Why Is Pet Insurance So Restrictive?

[Katrinka]

I think that is a real consideration also. A lot of the big item expenses I see relate to cancer treatments for instance which I don't think I would put the dog through if the outcome was a few more months of life. I would want an assurance that the dog would recover and have a good quality of life before agreeing to any expensive and gruelling treatments whether I had insurance or not.

It's not treatment, only diagnosis cost us 1200, and that's without biopsy.

[minimax]

I think that is a real consideration also. A lot of the big item expenses I see relate to cancer treatments for instance which I don't think I would put the dog through if the outcome was a few more months of life. I would want an assurance that the dog would recover and have a good quality of life before agreeing to any expensive and gruelling treatments whether I had insurance or not.

It's not treatment, only diagnosis cost us 1200, and that's without biopsy.

Wow!

[brutus]

Ok, so I haven't read the past 5 pages, but insurance is something I do know a fair bit about (having worked at an emergency vet for 7 years, and my recent dealings with the company I am insured with - Petplan).

Pretty much in Australia there are 2 insurance companies - those underwritten by Allianz (Petplan & Guide Dogs), & Hollards (all the others - RSPCA, Prosure, Medibank, Bow Wow Meow etc.).

The main difference are the following:

- Hollards will not cover for 100% of bills (Allianz do)

- Hollards are a 1 year policy (e.g. if your dog develops diabetes in a year that you are covered, the following year it will no longer be covered, as it is now an exclusion).

- Allianz only offers lifetime policies (e.g. if you dog devlops diabetes during a year that you are covered, they are covered for life, up to your yearly limit of course, providing you do not break your policy)

- no insurance (to my knowledge) will cover for pre-existing conditions, however Allianz (Petplan) will cover for genetic conditions (e.g. hip dysplasia), provided that symptoms did not devolop prior to the period of coverage

- Allianz will not cover for anything that is routine (e.g. vaccinations, desexing (strangely pyometra is covered), routine dentals), or related to breeding (e.g. caesarian). Teeth extractions are covered provided the animal has had regular treatment by a vet (i.e. if a dog has not seen vet for 6 years, and suddenly gets a tooth root abscess, Petplan may say that the owner did not provided preventative care (i.e. regular checks by vet at vacciantion etc). The same applies to parvo in adult, unvaccinated dogs.

In summary, I would only ever insure with Petplan / Guide Dogs, as realistically with the other ones, everything will end up being an exclusion and so you will end up with a policy that covers very little.

Please note that Petplan Equine, however, it only a one year policy, and so it is essentially like the Hollards product

With this in mind, I have both my dogs insured with Petplan, despite the fact that I work at an emergency clinic. Even if I were to put away money each month, it would never amount to the $10 000 / year I have to spend with Petplan, and I would only use it for big things, given the fact I work at a vet (my excess is $100).

I hope this was of some help !

[Danois]

I disagree with your comments re Hollard policies being yearly policies in the manner you outline.

The RSPCA policy (in the PDS) talks about a chronic condition provision which basically says that if the dog has a chronic condition/ illness then the maximum cover you will get for that specific condition for the whole time the dog is insured is the annual benefit payable under the policy in the year the condition manifested. So you could have $4,000 of costs a year for 5 years but after year 3 you would not be covered as the benefit limit was $12,000.

Every insurance policy is an annual policy which gets renewed yearly - that's all types of insurance like car, health, pet etc. The Allianz policies are annual too.

[Jumabaar]

I disagree with your comments re Hollard policies being yearly policies in the manner you outline.

The RSPCA policy (in the PDS) talks about a chronic condition provision which basically says that if the dog has a chronic condition/ illness then the maximum cover you will get for that specific condition for the whole time the dog is insured is the annual benefit payable under the policy in the year the condition manifested. So you could have $4,000 of costs a year for 5 years but after year 3 you would not be covered as the benefit limit was $12,000.

Every insurance policy is an annual policy which gets renewed yearly - that's all types of insurance like car, health, pet etc. The Allianz policies are annual too.

But pet plan will cover for the life of the pet up to the maximum amount each year- so if its a $10,000pa policy and the dog gets a chronic condition they will continue to pay 10,000pa and so long as there are no gaps in cover it will never become an exclusion. In the Hollard policies all chronic conditions eventually become an exclusion, even if the cover has been continuous.

It was explained as 'yearly' policies vs 'life time' policy to me as well- I assume its the lay person explanation they give to try and explain the difference.

[colliehound]

I have four dogs insured via my house and contents with Suncorp. VERY happy with them. First claim was 2 hours after taking out the policy and they honoured it - no questions.

Max payout is $500 a time, excess of $100 - but I have rarely found anything more expensive on the day to day things my dogs encounter. Dislocations, surgery, teeth extractions etc. (or perhaps our vet is REALLY cheap).

Anyway - added beggar all to my H&C premium (for FOUR dogs) so a bargain as far as I am concerned.

For the big big - might never happen things - I put a fund aside. As others have said - for many of the really expensive things - I would be unlikely to put my animals through the treatment - paid or unpaid - my animals best interests and welfare come before money or my desire for them to live regardless of quality.

PLEASE NOTE - not suggesting others do/don't do anything right/wrong - simply outlining my choices. As said previously - your pet - your choices and it is not for others to add their opinions unless requested.

[brutus]

I disagree with your comments re Hollard policies being yearly policies in the manner you outline.

The RSPCA policy (in the PDS) talks about a chronic condition provision which basically says that if the dog has a chronic condition/ illness then the maximum cover you will get for that specific condition for the whole time the dog is insured is the annual benefit payable under the policy in the year the condition manifested. So you could have $4,000 of costs a year for 5 years but after year 3 you would not be covered as the benefit limit was $12,000.

