Help interpretating insurance clause

[berties mum]

It's a funny thing because when I insured Minnie, I told the company she is deaf and blind, and they didn't bat an eyelid, nor is it mentioned anywhere in the policy ... yet you'd think that would pose a greater risk of injury than most cats have? 

[Susanne (urbantigers)]

I think they're trying to cover themselves against a situation where a cat presented with symptoms, no actual diagnosis was made, but the cat was later diagnosed with a condition that could be related to the earlier symptoms.  Tricky one, and one of the reasons why changing companies is such a difficult thing.

[Millys Mum]

A broken bone or crystals are pre existing conditions so its fair cop they dont want to be lumbered with them, but there are many things you can get twice and not be related.

Spikes example is he got a rodent ulcer from a retained tooth, the tooth is now gone but if i swap to petplan and he got a rodent ulcer again say because of an allergy they wont cover even tho the problems dont have the same cause! 

[berties mum]

Sounds like what's written into Bertie's insurance policy - because he's been diagnosed with struvite crystals and I've made a claim on a previous policy for treatment of them, I'm no longer covered for any complications arising from them, whether it's cystitis, a blocked bladder, whatever ...

[ccmacey]

Yes or if you had a broken leg in the past and they get Arthritis because of the break a few years down the line they would not pay for the treatment.

In human terms if you have a dicky heart they would not pay out if you died of a heart attack  

[Millys Mum]

Alot of things dont reoccur, like a sticky eye, you get it once and it goes, doesnt mean your eye will reoffend! Seems a bit OTT. 
I always read things negatively but guess i got it right this time 

[blackcat]

that sounds like a safe interpretation to me. Recurring ailments like cystitis, while not current at the time of insurance, are likely to re-occur and they are excluding them with that clause.

[Millys Mum]

Im joining all the other rats leaving the sinking ship that is marks and spencer pet insurance.
I find AXAs policy clear and easy to read but petplans abit more confusing 

In the section "what we will not pay" in petplan pages it says
2. the cost of any treatment for:
i     an injury that happened or an illness that first showed clinical signs before your pets cover started; or,
ii    an injury or illness that is the same as or has the same diagnosis or clinical signs as an injury, illness or clincial sign your pet had before its cover started; or,
iii    an injury or illness that is causd by, relates to it results from an injury, illness or clinical sign your pet had before its cover started'
no matter where the injury, illness or clincical signs are noticed in, or on your pets body.

Its the ii that confuses me, i understand if a cat has an ongoing problem but refusing to treat diarrhoea because they had a bug 5 years previous seems a bit extreme!
Is that what it means?    or am i reading it wrong.
I hate smallprint.

It would leave mine without cover for gingivitis, diarrhoea, rodent ulcers, and cystitis.