Insurance = unacceptably high vets bills?

Pet Insurance is a reasonly new concept. We all coped perfectly well without it not so long ago.

Do you think that now that there are a majority of pets insured that this allows vet practises to charge whatever they want - knowing it will be covered by Insurance?

There are no market forces affecting vets - not many people phone around to find the cheapest vet to tend to their pet! So there is no pressure to keep vets fees competitive.

And now that insurance is prevelant - how many times do you hear that the very first question the vet asks is "is this dog insured"? Why should that matter?

So do you think that the prevelence of pet insurance has caused increased vets fees?

How much does it cost to insure a dog and has this ever offset the cost of vet fees over the dogs lifetime? (I am sure there will be plenty of stories of operations costing thousands now - but I mean on average, and actually would those operations have cost thousands if there was no insurance?)

Its a bit of a Catch 22 situation. Are insurance premiums so high because vets bills are so high and would they be that high is there wasn't insurance in the first place!

Obviously it is the way this modern world has developed and I wonder what the next thing will be that we will all feel pressurised into buying? - LOL! Don't say it - dog licenses!!

Another little musing from me this evening to discuss.......

(PS: I am really lucky to have a down to earth, rural vet practise who know me so well and I would never go elsewhere - I am not aware that they have ever asked anyone about insurance, but I think this is the minority nowadays)

I totally believe that the introduction of pet insurance has increased the cost of vet bills - but the insurance companies like to let you believe that it is the other way around, and they only came about because vet fees were increasing. I think both have contributed to the other.

When I had my dogs insured (I don't anymore) and had them registered with a small animal vet the first question was always "is he/she insured" and when the answer was yes, it seemed to open the floodgates for every test and trial under the sun to be done. Now, this could have been explained away that due to having insurance the pet owner didn't need to worry about the cost of giving their pet every test (that it may actually need) to get to the root of a problem. Or it could be seen that the vet was taking advantage of the fact a pet was insured and so they could perform lots of, shall we say, "not strictly necessary" tests to be done.

Thankfully I now also use a rural vet practice who treat both farm and companion animals, and all the vets in our local surgery are very down to earth, old fashioned type of vets, who only do tests that are absolutely necessary and don't charge for every little thing. Definitely a minority in today's market I would say.

I think you may be right with some practices who may take advantage of insurance. Mine are insured but I trust my vet to be making the right decision regardless of the cost. She explains all the options. listens to my concerns, answers all my questions as I have ususally done a bit of homework before I attend. She is happy to give a script if you can get the drugs cheaper elsewhere (this practice is one of the franchises so probably not in her interest to do this) I think most of it is down to the vet and how they approach treating animals and how you approach the situation when your dog needs treatment. I am sure there are many who do take advantage though.

I imagine it could be partly down to insurance, I'm not naive, but I don't think every vet is guilty of it, nor do I think it's the only reason vet prices have gone up. 20 years ago, our family dogs only went to the vets if they were dying (literally!). If a dog had hip dysplasia, was there much they could do for it other than limit exercise and give painkillers? Nowadays there's hydrotherapy, acupuncture, chiropractors, hip replacements - lots more options but lots involve specialist staff (on specialists wages!) and equipment. You can even go as far as having chemotherapy for your dogs nowadays. If you look at what people pay to have the human equivelants of all these treatments privately or without the NHS (e.g. in America), you do see why it costs so much. Someone I work with has a son with CF and one of his medications costs £10,000 a year! Medicine and medical procedures aren't cheap, but the option is there for us now when ti wasn't before.
My vets prices have gone up recently but it reflects the equipment/surgery - manned 24 hours and now with on-site blood testing/analysis machinery, you get what you pay for.
I know my vets wouldn't push for unnecessary tests though and it is important to have a vet you can trust to not rip you off. Mine have advised against tests or gone down the cheaper route of diagnosing something by treating for it (as long as its a condition that wouldn't be worsened by this method). They give me discounted prices because I used to practically live there when I did some small scale animal rehoming, and they even did an x-ray totally free of charge when I took in a rabbit that wasn't mine - poor thing had a broken spine so was PTS but they didn't charge me a penny as they knew it wasn't mine. So I have a great relationship with my vets and don't begrudge the higher prices because I know it's paying for great service and very modern, high spec equipment which my pets may rely on to save their lives in the future.

Technically on the cat - I'm out of pocket going the insurance route. In the 8 years I've been owned by her she's been to the vet once (we don't vaccinate her since she's indoor only and gets so distressed being transported in the car I think it's kinder to keep her undisturbed wherever possible) for a quick consultation and the cost was way under the insurance excess so we didn't bother claiming.

That's not really why I have the insurance - especially at the present when we've just bought a house - we don't have savings built up, and I never ever ever want the decision on medical treatment for the mog or the dog to be made based on what I can and can't afford - I couldn't look at myself in the mirror knowing I'd had to call the end of one of them because I didn't have the money to treat them.

Yes I do think it's probably driven vets' bills up to be honest - if there's more money available for treatment, there's more treatments available and more vets start to get into the market for things like hydrotherapy and the like... but there's also a massive boom in gadgets and gizmos for pets anyway (same as with babies) - when I was a kid a dog required: lead/bowl/somewhere to sleep if you wanted him off the sofa... nowadays - we can fill a store the size of a small supermarket with stuff.

all 4 of mine are insured plus the ponies my vet for the dawgs has never asked if they are insured but then again i wont have unnecessary tests on my dawgs anyway or anti b if i think they dont need it , the vet for the ponies always ask and when they had to sedate one of them cos vet couldbt get needle into vein i refused to pay it as wasnt my fault he was afraid of horses!!

You could be right. But both Max and Ollie were insured and goodness were we pleased they were.

Neither survived the illness they had (different) in each dog, but it allowed us to go ahead and make sure everything possible was done to try to find the reason or cure if there was one and if not the means for them to be with us albeit a short time in each case.

The next dog we have will also be insured.

no vets do not put fees up because you are insured..they ask because more options are available when you are.(unless u have a bottomless bank account)

I have heard of several stories of vets having a pricelist for insurance jobs and a pricelist for regular jobs Not sure how often it happens but it can happen. That's why I'm so glad to have a decent vet I know I can trust (and am dreading moving and finding a new practise)

ive worked in the veterinary industry for 19 years,no vets i have known of has done this! i wonder if they are just that, story's, as some people are anti vet and anti having to pay for vets.