Every insurance policy is an annual policy which gets renewed yearly - that's all types of insurance like car, health, pet etc. The Allianz policies are annual too.

Danois, have you actually had to use the RSPCA policy ? Sure diabetes would be covered in that scenario, but what happens once the limit is exceeded ? You are then paying for a policy that you are not able to use in its entirety, as well as having to pay the ongoing treatment costs in their entirety (e.g. insulin, blood glucose tests etc), despite the fact that you have pet insurance. If this were to happen with Petplan for example, you would only have had the excess to pay (one off), and would then be covered up to your yearly limit (starting from $10 000). Similarly, say your pet has an eye injury in the first year (e.g. conjunctivitis), and then gets a seperate, but different eye condition a few years later (e.g. glaucoma) - you will find that eyes will be an exclusion after the first year, and so the second, seperate condition would not be covered.

It makes no difference to me as to what policy individuals choose (I certainly do not work for Petplan), but just think that it is really important that everyone reads their PDS on choosing (as once something goes wrong and you realise you are no longer covered after 12 months, it is unfortunately too late to change as that condition will now be considered as pre-existing by other companies).

Petplan is the only policy which has a lifetime policy (so exclusions do not pop up based on what you have claimed for once within the policy period), and it also does not have the restriction of sub-limits per condition (which can be a real issue with tick paralysis in particular - I have seen bills at work in excess of $10 000, and personally I would much rather be able to choose where I would like my yearly limit to go to).

Anyway, as I said - each to their own, but I think the most important thing is to be well-informed of what your insurance policy covers, and the other options out there, before an injury or illness occurs.

Edited August 10, 2012 by brutus

[coogie]

For me having access to the money to pay a huge unexpected bill is very different to being able to afford to pay it,sure when Issy dislocated her hip we "found" the money to pay for it. However we found it in the full knowledge it would reimbursed except for the $100.00 excess. If that had not been the case there is no way we could have afforded her second surgery or ongoing treatment . My first question is also always about the likely outcome for the dog in terms of quality of life,pain ,ongoing issues etc; I agree everyone is different and you have to make decisions based on your own circumstances but for me the decision was hard enough without the added stress of the financial factor. We were told she would most likely have a good outcome after a fairly lengthy rehab and she has so we have been very lucky. She was only two at the time of her surgery I may have made a different decision about putting her through the op if she was much older. She has lifetime cover with Petplan so we also have the added peace of mind of knowing if she has issues with her other hip she will be covered up to $20000 a year,we simply couldn't afford that kind of emergency fund regardless of likely outcome for her.

It hasn't always been easy to find the premiums and we both work so are fortunate,based on our experience I would give up a lot of other things before I gave up the insurance premiums for the dogs.

That said if I could change things I would still pick paying the premiums and being "conned" as some choose to see it to have a totally sound dog. I wish we had never had to use it but we have and for us it has most likely made the difference between having our girl get the best outcome or euthanasia ,and I could never ever see that as a con.

[Danois]

Yes I have used the policy frequently over 6 plus years. First dog had an illness over 2 years and current dog has claimed every year for 4 years for skin related matters. Never had one single issue with the multiples of claims which I have submitted.

With respect I really think you are misunderstanding the chronic condition limit aspect. If your dog has an eye issue one year and claims the whole $12,000 available under the policy and develops an entirely separate eye issue the following year then it is not a chronic condition - they are 2 entirely separate conditions and thus should be covered.

You need to be careful about putting out false information about the ways in which the policies work.

Edited August 11, 2012 by Danois

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Bilateral Condition means any Condition affecting body parts of which the Pet has two, one each side of the body (e.g. ears, eyes, knees, cruciate ligaments). When applying a Benefit Limit or exclusion, Bilateral Conditions are considered as one Condition.

That's straight out of a hollards backed Product Disclosure Statement.

Looking forward to you pointing me at a PDS (not al nz) that says anything different.

If your dog has an eye issue one year and claims the whole $12,000 available under the policy and develops an entirely separate eye issue the following year then it is not a chronic condition - they are 2 entirely separate conditions and thus should be covered.

I still think my example of cateract in one eye, then the other - the second would not be covered, because the second one is considered "pre-existing" because of the "bilateral" thing.

Now if you were talking about something in the heart and then something in the liver (and it's not a spreading cancer), then it might be considered two separate conditions and they might pay out on both.

[brutus]

Yes I have used the policy frequently over 6 plus years. First dog had an illness over 2 years and current dog has claimed every year for 4 years for skin related matters. Never had one single issue with the multiples of claims which I have submitted.

With respect I really think you are misunderstanding the chronic condition limit aspect. If your dog has an eye issue one year and claims the whole $12,000 available under the policy and develops an entirely separate eye issue the following year then it is not a chronic condition - they are 2 entirely separate conditions and thus should be covered.

You need to be careful about putting out false information about the ways in which the policies work.

As much as I do respect your opinion, I do not agree with the above. We have had plenty of cases at work where an entire body system is excluded based on a previous, yet unrelated condition (such as my above example). In these cases, certain Hollards policies have subsequently excluded the entire body system (e.g. eyes), following a claim, despite the fact that the conditions were unrelated.

Perhaps I did not completely understand the paying out of the chronic condition under your particular policy, and although I am glad to hear that you have had no problems with your current policy, I also assume that you have not yet reached the pre-set limit for that particular condition/s. Once this limit is reached, I take it that this condition will then no longer be claimable ? This would not be the case for the Allianz policies.

Regardless, I am not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of every single policy under the Hollards name - I just think it is important to be aware of the limitations of each policy prior to a problem developing :)

Edited August 11, 2012 by brutus