We rely on advertising to keep the lights on.

Please consider adding us to your whitelist.



Advanced search

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Pet insurance claim advice please.

(10 Posts)
Madondogs Fri 23-Aug-13 18:42:18

Hi, wondering if anyone could give me some advice please.

My mother was walking my sisters dog, dog saw cat and pulled my mother over. Resulting injury was a very severe fracture of radius and ulna. My mother had to have wrist manipulated under sedation then wait for 2 weeks for further X-ray and ? Surgery.

She has now been seen by orthopaedic consultant who has decided that due to her age ( 69 ) the risks of surgery outways the benefits, but she will be left with permanent loss of function in that wrist.

I have advised my mother to claim on my sisters pet insurance, she said that BIL has looked at policy and mother will have to seek legal reperesentation.
What does this mean? And do you think my mother could claim as a member of her family ( although policy is in BIL name ) ?

Sorry it's a bit long! Hope I get more responses than my clam chowder thread. TIA.

Lonecatwithkitten Fri 23-Aug-13 20:31:43

The only area she could probably claim is under the public liability. However, I suspect the difficult will lie in that as the one walking the dog at the time she maybe effectively claiming against herself.
The public liability is normally used where the dog runs out into a car and causes a road traffic accident.
15 years experience if dealing with pet insurance as a vet I have not come across this type of claim. I have made every other type of claim including for owners holiday costs as they cancelled due to dog being ill.

greenfolder Fri 23-Aug-13 21:43:03

I can't see how your mum could claim as she was in charge of the animal at the time.

prh47bridge Fri 23-Aug-13 22:30:15

In order to get any compensation your mother would have to prove that her injury was in some way due to your sister's negligence. As your mother was in control of the dog at the time I agree with other posters that I doubt she would succeed. The reason your BIL is suggesting legal representation is that your mother would have to take legal action against your sister and win for the insurers to pay out.

AuntyPippaAndUncleHarry Sun 25-Aug-13 04:08:54

Why should your mother be compensated? I am sorry to hear your mother has suffered an injury which will affect her permanently, but how is this anything that someone else should have to pay for? Things go wrong in life. I really dislike the attitude that any adversity must be someone else's fault and means the person on the receiving end of the injury should look to make money from it.

Madondogs Sun 25-Aug-13 04:51:52

One of the reasons people take out pet insurance is for 3rd party cover.

The dog caused an accident, resulting in a permenent injury.
I was not asking for anyone's opinion as to the rights and wrongs of insurance claims... My parents are the least grasping most generous people you could meet.

Presumably you have no car, house or any other kind of insurance, and would be happy not to be compensated if an accident occured to you.

prh47bridge Sun 25-Aug-13 09:15:41

I have car, house and life insurance. If I fall over in my house and break my arm I would not expect any compensation from the insurers. If someone else falls over in my house and breaks their arm they would only get compensation from my insurers if their accident was due to my negligence.

You asked for advice as to whether your mother could claim as a member of the family. The answer is no, she does not have a claim.

If your sister had been walking the dog and had suffered this injury she would not be entitled to any compensation from the insurance company. In the same way as your mother was in control of the dog at the time it is very unlikely she would be entitled to any compensation.

The third party insurance is designed to protect the pet owner in situations where the courts would award compensation to a third party. If the courts would not hold the owner of the pet liable for a particular incident the insurers are unlikely to pay out.

Madondogs Sun 25-Aug-13 11:02:22

Wow! There are such charming posters about! I ( or my parents) are no ambulance chasers . I only posted to clarify if a claim would be possible . If that is not the case so be it. Thanks for the replies.

mycatlikestwiglets Sun 25-Aug-13 11:38:19

prh47's explanation is a good one OP, no need to get chippy about it. I can see why you've asked but the likelihood your mum could claim is very low. Read the policy terms and conditions carefully (it would be the third party liability section, if any, which might respond) but the likelihood is that as your mum was in charge of the dog at the time there will be no grounds for an insurance claim.

AuntyPippaAndUncleHarry Fri 30-Aug-13 01:29:10

Prh47 explains the position excellently. Why do the messengers always get shot? I hold numerous insurance policies but I have never considered claiming for things that were my own responsibility. Life sometimes throws little obstacles at us. The automatic response shouldn't be to stick our hands out for a pay out. Having said all that I am still saddened to hear of your mother's injury and do wish her well.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now