I finally heard from Veterinary Pet Insurance re. my cat's FLUTD claims. The claims totaled about $1500 that included getting him unblocked and follow-up care. I got back $300.00. The annual premium is $445. Not exactly worth it!!!
Transparent thievery.
1 2 3
afr (Email Removed) writes
I finally heard from Veterinary Pet Insurance re. my cat's FLUTD claims. The claims totaled about $1500 that included getting him unblocked and follow-up care. I got back $300.00. The annual premium is $445. Not exactly worth it!!! Transparent thievery.

Did you expect the service to be a duplicate of a human HMO? Hope not. .
I finally heard from Veterinary Pet Insurance re. my cat's ... annual premium is $445. Not exactly worth it!!! Transparent thievery.

Did you expect the service to be a duplicate of a human HMO? Hope not. .

Obviously not. Had it been the equivalent of a human HMO, the claim would have been denied.
Sherry
LOL. Actually, when this cat was a baby and had an intestinal virus, they gave me back about 70 percent of the expenses. I guess when it gets to the more serious illnesses, they scale back, which I think sucks. I fail to see how reimbursement that is less than the cost of the policy qualifies as "insurance"... except for the salaries of the vets who work for VPI.
I finally heard from Veterinary Pet Insurance re. my cat's FLUTD claims. The claims totaled about $1500 that included getting him unblocked and follow-up care. I got back $300.00. The annual premium is $445. Not exactly worth it!!! Transparent thievery.

But that premium is for a year, right? And the reimbursement you got back was for one illness/claim? Obviously, hoping no more big clainms will be neeeded w/in the year's coverage, but I don't see how you can logically expect to get back more than what the yearly premium costs, for any one claim, unless that just happens to be the way the condition's covered.

Cathy

"Staccato signals of constant information..."
("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon
Sounds like my previous dental insurance!
Why not put $10 a week away just for such an expense. You'd have the $1500 next time in a little less than 3 years. You could open a special bank account but with the 1% interest they are paying, putting the money into a tin can would serve you just as well.

Barb
I can only please one person a day.
Today is not your day.
Tomorrow doesn't look good either.
LOL. Actually, when this cat was a baby and had an intestinal virus, they gave me back about 70 percent ... than the cost of the policy qualifies as "insurance"... except for the salaries of the vets who work for VPI.

Aren't the coverages disclosed in advance? Or do they pull the "reasonable and customary" BS? If so, ask them where you can get a cat unblocked and treated for $300. If they can't produce the name of a local vet, sue them for return of the difference in your premium. Sounds fraudulent to me.
-L.
LOL. Actually, when this cat was a baby and had an intestinal virus, they gave me back about 70 percent ... than the cost of the policy qualifies as "insurance"... except for the salaries of the vets who work for VPI.

I'm sorry your cat has been ill.
I am not sure I am understanding the above correctly, though. I'd be curious about where you stand on the following.
As you may be aware, and statistically and actuarially speaking, health insurance as a business is not viable unless (for some given period of time) reimbursements for all clients are less than the premiums. Presumably each year an insurance company makes more in premiums than it returns in reimbursements. In such a scenario, some clients get more back in reimbursements than they paid in premiums, but most do not. Those that do not instead get "peace of mind."

I happen to think "peace of mind" is worth money. These days it seems many people with insurance have a different view.
If an insurance company is set up so that no client ever gets back more in reimbursements than he/she paid in premiums, something is fishy (albeit it's probably legal, too). Surely your pet's insurance policy indicates instances where the reimbursement may very well exceed the premium, no? What's the upper limit of a claim, for example?
Of interest might be that an issue (July?) of Consumer Reports said a few months ago that insurance plans for one's pets were not worth it. As others here have suggested, one is better off stashing some money away each month in a cat/dog/etc. vet bill savings account.
I think one problem with human health insurance today is that people think they're supposed to get more in services than they pay annually in premiums. People readily agree when an MD suggests or "requires" a test or procedure when in fact the MD is trying to make money and the test or procedure won't make a bit of difference to the patient's health. The insurer goes along with this, because it justifies the insurer raising your rates next time around. Which causes the client to want still more medical tests and procedures (after all, he's paying all this money for premiums), which the MD is happy to prescribe (it's his/her bread and butter), which causes rates to go up further, etc.

Right now, we seem to have a Ponzi scheme in place with U.S.health insurance. I think what's happening with it is carrying over to people's view of (the relatively new) pet health insurance.
Direct-pay and/or high deductibles for all might encourage consumers to be smarter about their choices.
This is a political post, and you have enough on your mind, so blow what I say above off or comment as you like.
I am very interested in what is happening to health care in this country, and this is why I am posting.
Two cents.
As you may be aware, and statistically and actuarially speaking, health insurance as a business is not viable unless (for ... in reimbursements than they paid in premiums, but most do not. Those that do not instead get "peace of mind."

The maxiumum you can get for a blocked cat with flutd is about $530.00 My own undertsnading of health insurance is that most patients pay and don't get sick, and that is how the profit is made.Maybe people who have health insurance for cats and dogs have a higher percentage of patients who do become ill, and thus the lower pay schedule. The tricky thing with this company is if you send in six or more claims a year, your premium doubles. I guess that is their way of insuring that profits exceed expenditures.
If an insurance company is set up so that no client ever gets back more in reimbursements than he/she paid ... instances where the reimbursement may very well exceed the premium, no? What's the upper limit of a claim, for example?

I'll have to look through it more carefully. I never looked at the reimbursement schedule until he got sick. I suspect the cancer payment schedule exceeds the premium.
Of interest might be that an issue (July?) of Consumer Reports said a few months ago that insurance plans for ... here have suggested, one is better off stashing some money away each month in a cat/dog/etc. vet bill savings account.

Thanks for that reference. I'll take a look at that issue. Based on this experience, I would concur.
I think one problem with human health insurance today is that people think they're supposed to get more in services ... which the MD is happy to prescribe (it's his/her bread and butter), which causes rates to go up further, etc.

I guess it depends on where one lives. Where I live, the doctors think like insurance agents, and drag their feet when it comes to testing.
This is a political post, and you have enough on your mind, so blow what I say above off or ... interested in what is happening to health care in this country, and this is why I am posting. Two cents.

I'm very interested in healthcare too. Thanks for posting.
Show more