Pets Best is a FRAUD!!!

Out of 10

I recently purchased insurance from Pets Best in July 2010 after I got the bill for my beloved "Clarisse" who passed away in May 2010. The total bill for her was $4600.00 dollars. I just wanted some peace of mind as I'm a multi cat owner. I researched various companies from your sight and others and I thought Pets Best offered what I needed. WAS I EVER WRONG!!! I submitted a claim for "Lucky" approx 10 days after the 14 day waiting period. Lucky developed urinary output complications. I took him to my vet and she performed an x ray and various other tests. He was put on a special diet for a month but to no avail. Lucky was then given an ultrasound and the stones were still present. He required surgery on September 8, 2010. I was informed my initial claim for the x rays etc; had been denied due to what Pets Best considerd a pre-existing condition! How can it be pre-existing if he showed no symptoms? If he had no medical issue's for the last 12 months, how can it be pre-existing? Wouldn't tumors and cancer be pre-existing? It was explained that the stones were pre-existing because it took "some time" for them to develop! I asked customer care what does some time mean? If Lucky had the symptoms later on this year, say in November, would it still be pre-existing? They couldn't answer! Now, I'm out another $2400.00 dollars! STAY AWAY FROM PETS BEST!!! All they want is your hard earned money!!! I have filed complaints with the Department of Consumer Affairs and the Department of Ba

Did you find this review helpful?


Claim Amount
Over $1000

Domestic Shorthair

Age of Pet
1 - 8

Leave a comment

Enter the characters shown in the image.
Posted: 09/17/2010

Pets Best Insurance plans are designed to cover unexpected illnesses, accidents and injuries. Like all pet insurance companies, we exclude pre-existing conditions from coverage in order to keep premiums affordable for everyone. It typically takes bladder stones several weeks or longer to develop. Any illness or injury that begins before your policy is purchased or during your waiting period will be considered “pre-existing” even if your pet wasn’t previously diagnosed.

Posted: 01/17/2011

That's ridiculous. The only way insurers could definatively rule out an illness as "pre=existing" would be to require an extensive (expensive) set of examination tests to prove that the animal is indeed healthy before agreeing to insure the animal.
*The absence of symptoms is not a definition of health*. For example, at any moment in time, our own human bodies have cancer cells growing and circulating. They don't always find a foothold, and when they do, it generally takes YEARS for cancer "symptoms" to manifest. But, we are not healthy in the meanwhile while these cancers are growing, and when the symptoms manifest, we are diagnosed with a "pre-exissting" illness. But it sounds like PetsBest is taking the lead in this area for pet insurance: using statistical analysis to equate probability of potential illness expression and ruling it as pre-existing after a certain time of "probable" manifestation of symptoms. Why, because the illness could then be considered EXPECTED. (Which seems to be what happened in Bernard's case above) And pet insurance is only designed to cover UNEXPECTED illness. What's interestng to watch is how the "chronic" vs "pre-existing" coverages are evolving for this industry. Folks, be advised- get a solid explanation of "pre-existig" and "chronic" definations from potential pet insurers, and ask for documentation of prior decisions and payouts of other insured clients.