Petplan grrr...

Re: Petplan grrr...

Bob Russell — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 17:08:18 GMT

Numerous and random fax numbers so you can be sure of sending the history to the wrong number of course!

Re: Petplan grrr...

patrick murphy — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:11:16 GMT

they do seem to have a fabulous guy who unstaples everything and loses stuff really efficently

Re: Petplan grrr...

Rob Loxley — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:30:12 GMT

[quote user="Hanna Bennett"]is anyone else using the vet envoy electronic claim submission system? can highly recommend it - never have requests for old history as it all gets sent with the claim, and they turn around most claims within a week[/quote]

Our record for claims to be settled is less than 3 hours from submission :)

Re: Petplan grrr...

Hanna Bennett — Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:24:42 GMT

is anyone else using the vet envoy electronic claim submission system? can highly recommend it - never have requests for old history as it all gets sent with the claim, and they turn around most claims within a week. still think petplan are the best option out there - similar to one of the other posters I've had my dog to a referral centre within the last year and all paid with no quibble. Yes the 20% excess was a bit of a sting but I knew about it in advance (and it's not his fault he's 14!) so went into it with my eyes open - and I make sure clients do the same.

Re: Petplan grrr...

John Flynn — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:12:39 GMT

Not available in Ireland as far as I know, but anyone recommending Vetsure insurance - if so what is your experience out of interest?

Certainly sounds like a step in the sustainability direction for the industry?

Re: Petplan grrr...

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:45:42 GMT

[quote user="Tanya Fielding"]I was surprised to find Petplan had rejected my claim for inginal hernia repair and spay at same time. Also we have now been told pups must be insured before 12wo to claim for cryptorchid.[/quote]

I don't understand your confusion. The inguinal hernia would, presumably, have been present at birth so was therefore (understandably) not covered? Spaying is never covered.

Also, if a dog is cryptorchid after 12weeks then things are unlikely to change - would you expect them to allow someone to take out insurance in order to get any other pre-existing condition fixed??

Or have I misunderstood?

Re: Petplan grrr...

Tanya Fielding — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:14:25 GMT

I was surprised to find Petplan had rejected my claim for inginal hernia repair and spay at same time. Also we have now been told pups must be insured before 12wo to claim for cryptorchid.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Bob Russell — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:10:56 GMT

I am still more than a little unhappy that they introduced the 20% + excess payment from clients after the pet reaches 10 years of age. This may not be a big problem for most claims but can be for referrals.

I bet this was not in the terms and conditions 10 years ago!

Where is the cheap policy that kicks in at £500? This would protect owners from the referral bills and keep smaller claims from clogging up the system. We are used to car and house insurance having large excesses to manage claim loads.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 11:12:01 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Martin - resubmitting the claim under a different condition was bound to cause you even more problems!!!![/quote] True but it was a test of their response as much as anything, I didn't think they had rejected the first claim fairly.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:51:53 GMT

I do a lot of insurence claims-and very few queries from Petplan. Most of those are along the line of,"What are you claiming for? We can't read your handwriting!"

Wynne

Re: Petplan grrr...

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:47:13 GMT

Petplan must handle hundreds, if not thousands, of claims every single week. They are bound to make the odd mistake - don't we all? I find that, unlike other companies, they are easy to deal with and seem to make fair decisions in most cases.

Martin - resubmitting the claim under a different condition was bound to cause you even more problems!!!!

Re: Petplan grrr...

Thomas Johnson — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:09:47 GMT

[quote user="Stephen Courtney"]

If you write to pet plan on the clients behalf asking them to review the decision, and give reasons why, you will probably find that they will change their mind. i have never had an unreasonable end outcome, these glitches are usually due to some ignorant new employee trying too hard to reject claims .

[/quote]

I wrote to Petplan on the owner's behalf last week politely questioning their decision. I agree, they are usually very good at reviewing such decisions, but it just amazes me that they made it in the first place.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Stephen Courtney — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:15:32 GMT

And if need be a threat to go to the ombudsman works wonders in most cases. If i think a client is being shafted I go out of my way to help them deal with the issues.

I'm also not a fan of the incoherent phone calls from someone in an overseas call center quizzing me about the claim form i submitted. fortunately we scan them all into the animal's records, but sods law if ever there is a computer glitch, it will be that claim that gets lost or queried!

Re: Petplan grrr...

