daft!? I have always insured previous horses, i insure my dogs...but looking at quotes this evening unless i pay a £500 excess (which kind of defeats the object of insurance!?!) im looking at 50 a month...

Im really on the fence...what do you guys do???

Thanks!!!

 

[Shooting Star]

I stopped insuring other than for 3rd party as there was little left that wasn’t excluded anyway and I have a limit to what I would put a horse through by way of investigations or treatment.

I do though have savings accessible above the level that insurance would pay out to - if savings were limited I’d think twice about going self insured.

 

[AmyMay]

If you can put your hands immediately on £5k in an emergency, then yes I'd just save £50 a month.

 

[Chuffy99]

I had this conundrum in September at renewal, thank god I wasn’t brave enough as would have £200 in the account and a £3250 Vet bill

 

[pinkypug1]

I’ve just taken out insurance for the 1st time in 6 years. Although I have access to money & credit cards having to pay a 5k vet bill is still money I don’t want to spend. Putting away £50 a month it will take you 8 years to save enough to cover colic surgery and additional expenses!! What happens if you need that money before then?? As most as I hate paying it out of something goes wrong with a horse it’s an expensive business!!

 

[claret09]

my boy is 20 he has full competition horse insurance. it isn't cheap but I do have the peace of mind to know that should he ?(god forbid) need surgery he is covered. I would rather pay and "waste my money" than not have him insured. he is far, far to precious to risk

 

[View]

Have you looked at KBIS catastrophe insurance?

 

[asmp]

I think it depends on age and what you're doing with the horse. My happy hacker is now 18 and I stopped insuring a couple of years ago when there were too many exclusions, the excess was high and the limit of a claim was low. I put money in savings but wouldn't put him through big surgery now anyway.

 

[turnbuckle]

A second for the KBIS product, haven't taken it yet but it looks a VERY good idea.

And no, no connection whatever to them.

 

[Shay]

I stopped insuring ours some years ago. I kept insurance for the competition horses with loss of use; but as my daughter moved out of BS Juniors and started to look for other options I didn't renew for those we kept - and I stopped for the PC pony when he turned 15. I never had to claim before, have not had to claim since and am definitely up on the deal at this point. Plus I know that whatever treatment I want for them - or do not want - is my choice alone. And the decision on when to PTS is mine too. That said - the KBIS catastrophe insurance is interesting. We do mainly hunt now so that is something I am considering.

 

[Pearlsasinger]

We don't insure except for BHS Gold membership but we do know that we can afford any vet bills that we are likely to incur. We have already decided that any treatment which would involve a GA and prolonged of box-rest will not happen. It is easier to make such a decision in the cold light of day than when the vet is standing on the yard, at midnight, asking if you want to transport the horse to horsepital.
You have no idea what will happen tomorrow, so unless you can self-fund a vet bill, I suggest that you pay for insurance this year and at the same time, start saving for your fund. A 0% credit card can be useful for paying vet bills.

 

[ycbm]

If you can put your hands immediately on £5k in an emergency, then yes I'd just save £50 a month.

Or if you would not spend £5,000 but would put the horse down. There are very few illnesses or injuries, which I would spend that amount of money on, because of the uncertainty of prognosis.

 

[Theocat]

I shall be cancelling at renewal and saving instead. The horse has so many exclusions, and is any way so broken, that I would call it a day if it was anything remotely serious. Insurance for the two cats is coming in at about £25 a month as well, so I'll put £100 a month into savings and use it for whichever animal needs it.

I am dubious about insuring anything else in the future - despite more than making my money back, I am on my second permanently broken horse, and having the insurance hasn't actually made any difference to the outcone. I know it's different for others, but I'd also rather not be tied to these dreadful insurance timescales.

 

[Cortez]

Or if you would not spend £5,000 but would put the horse down. There are very few illnesses or injuries, which I would spend that amount of money on, because of the uncertainty of prognosis.

This ^^^. I wouldn't pay £5,000 under any circumstances. No wonder vet fees are so high in the UK.

 

[Red-1]

I cancelled Jay's insurance as soon as I knew there would be exclusions. Once there are exclusions then the vary thing I am likely to need to claim for is not covered, so it seems best to save the money I will need.

