Next year's Mollydog insurance is £280 - up from £247 this year. She's now 9. I have never had to claim on her insurance...
There probably comes a point as dogs get older, slower, more sensible and more expensive that it no longer makes sense to buy insurance, but just cross fingers and use savings if necessary. But is that this year...?
There probably comes a point as dogs get older, slower, more sensible and more expensive that it no longer makes sense to buy insurance, but just cross fingers and use savings if necessary. But is that this year...?
- Current Mood:
Scroogelike - Current Music:huge brown cats purring
Comments
Of course, anything you couldn't afford to replace/fix from regular cash flow (like, you know, if your house burned down) is excluded from this.
I've no idea how expensive vet bills could potentially prove to be, but that is how I'd make the decision.
I could cover routine 'fix up' type vet bills out of savings, it would be unlikely that those would run over a thousand or so - but there are two other factors I'm wrangling over - the very remote chance of a huge legal bill that I couldn't possibly cover, and also, the possibility that if she had not one accident, but an illness or series of problems that needed specialists and operations and rehabilitation expenses, which could mount up to a lot more.
I don't insure a lot of household stuff on the grounds you mention - washing machine breakdown, that sort of thing, if it comes to it we'll just buy a new machine. But it's sort of different with an animal, because you aren't just looking at repair or replacement costs: I could get a new dog for £100 or less, but obviously making the decision to replace a sick family member is on a different emotional level to a household appliance.
I do think that with animals there is sometimes a tendency to go on trying medical solutions when really it would be fairer to bite the bullet and let them go. But on the other hand, I'd really hate to be economising on something that could make a big difference to life expectancy and ongoing quality of life, like hydrotherapy or something like that, because the ongoing costs could stack up...
HUM!
I mean it sounds to me like its not really a case of she's old enough and reliable enough not to bother with the insurance because you probably want the legal cover no matter how reliable she is, but you might be able to find someone to cover that where they take into account age and reliability and the insurance goes down.
Obviously that would seem to be outweighed by the fact that chances of needing long-term medical care must be going up....
*This does, of course, mean very little, as I neither work in general (non-life) insurance nor have a pet myself.
I've kicked myself regularly for switching from the 6 week Petplan policy that came with Molls from the rescue, to an M&S policy, while she had a slight limp. At the time I expected the limp to clear up fairly quickly, but it slowly got worse, so x-rays, acupuncture, and pain relief all need to be paid for rather than claimed for, as they are all resulting from that one pre-existing condition.
They are quite generous in how they define 'pre-existing' actually - it has to be something previously investigated by a vet or otherwise known to the owner. Moll's arthritic leg is certainly down to a racing injury, but as at that stage she was quite young and had been on kennel rest for months, it wasn't visible when I adopted her, so I could have claimed for it.
However, I don't think there is a policy that just does legal and longterm. I could increase the policy excess though probably, I'll see what difference that would make.
Currently thinking I'll probably renew just for the peace of mind. When dealing with badly broken dog is not when I want to be worrying about costs...