Displeased

1
Out of 10

I am not at all pleased with the way vetinsurance handled my claim when my dog was hit by her car. I chose not to have my dog spayed, after spending just under $3000.00 we were informed that our dog was not covered because she was not spayed. Image two dogs hit by cars, one has been spayed and one was intact, what this has to do with a head injury from a car accident I can not understand. So now not only do we have to come up with $3000. 00 no one can afford with this economical downturn, I will not be covered in the future, now she is one, so I will cancel my insurance and hope nothing else comes up! By the way no one from the company called to inform me I was not covered for anything as they continued to take my premiums!

Did you find this review helpful?
Injury/illness
Claim Amount
Breed
Age of Pet

Leave a comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Posted: 10/07/2009
By:  

You should have had your dog spayed, you should know the aliments that go along with not having a dog altered, you can't expect an insurance company to pay for sickness or events caused by that. Hormones have a lot to do with roaming and getting out of the house - not to mention ovarian and mammary cancers.

Posted: 10/07/2009
By:  

Trupanion/Vetinsurance does have certain limitations for intact pets. Though it is detailed in our policy, we have found that these few exclusions need to be communicated more clearly to our policyholders with intact pets. We are actively working to improve that messaging because we feel it is important for all policyholders to have a clear understanding of what their insurance does and does not cover.

Posted: 10/09/2009
By:  

This was outlined very clearly in my policy. When pets are not spayed they are more likely to stray from their house when they are in heat. This puts them more at risk for accidents so I actually think it makes sense.

Posted: 11/18/2009
By:  

Quote: By the way no one from the company called to inform me I was not covered for anything as they continued to take my premiums!------------------------------------------------------------
As a purchaser of an expensive pet, I feel somewhat wronged by an insurance company, who denies the right to have a litter, to offset my costs!

Bad enough, they somehow feel their customers are too stupid to maintain an non-spayed animal...but smart enough to make more money to pay increased premiums?

But billing and not informing the client that they have no insurance, FRAUDULENT, Go figure, bad bureaucracy at its best!

Posted: 05/13/2010
By:  

Not all pet insurers put unneccessary restrictions on pet owners in order for them to receive coverage. The insurer should not force owners to sapy or neuter their pets. You should look at a company like Petsecure. Their policy terms and conditions are placed right on their website so you can look over them before you sign up.