Beware what information you give your vet…

[Cicadanymph]

Can I give you all a bit of advice.

we’ve recently tried to claim on our pet insurance for pancreatitis in our elderly dog.

As id advised the vet that she occasionally get sick after eating different food or treats the insurance refused to pay out as it was on her notes and evidence of previous ‘digestive issues’.

so beware of what goes on your dogs notes for future insurance claims.

To say I’m annoyed is an understatement.

Are you annoyed at your vet for being honest when filling in official forms?

Unfortunately that is the nature of pet insurance and I always try and warn people that 'anything' you have been to the vets for even if no diagnosis or claim can impact claims if not declared when establishing or swopping insurers.

When we had our first claim the insurers asked for a complete history from my vets since he was first registered as a puppy.

Please don't advise people to withhold important information which could have an impact of their pet's medical care. Highly irresponsible.
Instead I would advise people to read the small print in their insurance proposals and take out the best policy they can afford. Alternatively if you've had your insurance policy from the day you get your dog then nothing will be excluded other than genetic issues. I presume your policy was taken out after the original digestive issues which will of course result in an exclusion from future claims.

So sorry for you and your poor dog. They will do anything to get out of paying, it's disgusting. Thanks for the warning.

And I do remember there was a section asking to declare anything you had been to the vets for when I started my insurance.

The best thing to do is to declare everything then negotiate getting any pre existing exclusions removed if possible (and this can happen as someone I know had an exclusion as puppy had been to vets for a bout of diarrhoea but the gastro exclusion was eventually removed after 6 months as it was clearly just a puppy upset stomach when moving to new home).

We had similar as @BiteyShark but with a cat. I argued with pet plan it was a symptom, not a condition. Funnily enough the only way they'd remove it was if we purchased the more expensive, cover for life option. Robbing bastards.

To everyone here. As with any insurance it is best to disclose EVERYTHING.
If you don't and there is a claim and the insurance co finds out, you may find that they will not entertain your claim.

I had a chat with my vet after my dog bit me. That's on his records now which has affected me writing insurance for him. So yes, be aware!

This is 100% standard and absolutely as it should be. Your vet has a duty to report all issues to the insurers whenever they submit any claim forms.

It's also why you should get lifetime cover from when they're puppies and then stick with that insurer for life.

My vet always updated records using words such as 'discussed' as opposed to 'advised' as it gave more flexibility if you decided to go for treatment but not immediately.

One vet I saw used the word 'advised', we went for the treatment a couple of months later (when we had the money for the excess) and the insurer wouldn't pay out.

Surely you should be annoyed at the insurance for not paying out, rather than the vet who honestly updated your pets medical records.

See I don't agree with this, our one had an accident, yes it was very serious but he recovered fully and nothing that would impact his health in the future, think broken leg and it heals so it wasn't a lifelong "diagnosis" or anything that will impact his future life so why on earth should that be a previous "condition" it's not a condition

We couldn't get pet insurance as we told the vet our pet had to be hand reared not reared by the mother who had died.

But using your own example - dog that breaks a leg in an accident is more likely to go on to develop joint pain and/or arthritis than a dog who's never broken a leg. So, yes, unfortunately, that one-off accident does make it more likely that you'll go on to claim in the future - likely for things like joint x-rays and pain medication.

When you then go on to claim for the arthritis treatment, the insurers will argue that if your dog had never been in accident, they may never have developed the arthritis at all, or at least, not as early on as it did. It's all linked together.

You can always contact your insurers after a certain amount of time and apply to have exclusions removed if you wish, though there's no guarantee they will be.

It’s the vets job to treat your dog and put facts etc on your dogs file. They are not there to ensure your Insurance company pays out.
If you want to be annoyed be annoyed at the Insurance co

I disagree as the vet did the right thing and so did the insurance by checking the facts and like almost all insurance covers, do NOT inc existing conditions.

Not declaring something that you are aware of and then making a claim for that item can result in woes like this and other woes.

Slight OT but when we go on hols as older and so many visits to the docs/hspts it is diffuclt to recall the quick appt that wa s for a headache for example and I worry about missing stuff - best to be as honest to the best of ones ability

I think you really have to blame the insurance company there. We have had our dog at the vets in the past with gastro problems as all dogs get from time to time. Now he's diagnosed with IBD but our insurance has still paid out all claims relating to this even though past records of gastro troubles (as it goes it has been IBD all along & we had to fight for over 2 years for scans to confirm)

You just literally agreed with me

Vet here.

I'd refute this directly with the insurer.
Unless the dog had had pancreatitis before you took out thr policy, you should be covered by your insurance.

Having had a stomach upset before shouldn't mean pancreatitis isn't covered.

Getting a stomach upset after eating human food is pretty normal for any dog.

I think you have a good chance of getting the money back here, although less of a chance if the pancreatitis bout was directly triggered by you feeding fatty/greasy foods on this occasion, and your vet noted that they warned against you doing this.

As an aside, vets want your insurance to cover your bills. This way, your pet gets the best care and they don't have to have awkward money conversations with you.

What this is crazy.
Did you dispute it

I see why you're annoyed OP and this doesn't seem right to me.
But yes it is the insurance problem not the vets.
From your OP it just sounds like he was sick occasionally after having new food he wasn't used to? If this is the case surely you could try challenging it? As it does seem unfair from you've said

I see why you are annoyed OP. I disagree with most. In humans Mentioning a one off sniffle, or cold, or ever feeling a bit unwell. Then means your discredited from ever going to the GP again. Come on! Try a food that doesn't agree with you and you could be sick. we might try a few different flavours of dog food before you find one they like. hardly health condition of the century is it?

I agree with purple. Challenge it. Say to the insurance company : I tried him on a couple of different dog foods/treats before we found one he likes. Big deal!