That felt so liberating that I also cancelled my small dog's insurance at renewal. By saving £8 a month I then encountered a £900 bill for pancreatitis within a couple of months.

You win some, you lose some!

 

[ester]

If something happened in month two and you had saved only £100 but you could find more funds by way of credit card (0% if possible ) etc to deal with the gap until you have savings then yup carry on.

If not consider saving now ready for next year.

 

[Goldenstar]

If you can fund 5k on a credit card and save that’s what I would do .
I would however save 100 a month .
It’s a gamble mainly I don’t insure because then what I do is just between me and the horse .

 

[baran]

It’s a gamble mainly I don’t insure because then what I do is just between me and the horse .

This is nonsense. It is still between you and the horse. You don't need the permission of the insurance to put horse down although you may not get a payout. You don't have to put the horse through treatment unless you think it is in the horse's best interests and you can ask for for different treatment even if the insurance won't pay for it.

OH's horse managed to top out on two £5000 claims in one year. Without the insurance, he would have been put down.

 

[ester]

What is the point of insuring if you are going to go it alone then anyway though? Surely that is the exact point GS is making.

 

[Pearlsasinger]

This is nonsense. It is still between you and the horse. You don't need the permission of the insurance to put horse down although you may not get a payout. You don't have to put the horse through treatment unless you think it is in the horse's best interests and you can ask for for different treatment even if the insurance won't pay for it.

OH's horse managed to top out on two £5000 claims in one year. Without the insurance, he would have been put down.

So you are suggesting that those of us who want to be able to make decisions based purely on the horse's best interests, simply donate £100+ per month to an insurance company for the pleasure of it?

That certainly doesn't make economic sense! Far better to save the insurance money and not have to consult anyone.

 

[ycbm]

This is nonsense. It is still between you and the horse. You don't need the permission of the insurance to put horse down although you may not get a payout. You don't have to put the horse through treatment unless you think it is in the horse's best interests and you can ask for for different treatment even if the insurance won't pay for it.

OH's horse managed to top out on two £5000 claims in one year. Without the insurance, he would have been put down.

You are suggesting that you pay for the treatment yourself AND pay the insurance premium. What is the point of that?

There are worse fates for a horse than to be put down. I would think that most horses which have ten thousand pounds spent on them in one year on two separate claims would be unlikely to ever return to full work. Which is why I would not spend it. I hope yours is OK.

On the money side, taken over a decade or more, if you have more than one horse, you are unlikely not to end up in credit if you cover your own bills. The more horses, the more likely that is. With four, I am many thousands in the black on my 'insurance account'.

 

[ester]

The period for which we insured 2, which would have been about 10 years we think we worked out about evens. Mostly because the mare had PRP, and Frank had a couple of hospital stays for chemo cream and nitrogen freezing of lumpy bits which added up to a fairly significant cost.
Neither have been insured for the last 3 years or so.

 

[Clava]

You are suggesting that you pay for the treatment yourself AND pay the insurance premium. What is the point of that?

There are worse fates for a horse than to be put down. I would think that most horses which have ten thousand pounds spent on them in one year on two separate claims would be unlikely to ever return to full work. Which is why I would not spend it. I hope yours is OK.

On the money side, taken over a decade or more, if you have more than one horse, you are unlikely not to end up in credit if you cover your own bills. The more horses, the more likely that is. With four, I am many thousands in the black on my 'insurance account'.

This exactly, once you own a few horses, the thousands that go on premiums each year in no way match the usual outlay of vet bills for each year, so you end up in the black. I would not put any horse through colic surgery though and also agree that pts is not the worst outcome.

 

[baran]

You are suggesting that you pay for the treatment yourself AND pay the insurance premium. What is the point of that?

There are worse fates for a horse than to be put down. I would think that most horses which have ten thousand pounds spent on them in one year on two separate claims would be unlikely to ever return to full work. Which is why I would not spend it. I hope yours is OK.

On the money side, taken over a decade or more, if you have more than one horse, you are unlikely not to end up in credit if you cover your own bills. The more horses, the more likely that is. With four, I am many thousands in the black on my 'insurance account'.

Horse recovered fine, thanks and lived for several years!

