Pumpedd:

 

Is Pet Plan the same one from The Warehouse?

 

Yes. The Warehouse are just re-sellers. It looks like their was a change of underwriters to a Lloyd's subsidiary so obviously their reinsurance has gone up considerably.

kingjj:

 

I don't know who provides their SMTP service but if they can't get a simple policy update email through to Hotmail for an Insurance company then they need to find a new provider. I run a small mail server (which I've recently switched to a new IP) and even I can get emails through to Hotmail 99.9% of the time.

 

 

 

Laying all the blame on the sender for how Microsoft runs its mail filtering service is way too harsh IMHO. I have been running both small and large mail systems for more years than I care to think about and have had some serious frustrations with the likes of Hotmail and Yahoo randomly rejecting or "junk mail" tagging email for no clear reason. You are the one choosing a free email service, so you need to accept that its your choice to use a provider that is filtering legitimate email into the junk folder, not the other way around. If you have your own server and want to guarantee legitimate emails get through then get the insurance emails sent there and take responsibility yourself.

I loved my dogs but I self insured and had a max amount I would spend after which ... the blue syringe. 

Pet insurance is outrageously expensive.

MikeAqua:

 

I loved my dogs but I self insured and had a max amount I would spend after which ... the blue syringe. 

 

Pet insurance is outrageously expensive.

 

Everyones max level would vary, as I consider my dogs my children my max level is probably much higher than a family with a pet cat.....  I chose large breeds which come with large vet bills which is why I insure as I probably spend over $2k a year on vet bills. 

noroad:

 

kingjj:

 

I don't know who provides their SMTP service but if they can't get a simple policy update email through to Hotmail for an Insurance company then they need to find a new provider. I run a small mail server (which I've recently switched to a new IP) and even I can get emails through to Hotmail 99.9% of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laying all the blame on the sender for how Microsoft runs its mail filtering service is way too harsh IMHO. I have been running both small and large mail systems for more years than I care to think about and have had some serious frustrations with the likes of Hotmail and Yahoo randomly rejecting or "junk mail" tagging email for no clear reason. You are the one choosing a free email service, so you need to accept that its your choice to use a provider that is filtering legitimate email into the junk folder, not the other way around. If you have your own server and want to guarantee legitimate emails get through then get the insurance emails sent there and take responsibility yourself.

 

Thanks for your thoughts. The email was sent to my wife's email. She's had the account as long as I've known her (and we meet in our mid teens, more than half a life ago). She's an adult who can make her own decisions. She sorted the insurance, she used her free email address just like 95% of people out there would use a free account, or an ISP account, or a work account. The end users of these sort of accounts generally have very little to no control over filtering. If a business is sending important account information by email only (not physical like the vast majority of financial services out there) then they need to make sure that the emails are received. Email was never designed to be a wholly reliable source of communication, just like SMS is not designed to be. Laying the blame on an end user of a service (a service that is used by hundreds of millions around the world) is shaky and the start of a slippery slope to the BDFL flagging Godwin's Law. With respect to your argument about it being my, the end users, responsibility for letting my wife use which ever email service she pleases I will disagree.

BTR:

 

MikeAqua:

 

I loved my dogs but I self insured and had a max amount I would spend after which ... the blue syringe. 

 

Pet insurance is outrageously expensive.

 

 

 

 

Everyones max level would vary, as I consider my dogs my children my max level is probably much higher than a family with a pet cat.....  I chose large breeds which come with large vet bills which is why I insure as I probably spend over $2k a year on vet bills. 

 

Having kid's come along definitely changes things.  Pets are suddenly much further down the priority list.  Having pets stops dads being at the absolute bottom of the list!

Pets are a whole have become very expensive. Flea treatment alone seems outrageous... Also the cost of premium dog food is extremely high in NZ compared to Amazon US prices.

People buying pet insurance thinking it will save them money doesn't exactly make owning pets any cheaper either

jonb:

A facebook group I am in have been complaining about this too.  They have all switched to Southern Cross pet insurance after the large premium rises on Pet Plan this year.

Pumpedd:

Pets are a whole have become very expensive. Flea treatment alone seems outrageous... Also the cost of premium dog food is extremely high in NZ compared to Amazon US prices.

 

ZollyMonsta: 

The dogs insurance is now only $10 less than we are paying for health insurance for two adults and an infant combined.

And most kiwis complain about that hahaha

Fred99: Clear need for either Obamacare for pets in NZ or a more Trumpist attitude.

Buying a gun?