Pet health insurance

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Popess Pantiara Evokovitch, BAYBEE! - 15 Aug 2006 02:35 GMT

Do you think it's a better idea to get insurance for your cat that
covers just routine matinence like checkups or only illnesses and
accidents? Seems like pet insurance companies chose one or the other
and not both unless it's something like $50 a month. I love cats, but
that's about as much as I pay for my own insurance. Also do you think
it's better to chose an insurance plan that covers mostly illnesses or
accidents? I mean, what has happened more to your cats that cost you an
ungodly amount of money?

Reply to this Message

Barnabas Collins - 15 Aug 2006 19:52 GMT

>Do you think it's a better idea to get insurance for your cat that
>covers just routine matinence like checkups or only illnesses and
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>accidents? I mean, what has happened more to your cats that cost you an
>ungodly amount of money?

IMHO it is better to get no insurance for the pet.

Remember the moto: Insurance companies don't make money paying claims,
they make money not paying claims.

Take the money you'd put into pay for insurance into a high yield
investment of some kind, and use those proceeds to pay for your
pets medical expenses.

I'm older than dirt, i've learned over the years that
insurance companies are sleazy, they are out for the
profit, and they don't care if your pet dies as a result of
their denying coverage.

Yes after dealing with health insurance, auto insurance,
home owners insurance, etc. over the years not to
mention the people who got screwed by insurance during
Katrina i'm not a fan of the insurance fraud game.

Reply to this Message

Plus Net - 16 Aug 2006 17:55 GMT

I agree insurance companies can rip off those that do not know better so in
some respects it is better to avoid it altogether. I generally forego the
extra cover you are offered when buying new electrical equipment (not for
the cat:). However, with cats you are not responsible for their actions or
general health (apart from usual grooming and feeding properly), so I
personally decided it is better to get the insurance and relax. Found a
'best buy' in a consumer magazine which was extremely good value compared to
some companies and feel better for it.
At the end of the day it depends on your attitude to insurance.

Dave.

> >Do you think it's a better idea to get insurance for your cat that
> >covers just routine matinence like checkups or only illnesses and
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Reply to this Message

Barnabas Collins - 16 Aug 2006 20:22 GMT

>I agree insurance companies can rip off those that do not know better so in
>some respects it is better to avoid it altogether. I generally forego the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>some companies and feel better for it.
>At the end of the day it depends on your attitude to insurance.

If you do decide to do it read all the fine print to fully understand
what you're getting into.

Ultimately it may be better to just take the money you'd buy insurance
with and put it in a high yeild investment and self insure yourself.

After all you don't want some beaurecrat a thousand miles away who
has never had a pet that the insurance won't cover fluffy and it is
time to put it to sleep.

Never undersestimate the ability of an insurance company to avoid
paying. I still remember many years ago I was doing medical billing
for a doctor and BC/BS actually had the nerve to say "a heart attack
is not an emergency, we don't cover it." This was around the time
of the first shuttle crash.

Reply to this Message

---MIKE--- - 17 Aug 2006 23:47 GMT

i put $300 a year into a savings account for large vet bills. So far I
haven't had to use the money.

---MIKE---

>>In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
>> (44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

Reply to this Message

Barnabas Collins - 18 Aug 2006 01:01 GMT

> ---MIKE---
>>>In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
> >> (44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

Wildcat Mountain?

Reply to this Message

---MIKE--- - 18 Aug 2006 12:22 GMT

>>Wildcat Mountain?

No - The town of Twin Mountain.

---MIKE---

>>In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
>> (44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

Reply to this Message