Avoid FIGO

1
Out of 10

We were covered by FIGO from July 2017 until July 2018. Prior to coverage effect we took our kitten to our vet for her first check-up and she was found healthy. We submitted the records to FIGO as required. During the first several months, they refused every claim for our 4 month old kitten asserting everything was a "pre-existing condition". By October 2017 I was fed-up, so I sent them a strongly worded letter where I explained in part:

"Every insurance contract has an unwritten, invisible, or implied term referred to as the covenant or promise of good faith and fair dealing. This is a promise imposed by law upon an insurance company to always act fairly towards its insured in handling their claims…In my estimation the apparent failure to investigate my claims leading to the unwarranted denial of said claims is gross mismanagement needling dangerously close to the appearance of bad faith insurance practices."

I then threatened to report them to our State Department of Insurance.

After this, they paid my claims and I never heard from them again. They always paid every claim. (Suspicious action in my estimation. I believe they didn't want to have someone investigating their practices.)

Now, here at the end of July (2018), it is time to renew our policy. They decided to increase our premium by 100 percent for an otherwise healthy 1 year old cat. They further did this with zero transparency. They sent an email out in June explaining "some states could potentially see a rate increase". They gave no information as to which states would see an increase or by what amount. They instructed us to log-in and see if we would be effected. We did and we were not. 3 weeks later, we still were not effected. Then today, when payment for the next year would be due, we found they increased the rate 100 percent.

We are SO disgusted by this company and advise you strongly to avoid it like the plague!

Did you find this review helpful?
Injury/illness
Various
Claim Amount
$100 - $500
Breed

Ragdoll

Age of Pet
Under a year

Leave a comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Posted: 08/24/2018
By: laddyboy@maili…

Both the surprise restriction on "pre-existing conditions" and the exorbitant premium increase are very disconcerting. Every insurer I have ever been with has been happy to establish a base line for pre-existing conditions based on "underwriting" the policy when it begins. Figo is the exception. There is no value to giving them medical records ahead of time; the best they will do is to say it "looks like" your pet has no pre-existing conditions but you won't really know what we think until you make a claim.

The huge increase in premiums is inexcusable. All insurers have a formula they apply to increases although it is usually less than transparent. When I was with Pet Plan it was based on the age of the pet. Increases were usually small until the animal was 7 or 8 and then rose very sharply once the animal was considered a senior. I didn't like it, but it made sense and was predictable. A very sudden and huge increase like yours means the insurer doesn't know what they are doing.

Unfortunately Pet Plan has gone through two underwriters since I started with them many years ago. Each time the policies have gotten a little worse, although for a long time I was grandfathered into my original terms. This past year they increased my premium dramatically and reduced coverage so I dropped them.

I went with FIgo because they are one of the only companies left that reimburses 100% after the deductible is satisfied. But I think there is a major disconnect between their marketing and their underwriter, the ill effects of which you have experienced. The customer facing companies we pay actually have very little to say about how the policies work and what they cost. Most of the underlying insurance companies are smaller companies with experience in casualty insurance and no experience with pets. They are finding that pet insurance is much more expensive for them than they thought when they first got into business. So they are abruptly changing prices and terms and making it impossible to predict which companies will live up to their promises.

Nationwide, which bought VPI and upgraded its coverage, seems to be an exception. Healthy Paws remains a very popular choice. When the year of Figo I've already paid for expires I expect to get a very large bill. At that time I will probably cancel and go with a company that offers the more typical 90% reimbursement.