Topic: Not happy with Marks & Spencers' Insurance! (Read 5768 times)

Millys Mum · « **Reply #27 on:** October 15, 2007, 16:58:48 PM »

Had i taken George for a scan it would have been £1000 at a specialist centre.

Desley (booktigger) · « **Reply #26 on:** October 14, 2007, 19:02:17 PM »

You should be able to modify your post to take it off PEte.
I thought £2k for a scan was a lot - it does show the importance of getting as high an amount as possible though, if you had a cheaper policy, that could eat up your full allowance. Fortunately, as a specialist centre, they do deal directly with your insurance company.

Beanie · « **Reply #25 on:** October 14, 2007, 18:49:47 PM »

Apologies - screwed up the 'bold' print on the last 2 paragraphs. Curses.

Beanie · « **Reply #24 on:** October 14, 2007, 18:48:26 PM »

Hi Des,

That is a collosal amount for an MRI scan. I had one at a private hospital in London about 7/8 years ago. Thankfully, my employer provided private medical care. The cost of the scan at that time was approximately £750 and I asked about the cost of the scanner hence my figures below. Whilst doubtless expensive, there is no way that an animal scanner would cost as much.

As for other comments on here regarding cancellation,

1. Non Renewal[
If you simply don't renew it would be extremely prudent to compare the critical points of the policy wording of the new and the old insurer. In particular, will the new insurer pick up life time illnesses should they occur? What is their position on existing or past illnesses? Would they cover it? Yes or No and, if yes, how does that affect your premium and terms?

2. Mid term cancellation
I am not sure if some are considering cancelling their policy midterm. I am not sure if that is wise but it is your prerogative. If pursing that course of action, you need to look at your policy wording. An Insurer should set out his cancellation policy and this is traditionally found within the General Conditions.

Either way insurers are regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). Traditionally ambiguity, particularly - although not exclusively- in personal lines contracts, has been legally interpretted against insurers which is quite correct and proper. The FSA has sought to bring more clarity to contracts of insurance at the offset by insisting that insurers adopt the concept of Contract Certainty. This means that a contract should be crystal clear in what it will and will not cover. It also needs to be clear on claims and cancellation provisions.

The point of me raising the preceding paragraph is so that you can ask your insurers or appointed representatives any questions where there is no clarity in the policy wording. The midterm cancellation condition may be one area to check. As a general rulke of thumb I would suggest that if it doesn't say if you are entitled to a refund, you are reasonably entitled to expect one.

Tiggy's Mum · « **Reply #23 on:** October 14, 2007, 18:21:24 PM »

I think we all knew the NIL excess wasn't really sustainable, especially seeing as it only cost something silly like £4 per year to change the excess from £50 to £0

I've claimed around £500 for Riley so far, the annoying thing in my case is that the tests have shown him to be 100% healthy but I can't switch him now as any new insurer would more than likely try and wriggle out of paying for a new condition on the basis that it's linked to his non existant illness

I'll definitely switch Lucas to Axa when the time comes and when I feel hard done by about Riley's increase in premium's I'll have to console myself with the fact that I've already cost them £500 in the first few months of the policy

Millys Mum · « **Reply #22 on:** October 14, 2007, 15:15:52 PM »

I think iv claimed for all of my lot

Thats a good saving Gill

Gill (sneakiefeline) · « **Reply #21 on:** October 14, 2007, 12:47:38 PM »

Yes I must bite the bullet I think and change this , must get quote for Ducha cos he has three legs and had a tooth out ayear plus ago, trouble is on the axa stuff online it doesnt give you a place to write stuff. like ducha lasy a leg a few years ago before I got him etc etc!

About £26 a month back in my hand just for two cats makes a lot of difference to me and it could be another £10 onto that for the other two.

Desley (booktigger) · « **Reply #20 on:** October 14, 2007, 09:27:37 AM »

Pete, a specialist my vets use do MRI scans for pets, but you are looking at £2k - bet that is something most people couldnt afford without insurance, esp when you think that is jsut for the scan, you might have already had lots of consults and other tests done first.
I hope you can get it sorted Gill, at least cos you have never claimed, you dont have to worry about any exclusions. I can move Molly, but not Tiger, so am hoping Sainsbury's only go up a small amount for Tiger in Jan.

Kittybabe (Ruth) · « **Reply #19 on:** October 14, 2007, 09:20:42 AM »

They can't stop you cancelling Gill, the worst they can do is charge you an admin fee for cancelling early. I'm still with Direct Line and because of Lexy's surgeries I just cant move even if I wanted to. The premium has only increased from £8 to £10.50 a month for her from one year to another. Excess is £55 and apart from being a little slow paying back, they are pretty good.

