The Latest From Petplan

[F, Calla & Luca]

Dear F...

Thank you for being a loyal member of the Petplan family.

As part of our continued efforts to offer the most comprehensive coverage for our policyholders and their pets, we are delighted to announce that we are increasing the coverage limits on our bronze, silver and gold policies. On average, the annual coverage limit will increase by 15% at your next renewal. This means that as a policyholder, you can have even greater peace of mind when it comes to Calla and Luca's unexpected vet bills.

We are introducing these increased policy coverage limits to ensure that your pet's protection is in line with advances in veterinary medicine, and the increasing amount spent on veterinary care. According to the American Pet Products Association (APPA) 2011-2012 National Pet Owners Survey, pet parents will spend $12.2 billion on veterinary care this year alone, up from $11.0 billion last year and $8.2 billion five years ago.

Not only do costs within the veterinary market as a whole change from year to year, but as veterinary technology advances, treatment options become more advanced and thus more expensive. As a company, we, along with our underwriter - AGCS Marine Insurance Company - must adjust premiums to accommodate the ongoing changes in veterinary medicine, and the associated costs for our pets.

This email is to provide notice as required pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:27EE-51 that AGCS Marine Insurance Company filed on 17th December, 2012 with the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance a request for a rate increase in the amount 26.6% for pet health insurance. Under the proposed filing, the average policy will see a rate change of no more than 25%. The impact of the filing on your rates may vary substantially, depending on the terms of your policy and your individual circumstances.

The request for a rate increase is subject to review and approval by the Department of Banking and Insurance pursuant to law, and the request ultimately may not be approved or may not be approved for the full amount requested. If approved in whole or in part, the rate change will not affect existing policies until they come up for renewal.

As always, we're here to help. If you would like to know more about veterinary advancements and how they can help you seek and provide the best care for Calla and Luca, follow along with our team of veterinary experts on our Vets for Pets blog. If you have any questions about this letter, or our proposed policy changes, please contact us.

Warmest regards,

Your friends at Petplan

This worth some thought! Guess I' ll have some thinking to do.

[Diane, Baker & Oskar]

Last month, the Seattle Times published a 4 part series comparing national pet insurance companies.  It was researched & written by an attorney in the area who went through all this with a fine toothed comb.  Here is a link to the 4th article...if you want to see the other three, just go to seattletimes.com & search 'pet insurance'.  It helped me decide...we have Healthy Paws now.

http://seattletimes.com/html/tailsofseattle/2019720254_part_4_shopp...

[Karen, Jasper and Jackdoodle]

I have no insurance, but have been folowing this discussion because I do advise doodle adopters about it.

The article Diane linked above states that PetPlan pays out $52 for every $100 it collects in premiums. I'm not sure, but I think Jane might tell us that's pretty high. Their financial strength has a very high ACGS rating, but the outlook is deemed negative because of this, and that might be the reason for the premium increase.

If I were to get a new dog, I would still go with PetPlan from everything I have read and heard.

And from my experience over the past year, many of the cost estimates for various conditions, testing, and meds in the articles posted in this discussion were very low.

As far as "per incident" coverage mentioned in the article, I can tell you that the diagnostics alone for JD's Inflammatory Bowel Disease were almost $5000. The endoscopy itself was $3000. That doesn't include the many thousands spent to treat it since the diagnosis, of course, and those costs are ongoing.

For his back, diagnostics alone to find out what was wrong with him were about $2600. Surgery would be $7000.  Neither of these conditions is genetic, and they could happen to any dog, especially as they get older. Just throwing that out there for those who may be trying to figure out how much coverage they need and what to look for in the policy.

 

 

[Jane, Guinness and Murphy]

It's difficult to tell whether paying out $52 for every $100 collected is bad or good.  It all depends on the company's expenses.  Normally you want your paid losses and expenses to equal no more than $85 which would leave $15 for profit.  That's a very broad "rule of thumb" and doesn't consider investment income.  I would guess that at $52 they're probably generating an average profit.....can't imagine that their expenses are much over $30 - $35.  Also this figure is only for the State of Washington, not the business as a whole. 

