Listening to this.... Our blimmin cat been to the vet 3 times in the last couple of months at $150 a pop. I suppose the insurance is just for $000 surgery though?

kryptonjohn:

 

Listening to this.... Our blimmin cat been to the vet 3 times in the last couple of months at $150 a pop. I suppose the insurance is just for $000 surgery though?

 

It should be called prevent-nate-being-divorced insurance. If the thing does need major surgery, we will be paying for it, regardless of how expensive (my wife loves the little furball more than life itself).

Just trying to prevent an argument I'm going to lose sooner or later 

It's like that with our moggy, but with the kids who absolutely adore the thing. Seriously it's like they're ancient Egyptians.

I'm not at all sure if pet insurance is really worthwhile. The people pushing it are the vets, who are also the people who will get more money from it, as they would be the ones doing the op that would otherwise probably not have been done had insurance not been purchased in the first place.

If it was me, I'd find out how much the insurance is, then put that much aside into another account every month. If your pet needs to go to the vet, then the money should be there, and when your pet probably doesn't need to, you've got a bunch of money that you wouldn't have had. 

Dunno about NZ, Nate, but we got it here in Oz for our Kelpie, because he runs and runs and runs and ru... you get the picture.. (house paddock is over an acre).

Mrs (who works in insurance) insisted on insurance in case he "does a knee"...

Guess what's not covered (besides actual vet visits).... 

Waste of time. And you'll have to fight  the a-holes all the way too, which is something you don't need when your best friend is laying on a table at the vet.

The pros and cons of self insuring are the same whether it's a pet, car or house. On average you are better off to self insure but if you are unlucky enough to be hit by a calamity - you drive into someone's Rolls Royce, or your cat needs surgery, your account will not cover it.

I'd say it's a little different with an animal. The 3rd party coverage aspect is not the same as with a vehicle (your cat is more than likely not going to write off a $100k Audi, and even if it did the pet insurance wouldn't cover it...) and the value of a house and it's contents are a lot higher, even in comparison to the premiums when compared to an animal. 

Putting away $50 a month (for example) will more than likely cover vets visits in the short term, and even the odd op in the long term. 

Putting away $300 or so a month for house and contents does not achieve nearly the same thing, and also the 3rd party aspect of that, eg if your house burns down and the neighbour's also catches fire.....

I don't think it's the same at all. 

kryptonjohn:

 

The pros and cons of self insuring are the same whether it's a pet, car or house. On average you are better off to self insure but if you are unlucky enough to be hit by a calamity - you drive into someone's Rolls Royce, or your cat needs surgery, your account will not cover it.

 

 

 

The problem is, in an emergency, you have to pay for it (unless you have a deal with your vet) and *hope* your insurance will come to the party.. And pet insurance places don't like parties.

Edit: We live on an ex-farm in a primary production rural area, and because our dog is a "working dog" breed, they wont cover for "pet insurance", even though we don't farm, he's a cross, we aren't registered primary producers, and eff them.

We looked at this, and decided to self insure. At one stage we went to the vets a lot because one of the cats used to fight and bite the  other and so one regularly developed abscesses  . Due to the high cost of the treatment, we looked at insurance, but were told by the vet that it likely wouldn't be covered by insurance, based on the number of times we went in. That is the problem with two male cats. Sadly the one doing the biting ended up getting hit by a car, so we replaced it with a female, and there was no more fighting and biting, which has ended up saving a lot in vets bill.  Because the cats are now indoor cats, there is less risk of problems, apart from age related illnesses. But it looks like once a pet reaches a certain age, it can be excluded from some coverage anyway. I think the secret is to find a good affordable vet as well, that won't just do expensive tests tat you may not need. We got told by one that ours may have feline aids based on the tests, as it wasn't eating or drinking and to prepare for the worst. We took it home and it was fine after a day. That was about 10 years ago and the cat is now 13. I think pet insurance though is possibly good for those people who aren't good savers, and can put the money away to self insure. I also think dogs are a different beast in terms of insurance, although our old Beagle lived to nearly 20 with hardly any vet visits.

Older cat, now passed away, had a sore eye. Got drops, $300 later. They said his teeth need attention, one out, quote $600.

I was told once that a vet is a licence to print money, as owners will spend on pets, rather than themselves.

I self insure

tdgeek:

 

Older cat, now passed away, had a sore eye. Got drops, $300 later. They said his teeth need attention, one out, quote $600.

 

I was told once that a vet is a licence to print money, as owners will spend on pets, rather than themselves.

 

I self insure

 

The other thing is that sometime people will have pets instead of children. Or replace grown children with pets. So they don't mind spending all their money on them, which is perfectly fine. But the pet industry over the last decade seems to have really grown as a result.You just have to go into the pet shop to see all sorts of expensive foods etc. Real chicken breast for humans, is actually cheaper these days then good quality pet food.

I have insurance for both my fur monsters with https://www.petplan.co.nz/

end of last year one of them was unable to breathe properly. A vet visit and stay for a lung op and tests etc ended up north of $6k .... I paid $150 excess. The other beast is no doubt going to devlop issues later on as she only has three legs but the insurance said she would be covered if and when she has joint issues. Had I put away the money I paid on insurance for the lung issue (turn out to be heart issue causing the lung problem) I wouldn't have got close to the bill.

fizzychicken:I have insurance for both my fur monsters with https://www.petplan.co.nz/

Will have to compare them to https://www.nzpetdoctors.co.nz/pet-insurance