Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets > Cats
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-29-2012, 05:45 PM
 
2,280 posts, read 4,481,390 times
Reputation: 1851

Advertisements

We use PetPlan, have had VIP (awful) and Pet Care (good enough) in the past. I really like Pet Plan but, except for our 2 FIV+ cats, who are underwritten as excluded from just about every condition other than a broken bone or swallowed object, we would have to insure 8 cats (we have 10 cats now).

I have found pet insurance to be very useful in the past. It has covered some expensive things and I really wish we had it for those pets who were very sick with expensive illnesses (our renal cat cost $15,000 in vet related bills, for example, one dog was $6,000 in a week, our most recent late dog was maybe $10,000 for his valve problem, etc.), so I am a big believer in pet insurance.

But it is Russian roulette and very expensive if you have many cats and/or dogs.

I think it is crazy not to have the very best insurance money can buy if you have only one cat or dog. I would gladly pay $1,000 a year, if I had only one pet, for a great policy. It is so worth it.

But we have now 2 kittens (rescues from a feral colony) and 3 adults on pet insurance and it is getting pricey. Like almost 1,000 per year now. Yet, I have cancelled policies only to wish I had them!

Feedback, please!

Thanks!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-29-2012, 07:17 PM
 
2,280 posts, read 4,481,390 times
Reputation: 1851
Doesn't this topic interest anyone?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 08:35 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh area
9,912 posts, read 24,530,389 times
Reputation: 5162
It had only been an hour and a half! Patience. I don't think this is going to be a big discussion though.

FWIW I don't have insurance for my one cat. So far I think I'm ahead, but that is because I haven't had any catastrophic issues. I'd have to look at details again but I'm not sure most wouldn't be better off putting an amount similar to insurance premium into a pet care fund instead.

The idea of paying $1000/year for one pet is nuts to me. Amber gets two vet visits each with thyroid recheck lab each year, and those plus all her medication plus the pill pockets to put them in is still only about $500/year. And the insurance isn't going to cover all that. So that's a significant amount towards deferring some possible really large expenditure. I'd have to look at the costs and exclusions, but in general I don't think the math is there. Part of it is likely that not enough pets are insured to really get the cost average down low enough.

If you could buy it like life insurance, where if you start with the cat being young at that rate and could keep that rate for however many years as long as you don't cancel, that might average out nicely. But I don't think it works that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 09:57 PM
 
11,183 posts, read 19,343,127 times
Reputation: 23911
I remember you have had reason to be grateful for insurance in the past Martha. However my opinion is that insurance companies are in business to make money, not save people money. With that in mind, if a person has the ability to budget and save, most people are better off just putting money away toward emergencies and excessive unexpected health costs for pets.

All my cats have 'pre-existing' conditions they have been treated for, and unless things have changed since I last researched pet insurances, this means that any of the things that are likely to happen that they may need expensive treatment for, will not be covered by any insurance company.

My little bridge angel seizure kitty, for example, I spent over $30,000 in medical care for him over the 12 years of his life. I don't think there is an insurance company in existence that would have paid out for him, because his problems started when he was a baby. Anything he had medical treatment for, the insurance company would have found a way to connect it to his "pre-existing" health problems.

On the other hand, I know other people, like you, who feel it is worth the premiums, and have had good results.

I'll stick to putting those would-be premiums in savings toward anything that might come up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 10:15 PM
 
2,280 posts, read 4,481,390 times
Reputation: 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by greg42 View Post
It had only been an hour and a half! Patience. I don't think this is going to be a big discussion though.

FWIW I don't have insurance for my one cat. So far I think I'm ahead, but that is because I haven't had any catastrophic issues. I'd have to look at details again but I'm not sure most wouldn't be better off putting an amount similar to insurance premium into a pet care fund instead.

The idea of paying $1000/year for one pet is nuts to me. Amber gets two vet visits each with thyroid recheck lab each year, and those plus all her medication plus the pill pockets to put them in is still only about $500/year. And the insurance isn't going to cover all that. So that's a significant amount towards deferring some possible really large expenditure. I'd have to look at the costs and exclusions, but in general I don't think the math is there. Part of it is likely that not enough pets are insured to really get the cost average down low enough.

