RE: Are vets pricing themselves out of the market?

Michael O'Gorman — Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:00:06 GMT

If you look at the text of the article, rather than the headline, the pet insurance companies are pricing themselves out of the market, not vets. The increase in premiums was about 10% greater than the increase in value of claims (38.9% vs 35.4%).

According to the YouGov report, poor value and high cost are the main factors limiting uptake, and the percentage of people able to afford treatment without insurance and without prior savings has increased. The logical inference to draw from that is that veterinary services are not overpriced, but that insurance policies are.

The insurers have been moaning about the price of veterinary fees since the mid 1990s at least, but they are still in the market. A couple of years ago there were some articles in the press about how insurers were finding the cost of veterinary fees particularly at referral centres insupportable. Having heard similar bleats repeatedly over the years, I took a look at the annual shareholders report of one of the largest insurers. Oddly, they told the shareholders that everything was going marvellously - more policies sold and higher profits per policy. According to a Datamonitor report, the market average loss ratio in 2012 was 70%, i.e. £70 paid out for every £100 collected in premums. According to Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/.../Loss_ratio)loss ratios for property and casualty insurance (e.g. motor car insurance), range typically from 40% to 60%.

Looking at those figures, I would agree with those who consider pet insurance is overpriced and poor value.

RE: Are vets pricing themselves out of the market?

Ben Sullivan — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 21:23:14 GMT

I agree with Wynne - people who say they can't afford insurance premiums shouldn't have pets. I can't afford Sky TV subscription fees or a swimming pool so I have neither.

RE: Are vets pricing themselves out of the market?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 15:03:59 GMT

That's always been the case. If you're one of the Rothschilds, it's pointless taking out insurence - you make your millions from other peoples insurence premiums. As for the ones who save money by not insuring ( and whinge if the veterinary surgeon can't cure everything within their budget - well these tend to be the same lot who think they have a right to demand taxpayers feed, clothe and house their brats.

Wynne