Understanding Negative Pet Insurance Reviews
One of the most frustrating experiences pet parents have with pet insurance is having their claim denied. We fight tooth and nail to get the claims approved, we write negative pet insurance reviews hoping to change the pet insurance company’s mind, we tell all our friends how horrible our pet insurance is, and some of us even go so far as to cancel our plans and never look back at the evils of all that is pet insurance.
But perhaps in doing so we are really acting like children and throwing temper tantrums where none are earned, and we must instead take the time to understand the negative pet insurance reviews that people leave for us to read.
In this blog post, we evaluate three negative reviews on Yelp.com that are written about three different pet insurance companies. After careful consideration, we’ll let you be the judge of whether the pet insurance company deserved a negative review.
“…Our year old rescue dog exhibited symptoms of a tummy bug two weeks after we adopted him. The vet thought it was probably Giardia, even though the test was inconclusive, and a course of antibiotics took care of the symptoms within a matter of 48 hours. Four months later, he got an upset stomach (puking), was lethargic, and some blood appeared in his poop. He was treated with a special diet, a different antibiotic, and some probiotics. ASPCA’s conclusion? Pre-existing condition. ..” — Margaret G. 5/2/16
epetsure analysis: A pre-existing condition is any kind of injury or illness that occurred, showed signs or symptoms of, or was diagnosed prior to enrollment and/or the waiting period. A pre-existing condition does not have to be diagnosed in order to be classified as pre-existing. If you and/or your veterinarian knew about it or witnessed signs or symptoms, then it is automatically considered a pre-existing condition. Most pet insurance companies require a certain period to pass, such as 180 days for this pet insurance company, before covering a condition that was previously considered to be pre-exiting. Since the review clearly states that only four months had passed (120 days), this bad review is completely neglecting to acknowledge the waiting period set forth by the pet insurance company.
What do you think? Does this pet insurance company deserve this low review?
“…Unfortunately, my dog became ill a few weeks after I obtained the insurance. Pet’s Best claimed that the condition occurred before the waiting period was over. I submitted proof that it did not. Despite having never paid for services and turning down all claims they still would not refund the money I had paid…” — Chris L. 1/19/16
epetsure analysis: No pet insurance will cover a claim before their official waiting period has passed. This common knowledge is clearly stated in their documentation. It should also be noted that most pet insurances will not change their decision based on a vet’s note that your pet’s condition was not due to a certain pre-existing condition, because pet insurances have their own veterinarians who make these assessments. Since pet parents are allowed to choose any veterinarian they want, pet insurance companies cannot always rely on their diagnosis due to the possibility of prejudice against the pet insurance company.
What do you think? Does this pet insurance company deserve this low review?
…” [I]t turns out [our puppy] had a cold [in May, and] the vet sent us home with some antibiotics. [A]fter a couple of weeks he was all healed up and back to normal. Zoom forward to November and we take him in for vomiting and diarrhea. It turns out he had pneumonia (a lower respiratory infection) which was pretty advanced so the vet wanted to keep him overnight. When we sent in our invoices to embrace we were rejected coverage due to the pre-existing UPPER respiratory infection our dog had when we first got him. Which is REALLY interesting because in the rejection letters to a follow up visit to his cold in May, Embrace clearly stated that what he had was an upper respiratory infection and that all UPPER respiratory infections will not be covered until he’s cleared the 12 month period. Our vet sent Embrace a letter stating that the two incidents were not related and that the initial infection was resolved in August. This was not enough to sway the company…” — Hilda D. 12/22/15
epetsure analysis: Embrace Pet Insurance clearly took the time to write this pet parent a letter stating that all upper-respiratory infections would be considered pre-existing conditions for 12 months, due to the cold their puppy had in May. Yet, this pet parent thought they could outsmart the pet insurance company by submitting and fighting for a claim to be paid for an upper respiratory infection in November.
What do you think? Does this pet insurance company deserve this bad review?
As pet parents, we may not always like, or even agree with, the rules set forth by the pet insurance companies. However, pet insurance companies, despite the fact that they handle payments for the health and wellness of our most precious fur babies, are actually for-profit businesses. They have a business plan, a business model, investors, thousands of pet parents and pets to care for, and hundreds of employees that earn a regular paycheck so they can go home and care for their own fur babies.
It’s easy to forget in our moments of frustration and fear that the people who represent these pet insurance companies are pet parents too, and they have probably been in the same situation you may one day find yourself in.
Does that mean pet insurance companies are bad? Of course not.
Are they worth it? We think so, or we wouldn’t be here.
The ultimate decision lies with each and every pet parent, but before you make any permanent changes or decisions, check out our pet insurance providers and see if there is a pet insurance plan that is right for you and your pet.
Originally published at epetsure.