Gill (sneakiefeline) · « **Reply #18 on:** October 14, 2007, 01:40:43 AM »

Well I just got a quote for Franta one of the pedigrees who is 14yrs old from AXA, cos the birmans cost more to insure and i couldnt believe my eyes!

£9.67 a month and I am paying over £23 at present and thats without a discount cos I would have 4 cats insured!

Hells Bells need to look at all the small print now and then look at M&S booklet cos there is I think no way they can stop me cancelling as I pay monthly and have never ever made a claim.

I am currently paying more than this each for Misa and Sasa and when I took out the policy last year it cost more than this.

The £50 excess is worth it cos I am getting nothing from the nil excess at M&S

Gill (sneakiefeline) · « **Reply #17 on:** October 14, 2007, 01:06:10 AM »

From the picture it loks a smaller version of MRI for humans, I have had MRI scans but I bet its still very costly

Susanne (urbantigers) · « **Reply #16 on:** October 14, 2007, 00:58:03 AM »

Quote from: Beanie on October 14, 2007, 00:43:46 AM

I assume it is a small version not the size of the human size MRI scanners which can fill a room, although it will still be costly! Probably a bad example on my part.

I was being a bit facetious! And I've just checked and it's not actually my vets but the other branch they have which has the scanner. My vets is primarily a referral specialist centre so I guess they are the kind of people who have MRI scanners. Bit pricey for your vet GP I guess! I don't know about size, having never had an MRI scan myself - do they do smaller ones for pets? Actually, You wouldn't fit a person in there so it must be a smaller one!

This is a pic of their scanner from their website.

Beanie · « **Reply #15 on:** October 14, 2007, 00:43:46 AM »

Hi Suzanne,

I assume it is a small version not the size of the human size MRI scanners which can fill a room, although it will still be costly! Probably a bad example on my part.

Susanne (urbantigers) · « **Reply #14 on:** October 14, 2007, 00:35:19 AM »

Nice though it is to have a nil excess, it's never really been practical. I think the hike in premiums by M&S shows that it just doesnt' work in practice. I've always seen pet insurance as something to take care of the big bills rather than something that pays out for every vet visit. The bottom line is that they need to bring in more in premiums than they pay out in claims and to do that they need to either limit the payouts or have very large premiums. It does sound like M&S are now trying to get back some of their losses through the nil excess option.

Quote from: Beanie on October 14, 2007, 00:28:56 AM

It is not unlike the the NHS and their range of equipment although, granted, a vet will not have an MRI scanner (now worth circa £1.5M each) but you get my drift.

My vets do have an MRI scanner!

Beanie · « **Reply #13 on:** October 14, 2007, 00:28:56 AM »

Hi Des,

I think that is a fair reelection. To play devils advocate for a minute and wearing only an underwriter's hat, I do not honestly see how any scheme can make money where customers have a NIL excess unless the premiums are a lot higher to cover it. In reality an underwriter is there to make money but could not have a large premium on a scheme to cover the attraction of Nil excess, as it is simply would not be financially viable for this type of risk, as his competitors would get all the business.

Our cats range from 7 to 11 and the compulsory excesses range from £80 to £110 for veterinary fees. As a former underwriter i think this is sensible. There are great advances in feline medicine and more and more veterinary practices have their own diagnostic equipment on site or access to university veterinary testing facilities, which takes a lot of guesswork out of diagnosing problems. It is not unlike the the NHS and their range of equipment although, granted, a vet will not have an MRI scanner (now worth circa £1.5M each) but you get my drift. However, with my consumers hat on, naturally I want the best deal.

I cannot stress enough that animal owners need to be very careful when changing insurers A new underwriter will look at the risk afresh. If there is a history of a recurring veterinary problem, he has 3 options or a mixture of 2 or more - increase the premium, impose an excess or larger excess or... and this is the real problem........Exclude the particular problem from the cover If the latter happens you are left with a funding problem if treatment is expensive.

It is not like moving your car or house from one insurer to another, although there are instances where that can be problematical. Consumers really need to have a wider understanding of the issues.

Gill (sneakiefeline) · « **Reply #12 on:** October 13, 2007, 23:40:53 PM »

yes and i am one of those who cant afford it now, wish I had stayed with sainsburys cos at least the increases were nominal but M&S played a devious game cos they thought they would offer the nil excess and it was really a loss leader and boy did they lose cos peeps were signing up in their droves and now of course the thing that people wanted has been taken away but the price is left at twice the cost of last year.

