Hello again Dave – and sorry again for leaving you waiting for an answer.
I’ve read through your queries and firstly I’m really sorry to hear about the cancer with your parents’ dog, and also about what happened to you cat. So sad on both counts, and particularly given the additional issues with their health cover.
The 14 day exclusions on certain things are standard when buying pet insurance – as it’s a health/life cover in much the same way as it would be for people (where similar exclusions apply if you buy a health policy for yourself).
The reason for this is broadly that certain conditions and illnesses could already exist before the cover starts but be asymptomatic. And then, when symptoms develop early in the new policy the central cause would have pre-existed that policy start date – and thus been from a time relating to the previous policy, or from a time with no insurance. If full cover started from day one, then claims for pre-existing things would mean that prices across this market would be significantly higher.
The exclusion period only kicks in for new policies (and I think that’s pretty standard in the industry). So any policy which renews with the same provider would not keep having the 14 day period each time the policy ‘restarts’ annually.
Because pet insurance is designed more like health cover for people (and not like car, home or travel insurance) it’s looked at as a life policy. In fact, you’ll often find that if you switch providers that certain things (including any previous illnesses/accidents/etc) will not be covered under the new provider’s policy.
I can’t speak for other providers, but we make the various exclusions really clear on the webpage before you get an actual quote, and any lapsing policies would I’m sure also let people know that they will see a break in cover if the pet’s cover is moved to a new provider.
The Association of British Insurers also has information for people looking at pet insurance, and this page highlights the likelihood of an exclusion period (although I do appreciate most people wouldn’t turn to the ABI before buy any policy really). But just pointing out that it’s an industry-wide approach (like as I mentioned it is for human health cover).
One again, I’m really sorry to hear about your parents’ dog, and your cat as well. Both very distressing and upsetting times for you all. But I hope the above information is useful.
Have a lovely Christmas and New Year (insofar as we’re all able in the current situation).
Alex
In reply to Alexander J’s original email dated 17th December 2020 to Alexander J, RSA Insurance Group plc
I’m so sorry Dave – Sam is on hols this week but did ask me to come back to you, and last minute stuff to sort before year end slightly swamped me.
Let me check my notes first thing and I’ll drop you a line.
Apologies again!
Alex
In reply to Dave Parker’s original email dated 17th December 2020 to Sam B, RSA Insurance Group plc
Hi Sam.
Although I’ve not heard back from you since my reply to your email on the 3rd December, I thought I’d let you know that since my last email to you, I’ve had some feedback from the Financial Ombudsman who I also asked about who sets the 14-day Day “no-claim” clause on pet insurance. They’ve advised me that it is the underwriters who set this clause. If this is incorrect (either generally or specifically for RSA) , please let me know.
In the new year, I’d very much like to open the conversation up about why this clause exists, and why underwriters put it in. I’d also like to explore what it would take to get underwriters to consider removing this clause to make pet insurance fairer; taking away the worry when pet owners find out that their beloved pet is not insured when illness strikes unexpectedly within the first 14 days of the cover starting. Obviously, with RSA being an underwriter, it would be good to get RSA’s thoughts and feedback. Perhaps you’re not the right contact in this regard, so if you’d like to direct me to the right person, that would be appreciated.
Kind regards
In reply to Dave Parker’s original email dated 9th December 2020 to Sam B, RSA Insurance Group plc
Hi Sam.
I thought I’d send a quick follow up to see if you’d managed to ascertain whether it is the underwriters or the insurance company who sets the 14-day “no claim” clause in UK pet insurance policies.
Hope to hear back from you soon.
All the best.
Dave
In reply to Dave Parker’s original email dated 3rd December 2020 to Sam B, RSA Insurance Group plc
Hi Sam.
Thanks for getting in touch.
My research is being conducted after my parents suddenly lost their dog to stomach cancer two weeks ago. Surprisingly, he showed no symptoms and from diagnosis to him being put to sleep was just two days. Because a new policy was started a week before to replace an existing policy, the 14-day clause kicked in. This meant my parents were left with a huge bill to pay (although my partner and I stepped in to pay it for them). I too, myself, have had this happen to me in the last year when our cat had been involved in a fight with another cat, and her policy was 10 days old.
I am starting a campaign to try to see if insurance companies and/or underwrites [sic] would consider removing this clause. I am trying to understand who sets the clause, is it the underwriter, or the insurance provider/broker. The research will appear on a website I am building for this. I want to give a fair and rounded story as to who sets the clause to give people the full story of where the clause originates from. Of course, I want to present all the facts accurately, whilst also understanding what the stumbling blocks may be to removing the clause.
I will point out that the website and my findings aren’t aimed at pointing fingers, accusations, or apportioning blame – either at the underwriters or the brokers. It’s merely to get a conversation started as to why pet insurance has this clause in policies when other insurance policies such as motor insurance or holiday insurance cover the policyholder from the moment they come into effect. I’d be more than happy to share the link with you if you would like to see the website with content as it is at the moment. What I don’t want to do before I announce the website to a wider audience is to have inaccuracies or misinformation.
Thank you in advance.
Dave