If you could buy it like life insurance, where if you start with the cat being young at that rate and could keep that rate for however many years as long as you don't cancel, that might average out nicely. But I don't think it works that way.
Hi Greg,

I said $1000 as hyperbole <g>. But, seriously, I would, absolutely, pay $500 for a deluxe policy if I had only one cat. Case in point: Our cat, Sarah, whom we adopted from a vet who took her off the street at age 4, had developed renal problems by age 8 and she cost us $15,000 in vet care. Renal cats can get very, very sick, and not just once, and she lived longer than most do once the fluids have to be started (she lived with SubQ fluids for 4 years after her initial diagnosis). She also had to have surgery to remove a bleeding tumor on the pina (outer ear).

Our dog had a mitral valve problem only months after we adopted him at age 3 1/2. I never calculated the total cost, but that plus his demodex mange was well over $10,000 and he was 9 when he died. The biggest expense was the heart disease, and I had a cat who had hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, diagnosed at one year, and seeing a cardiologist frequently and those ultrasounds and blood work and all of that does add up.

We had a cat who had a radical mastectomy and hyperthyroidism, etc. I like insurance for situations like that, but then there are those cats who require far less expense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 10:19 PM
 
2,280 posts, read 4,481,390 times
Reputation: 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsmom21 View Post
I remember you have had reason to be grateful for insurance in the past Martha. However my opinion is that insurance companies are in business to make money, not save people money. With that in mind, if a person has the ability to budget and save, most people are better off just putting money away toward emergencies and excessive unexpected health costs for pets.

All my cats have 'pre-existing' conditions they have been treated for, and unless things have changed since I last researched pet insurances, this means that any of the things that are likely to happen that they may need expensive treatment for, will not be covered by any insurance company.

My little bridge angel seizure kitty, for example, I spent over $30,000 in medical care for him over the 12 years of his life. I don't think there is an insurance company in existence that would have paid out for him, because his problems started when he was a baby. Anything he had medical treatment for, the insurance company would have found a way to connect it to his "pre-existing" health problems.

On the other hand, I know other people, like you, who feel it is worth the premiums, and have had good results.

I'll stick to putting those would-be premiums in savings toward anything that might come up.

Your example of $30,000 is why I have not yet taken the insurance off my colony rescue kittens, taken in at 3 months and 5 months. Yes, problems are often pre-existing and our cats and dogs, most, had the worst conditions that were pre-existing. We got no insurance help for the renal cat, the mitral valve dog, our Cushings and Hodgkins and renal dog, etc. Now I want to start early on them, before conditions are picked up and noticed. I have a rescue cat who is 2 and she has no pre-existing stuff so far except for herpes virus. She is insured. But it is so expensive. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2012, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Earth Wanderer, longing for the stars.
12,406 posts, read 18,899,849 times
Reputation: 8909
From what I have heard pet insurance is more expensive than some human insurance and it's because insurance companies make money by having a lot of healthy subscribers to pay for the ill ones. Most pet owners have more or less healthy pets and most do not have pet insurance, so it costs a lot for those who do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2012, 10:08 PM
 
8,851 posts, read 5,316,966 times
Reputation: 5652
According to my vet, pet insurance requires you to pay the bill then submit the bills to the company for re-imbursement. Is this true?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2012, 10:14 PM
 
11,183 posts, read 19,343,127 times
Reputation: 23911
Yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 08:07 AM
 
2,280 posts, read 4,481,390 times
Reputation: 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldengrain View Post
From what I have heard pet insurance is more expensive than some human insurance and it's because insurance companies make money by having a lot of healthy subscribers to pay for the ill ones. Most pet owners have more or less healthy pets and most do not have pet insurance, so it costs a lot for those who do.

All I can say is that I sure wish I had insurance when our renal cat was diagnosed: $15,000 for vet care. Dog: He must have been over $10,000 for the valve condition. Another dog cost us $20,000 for care, no insurance. I believe in insurance, esp for an older pet. I think it is really, really worth it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets > Cats

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top