I am lucky and due to the timing my policys still have nil excess until next July but of course if one of my cats were to get very ill I will not be able to get a new company without an exclusion.

When i get a minute I gotta check to see if I cam cancel.

Desley (booktigger) · « **Reply #11 on:** October 13, 2007, 23:34:29 PM »

That is a shame, as I bet there are a lot of people who will no longer be able to afford it, or decide that it isn't worth it if they are paying an excess, as you still have to pay quite a few of the vets bills as they dont come up to the excess limit.

Gill (sneakiefeline) · « **Reply #10 on:** October 13, 2007, 23:32:33 PM »

yes desley thats it exactly, they have made a loss so have doubled the cost to try and claw some of it back, hence axa offering same policy but much cheaper

Desley (booktigger) · « **Reply #9 on:** October 13, 2007, 23:29:06 PM »

So basically then Pete, the nil excess has resulted in M & S having to pay out a lot more? Molly's premium with Sainsbury's has gone up, but only about £4 a month, and at teh age of 14, I am not going to cancel it.

Beanie · « **Reply #8 on:** October 13, 2007, 23:25:19 PM »

Hi Andrew,

What has almost certainly happened is that you find yourself at a disadvantage with an insurance schemearrangement. Many people refer to M & S cover or Sainsbury's cover when it nothing of the sort. It is cover they have arranged on behalf of their customers with an Insurer with a view to obtaining savings in premium and possible cover enhancements compared to invidual approaches to the company.

For commercial reasons, probably requested by supermarkets, it is badged up as Sainsbury's or M & S, etc cover. They can say that they are looking after their customers by using their influence and purchasing power to arrange a scheme which should benefit everyone. There is nothing wrong with the theory.

The underwriters willl look at the scheme as a whole and it's profitability. You say that, in your case, you have not registered a claim. What has almost certainly happened, judging by the increase, is that the scheme claims paid and outstanding has been reviewed by underwriters exceed the premiums received. The underwriters have, therefore, adjusted their rating when looking at the cost implications at the anniversary date.

It would seem that you are paying for the apparant unprofitability of the scheme. Axa have subsequently quoted you far less as they have judged the risk against their main non scheme portfolio of pet business, which would appear to be more profitable to them. On top of that insurers, with personal lines business, offer some inducement to switch their business to the internet as there are longer terms administrative savings.

Axa are a reputable company...........and, no., I don't work for them. Regardless of whether you renew or go elsewhere I would strongly recommend that you check the respective covers to see if they are the same. If not, you can take a balanced view on both.

Susanne (urbantigers) · « **Reply #7 on:** October 11, 2007, 14:01:43 PM »

Mosi's premium with petplan went up a fair bit when it was renewed a few months ago

I think they all seem to be going up, but M&S seem to be going up the most. The premium will never stay the same - they usually go up in relation to total claims to the company rather than your individual claim.

Andrew · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2007, 13:56:01 PM »

Quote from: ems (nina+kiki's mum) on October 11, 2007, 13:20:15 PM

My premium with Sainsburys has just gone up, but because of the Postal Strike i have missed the 10 day deadline to change the policy

Is your premium with Sainsbury doubled?

Millys Mum · « **Reply #5 on:** October 11, 2007, 13:32:59 PM »

Yep M&S have bumped the prices and got rid of no excess. If you do a search you'll find all the moans abot it

Other companies have put things up too. I guess the plus side is that more pets must be getting the health care they need.

The closest match to M&S cover is AXA

ems · « **Reply #4 on:** October 11, 2007, 13:20:15 PM »

My premium with Sainsburys has just gone up, but because of the Postal Strike i have missed the 10 day deadline to change the policy

Dawn F · « **Reply #3 on:** October 11, 2007, 13:14:31 PM »

my premium with M&S went from £70 the first year to £120 the second, I changed to Sainsburys

Andrew · « **Reply #2 on:** October 11, 2007, 13:01:18 PM »

I just found out I am not the only one who is complaining!

Click here to see the reviewhttp://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews57566.html

Andrew · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2007, 12:55:24 PM »

I insured with MS last October and today I received annual renewal insurance policy from MS. They not only remove nil exccess but the premiums are doubled (about £250)!

I went to a few other companies' website to get quotes and it's still around £100. I then went to AXA and they quote me £104 too! Funny thing is AXA underwrites MS' pet insurance!

There has been no single claim from me and I thought the premiums stayed the same. I want to ask those who have insured with MS or other companies if your premiums just suddenly double with your existing company?

Sorry for the rant!

Andrew

Author Topic: Not happy with Marks & Spencers' Insurance! (Read 5768 times)