[F, Calla & Luca]

Yikes. People do need insurance. It is expensive even to have healthy dogs and if they get sick it can be a life and death decision.

But L and C are not covered for routine care. So far in 2012, and hopefully we are done for the year:

April: 2 exams, 2 lepto, 2 bordatella, and 2 medical waste= $294. Mind you I skipped heartworm exam since I treat all year long. They threw in a free nail trim, yippee.

May: Hip x-rays Calla, $411.

May: Orthopedic Consult Calla $205. It turned out she is fine, Thank goodness.

Insurance paid $392.80 for the above 2 visits.

July: Rabies Luca $32 (and $8 for copy of Calla's hip x-rays)

November: 2 Lyme plus medical waste $98

December: Fecal Exam Calla $56

A grand total of $1104 minus $392.80 = $711 I paid. And then there is

Insurance: $645.64

So this year I have spent $1365.64 in health care costs for two healthy dogs.

 

[F, Calla & Luca]

Paying out $52 for every $100 is high? To me that seems awfully low. The new health laws for humans demand much better pay out to collection ratios I think. That's one of the things the insurers were protesting.

[Jane, Guinness and Murphy]

It's all about the expense ratio.  $52 is very high for a company with high expenses, but low for companies with lower expense ratios.

[Jane, Guinness and Murphy]

This was interesting.  I am surprised that he ultimately chose Healthy Paws over Pet Plan.  I know nothing negative about Healthy Paws, but it is a very new company only being in business since 2010.  What would worry me a bit is that there is no history upon which to base their pricing data.  Usually when new companies enter the business they formulate their rates by looking at other companies, but often this is a guess and doesn't reflect the book of business that they will develop going forward.  They have a loss ratio now of 28 which gives them the ability to price low, but there is a tail on those results.  Usually new companies as they build experience are forced to take lots of rate movement to keep up with their results.  Also he mentions that AGCS has a Best Rating of A-.  The information I reviewed stated that their financial strength rating is still an A+ with a Stable outlook....http://www3.ambest.com/frames/frameserver.asp?site=press&tab=1&....  I haven't seen anything that downgraded that rating...and their annual report also shows the A+.

[F, Calla & Luca]

I remain comfortable with PetPlan as compared to Healthy Paws at least. I think being a new company, Healthy Paws would have many younger, healthy dogs since older dogs may already have insurance or be excluded due to pre-existing conditions, thereby skewing the costs lower for the company. So would the rates and reimbursements for Healthy Paws change with time. I think they probably would. The unlimited benefits is a great plus for Healthy Paws though.

[Rita and Fazzy]

Having worked in health insurance for the past 16 years, I understand the increases in premium for both human and pet insurance - looking at claims it just amazes me the cost of different visits, procedures, etc....and with the new technology as it comes out, the cost that goes with that is amazing.  I just signed Fazzy up for PetPlan this morning, he is 6 months old today (happy birthday big boy) and I know how expensive things can get in a very short period of time if something happens.  For the bronze plan with a $100 ded and 90% coinsurance, $8000 yearly max - it's just under $29/mo.  We may pay for it and never use it, but if something major happens, we're going to be very glad that we have it.

[F, Calla & Luca]

Okay, I got a price quote from Healthy Paws for Luca including two 10% discounts, I think. The quote was $399.84. This year I paid $322.82 to Petplan which could go as high $408, but might be lower. So basically the rates are the same and this was for about the same deductible and copay. Of course the details might differ.

[Sally, Echo and Emmi]

I read the article, then checked out Healthy paws website. I currently have Pet Plan but have not made any claims. I have 2 doodles. I got quick quotes from Healthy Paws for both my dogs. Both quotes were quite a bit higher than my Pet Plan premium. If it goes up 25% my Pet Plan will be close to Healthy paws but still a bit lower.

[F, Calla & Luca]

I think the major difference for me is that my Petplan limit is $20,000/year and Healthy Paws is unlimited. I'd like to think $20,000 is enough for my dogs and that treatment that costs more than that would not be compatible with a good quality of life. As to Healthy Paws, I think eventually they will have to do what the other companies are doing.