Bob Russell — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:54:44 GMT

[quote user="Thomas Johnson"]

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]

[quote user="Thomas Johnson"]Petplan recently declined to pay a claim for campylobacter in a puppy as the owner hadn't declared that the puppy had an umbilical hernia when they took out the policy.[/quote]

Really - what's the full story behind that one? Why would they exclude a claim for bacterial enteritis because of a hernia? Are you sure you're not being spun a line by the client ?

[/quote]

I've seen the letter from Petplan, it gives no reason for refusing the claim for campylobacter other than the undeclared umbilical hernia, and the puppy presented with a 24hr history of diarrhoea a month after the policy was taken out. I have no idea what their reasoning is.

[/quote]

Since when does an asymptomatic hernia need to be reported to the insurer at all? Granted it is likely to be excluded as pre-existing but as it is not related (presumably!) a threat of the ombudsman may be in order!

Re: Petplan grrr...

Thomas Johnson — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:50:25 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]

Really - what's the full story behind that one? Why would they exclude a claim for bacterial enteritis because of a hernia? Are you sure you're not being spun a line by the client ?

[/quote]

Re: Petplan grrr...

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:24:29 GMT

[quote user="zoe north"]However still think that Direct line have to be the most podantic where paperwork is concerned. Client's having to phone for a claim form that can only be used for that claim!! Time to send form out for one client was 2 weeks![/quote] Yes, I generally refuse to do direct claims with direct line because of this but have weakened just now to allow a good client who has already forked out over £300 to continue treatment. I don't wait with baited breath for the claim form let alone eventual payment.

Another problem with another insurer now - Swiftcare. I removed a mammary tumour and another lump which turned out to be a round cell tumour plus a tiny fibro-lipoma (which I would have ignored if I hadn't already got the knife out) all at the same time under one minor surgical procedure fee which would have been the same for one or all three lumps. They dismissed the claim on the grounds she had a mammary tumour removed several years ago. I wrote a letter to say that IMO the mammary tumour was a denovo tumour unrelated to the original and in any case there were two other masses removed which should be claimable but they still declined. We then re-submitted the claim for the round cell tumour - same fee because as said before one price for the lot. They called me today to clarify the claim and said that the original claim should have been honoured as it was now clear it was unrelated to previous history but as we've resubmitted they consider it is now 3 different conditions so 3 excess fees of course even though they had full clinical history on the first claim showing there was three different masses and were therefore fully aware. I told them if the client wanted to take this to the insurance ombudsman he would have my full support that they were being unreasonable and just playing tit form tat to get their revenge. Another name on the un-recommend list.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Niall Taylor — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:03:18 GMT

Really - what's the full story behind that one? Why would they exclude a claim for bacterial enteritis because of a hernia? Are you sure you're not being spun a line by the client ?

We've always found Pet Plan to be one of the better insurers and not had too much trouble with them, or if there has been a glitch they are sensible and reasonable about sorting it out.

Cheers,

Niall

Re: Petplan grrr...

zoe north — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:40:13 GMT

Yes, PetPlan's capacity for asking for large reams of history repeatedly for the same claim and being able to lose it, despite us stapling said history to claim form has become legendary at my practice in the last 6 months. A claim is now sent with full history from day dot - not easy given the size on envelopes provided, and a note on the top of the claim form stating that a full history since registered is stapled to it! Its amazing as you say the number of repeats for history are required and the number of different places they need to be faxed. Repeated paperwork has made nurses slightly annoyed (steps back and offers chocolate!).

However still think that Direct line have to be the most podantic where paperwork is concerned. Client's having to phone for a claim form that can only be used for that claim!! Time to send form out for one client was 2 weeks!

We have thought about this long and hard and have come to the conclusion that speed of payment certainly seems to vary with size of claim. We wondered if there are claim levels at which claims are given over to higher beings at petplan, thus creating delay and further requests for history. Is electronic claiming any faster? Certainly my dog's claim at a large ref centre has been paid out in 8 working days this month yet direct claims from us seem always to take a month!

Re: Petplan grrr...

Mark Frost — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:10:16 GMT

Haven't personally had any issues, either as an owner (both my cat and dog have been referred and treated at Petplan's expense in the last 18 months), or had any issues with any of my clients claiming. I'm always keeping an ear out for these type of problems and we have had issues with a number of other insurers in the last year or so.

Re: Petplan grrr...

Thomas Johnson — Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:25:24 GMT

Petplan recently declined to pay a claim for campylobacter in a puppy as the owner hadn't declared that the puppy had an umbilical hernia when they took out the policy. I have written Petplan a letter questioning their decision, we shall wait and see what they say...