I took a policy out for our Labrador in January 2017. At the time I disclosed that in December 2015 he had swallowed a collar while with his litter and needed treatment to pass-it, no exclusions were placed on policy. In February I made a claim after he'd had gastro-enteritis. The claim was rejected on grounds that this was pre-existing condition dating to the December 2015. Our vet contacted insurer to confirm these were two unrelated events but this was ignored - the insurer is clearly better qualified...

Spent weeks going through a complaints process, but at each point the "evidence" used to diagnose the pre-existing condition has changed. Apparently, I was also expected to disclose that he'd had several loose faeces at the time we changed from puppy to adult food. This was included on vet's notes as he'd been in for boosters and a health-check soon after and we mentioned this to them. If being a normal dog is treated as a pre-existing condition they will always have grounds to reject claims.

Please beware. Looking at other reviews I see this is standard practice to "create" pre-existing conditions from normal events and reject claims.