After reading the review that calls attention to the fine print on this company's policies, specifically the exclusion on coverage for conditions that manifest during the previous policy year, I did a lot of comparison research.
I really think this may be a matter of getting the best deal for the money. The routine coverage of $220 per dog, under the preferred policy, just can't be beaten. Even with the allotments within the $220, it all gets used. That's a guaranteed recovery of $440 a year for my two dogs, which reimburses me more than half of the year's premiums, even if no illness occurs. When accident or illness DOES occur, the $50 deductible with 90% reimbursement appears unusual among companies I've found, unless I'm going to pay much more money.
In sum, it appears to me that, in order to overcome the disadvantages of Petfirst, I would have to roughly DOUBLE my premiums paid, and would most likely recover nothing during the year. A $200 deductible appears standard with most policies, and with a typical illness, I would not reach that threshhold.
I'm into my 3rd year with Petfirst, and the fact is that I've not lost a penny. Each year, I've recovered more than I put in, and so I'm staying with them. I do see that I can overcome the exclusion mentioned by putting a rider on my policy, but that would either double or triple my premium, depending on the level of coverage I chose under that rider. From a statistical standpoint, I can't justify the extra cos