Just had the renewal through for my two dogs,both healthy, 6 & 4 respectively. What a nice surprise a 58% increase with no claims made. The whole industry with pet insurance seems to realise that most of us dont insure ourselves for healthcare, but want to do it for our dogs, which are family to us.The way it is going, to insure our pets will be beyond us all in terms of rip off prices asked for. Will also cancel my other insurance with More Than as a thankyou to them.
Breed
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Species:
Dog
Leave a comment
Same problem. 1 claim of £120 minus £70 excess and insurance rose also by 58%. Would have been cheaper to have paid vet myself. Unfortunately this wont be last claim for same problem so difficult to insure with anyone else.
Same thing -- no claims (ever) yet a 45% increase in premiums. Rip off.
Yes, same problem for me; first year premium was £240 (including 10% discount, so full price would be about £270), renewal in 2014 was £350; the 2nd renewal in 2014 was £400. I negotiated £50 off the first renewal, so this was actually £300, which wasn't too bad.
However, I got tired of this little game the second time around - again, they offered £50 off (bringing premium down to £350), but I checked the new policy price online and was quoted just £230 (with 10% discount, so full price would be about £260). No claims made in any year, by the way. When I pointed out that they were loading renewal premiums by at least 50% I got a lot of excuses, and emotional blackmail, in order to induce me to stay e.g. if you cancel the policy then other insurers won't cover you for first 14 days, you're breaking the continuity of insurance and so that could affect cover in future etc etc. Outrageous behaviour, and I'll take my business elsewhere as a result!
But, looking at it another way, what I think they're actually doing is selling new policies as a sort of "loss leader" i.e. at around 35% discount off the "real" price. They then recover the "loss" in subsequent years when policies are renewed. Not illegal by any means, but certainly unethical in my book, especially when coupled with the emotional blackmail techniques that I mentioned earlier.
The question is, though, are any pet insurers any good? They all seem to have us over a barrel, especially when medical conditions are excluded due to prior claims, and pets reaching the age at which new business will not be written i.e. effectively trapping customers with their current insurer. It really is an industry that's long overdue for scrutiny as, even though the insurers are not breaking any laws, many customers feel they're being held to ransom at renewal. Surely there must be something that can be done about anti-competitive practices that lock customers into staying with insurers due to claims history or age of pet? The right balance needs to be struck as insurers have to make a profit at the end of the day, but I think there's scope to tighten regulation to prevent excessive renewal premium increases when they have a captive market.