ASPCA | Pet Insurance Review

Following up on this - a supervisor reached out to me but offered no help with my situation. She only explained that coverage goes down because initial diagnostic costs tend to be the highest. If that's true, why not keep the coverage limit as is, and then the claims will go down by themselves? The insurer refuses to give me any relief. ASPCA did create new policies in response to complaints like mine from other customers. But again, I was not made aware of this and they won't grant me such a policy retroactively. And so my poor review stands.

My 4 year old Cavalier, Birdie, had a growth on her scalp that at first seemed like nothing, but eventually grew large enough to be a concern. It was recommended that we have it surgically removed and biopsied, so we did so. Luckily, it was benign and Birdie has healed quickly. We were able to get reimbursed for 90% after our deductible, which made it affordable. She also required a dental cleaning, which isn't covered, but that part was only a minimal cost when compared to all the fees (anesthesia, medications, extractions, etc) and I am SO glad we didn't wait any longer or she would have had further decay and pain. I know other people have chosen other pet insurance providers because they cover dental cleanings, but in reality, the actual cleaning portion is not what costs the most - it is if your dog requires extractions or medications that end up adding to the final cost.

Quick and easy! Especially with the app! Thank you.

ASPCA has been there for me and my dog Rosie. Rosie was diagnosed with cancer and is fighting for her life. Thank you ASPCA

I have been faithfully trying to keep my dog alive and happy since his terminal adrenal gland cancer diagnosis last fall. The vet visits and chemo prescriptions are very expensive and the ASPCA $3,000 per incident coverage limit, while helpful, only covers a portion of the costs. We have been paying into our policy for nearly 9 years, ever since we rescued our pup. Now I have just been told that his coverage will go DOWN for his "ongoing condition" once the year re-sets on September 1. Yeah, let that sink in a second. It's not a pre-existing condition, it's an "ongoing condition" for which we are only entitled $1,000 in reimbursement going forward. What sense does this make? A dog, or a person for that matter, with a serious incurable condition, does not need LESS coverage as time goes on, they need more. When I called the company to discuss this I was told that there are newer policies available as of a year or two ago that have better coverage for so-called ongoing conditions, but I was never made aware of those policies and I'm just stuck with what I've got. It seems to me that the ASPCA in theory would share the pet owner's goal of keeping their animal healthy and happy and well-treated as long as possible. Who would create a policy that diminishes coverage for conditions over time? Only someone worried about the bottom line. Buyer beware.