1
out of 5
POSTED: | BY: BC Mentior
INTENTIONAL FRAUDULENT REVIEW OF CLAIM
They used the fact that the vet did not see a foreign object in his paw, despite the fact there was a very large wound, it was infected, and they needed to clean it out and prescribe antibiotics, as an excuse to deny the claim. They said since nothing conclusive was found, they could not cover the claim. When I pointed out that the vet said it could have been a foreign object, the claims adjuster had no reponse other than to say the vet did not find anything conclusive. I asked what else could have caused a large wound and needed the care that it did. Again no response. I am filing a claim with the insurance commissioner against them. I would love to be able to file a lawsuit against the adjuster personally for fraud, but I'm not sure it is worth the trouble. I might do so just to prove a point. Horrible company.
Read more on Trustpilot