No, I don't pay the insurance premium and then pay for all the treatment myself. In one case, insurance company was prepared to fund further treatment but vet and I agreed this was not in the best interests of horse so horse was put down at my expense. In the second case, insurance company initially wasn't prepared to pay for an experimental treatment. I decided it was worth a try and it was successful. Insurance had already paid out for initial treatment. They do now pay for this treatment as it is an established procedure.

So I retain the right to decide what happens to my horse and have most of my cost covered. Don't see why people have difficulty understanding this.

 

[LaurenBay]

Mine is not insured anymore.

She is now fully retired so never leaves the field. She has bad arthritis so if she ever seriously injures herself or gets Colic or Laminitis etc she will most likely be put to sleep as I can't boxrest her without her being crippled due the arthritis. When she was insured she was excluded for so much anyway it wasn't worth my while keeping it.

 

[hairycob]

It all depends doesn't it.
If you have several horses self insurance is likely to work well unless you are very unlucky.
If you have exclusions is what's left worth insuring.
If you would prefer to pts a horse that needed extensive treatment there is no point.
BUT if you are a single horse owner who would be financially challenged by a big bill and you couldn't sleep if you didn't try all you could then you would be mad not to insure.
None of the positions are wrong just different attitudes and circumstances and you have to work out what's best for you.
A couple of years ago I was expecting my policies to go up a lot - I'd had 2 big claims for atypical myopathy and I thought the surviving horse would have a massive hike. The premium hardly went up so I kept it on. 1 day into the new policy he got thorn injury that got an infection that didn't respond to treatment and spread into a bursa. He recovered completely but without insurance I would have had no choice but to pts. I had 13.5k of claims in 13 months. 5 for the infection the rest for the AM (included a mortality).

 

[baran]

I am also sometimes puzzled by people's arithmetic. I pay just over £100 per month. this gives me cover of £5000 per incident for 2 horses, replacement value insurance for two carriages and an expensive saddle. I reckon I would need to save £100 per month for over 10 years to have the money available to pay for all this myself.

I agree it is a gamble and everyone has to decide but for me, insurance has definitely paid off.

 

[mums the groom]

Currently saving to get a vet fund when it gets to £5K I'll stop insuring the boys, currently having a claim go through on a mysterious lameness, what annoyed me most is when the vet said is he insured- yes suddenly its x-rays and MRI scans,

 

[ester]

That is as much to do with the clock ticking on a claim as to spending more money. You could turn away for 6 months first but if the problem doesn't resolve you then only have 6 months to do all the diagnostics and treatments, and deal with any recurrence.

 

[ycbm]

I am also sometimes puzzled by people's arithmetic. I pay just over £100 per month. this gives me cover of £5000 per incident for 2 horses, replacement value insurance for two carriages and an expensive saddle. I reckon I would need to save £100 per month for over 10 years to have the money available to pay for all this myself.

I agree it is a gamble and everyone has to decide but for me, insurance has definitely paid off.

A person would be very unlikely to have £12,000 of claims in two years on two horses. Your carriages and saddle are unlikely to be stolen at all. Of course you personally are the exception that proves the rule.

The arithmetic is that you would be unlucky in ten years to spend more on vets fees than you do in insurance premiums. I've had two or more horses for ten years, often three at times and for the last year and a half four. I've spent under five thousand on insurable vets fees in that time. On your sums, I'm about ten grand in hand.

The balance alters radically in favour of insuring for the kind of person who tells the vet they want them to do everything they can to save the horse, and for whom colic surgery, to take the commonest example, would be a definite yes.




The other point is that it's very easy to top out an insurance claim but get no better a result than by being conservative. It's easy to assume £5k worth of treatment was essential to save the horse on the strength that it was saved.

My favourite example was a small wound in my horse's foreleg which was extremely slow to heal, but the horse was sound and well. A vet told me there was almost certainly a bone chip in it and they need to x ray and remove it or I would lose the horse. He was in hospital being treated with intravenous antibiotics for a nasty infection in a hind leg.

I refused to allow the x rays on the grounds that horse was sound and covered for infection. The wound closed in time with no scar. The Vet saw me competing the horse soon afterwards and was visibly shocked.