An interesting piece from The Guardian newspaper highlights the dangers of admitting liability on pet insurance claims. When a dog attacks a human, it is easy to point the finger and blame the dog (or the human). But when dogs play-fight and one gets hurt; who do we point the paw at? And more importantly…who has to pay the price?
Rob Maunder, 49 from Hertfordshire had to pay the price when he claimed under his pet insurance policy's third-party liability cover for a incident that happened with his dog Max, a Newfoundland.
The Guardian reports how 1/2 an hour later the Greyhound's owner returned with the accusation that Max had bit his dog whilst playing.
Petplan rejected his claim on the basis that because Rob didn't see Max bite the Greyhound, then he wasn't liable.
He sent several letters of complaint over the next few months and each claim was rejected. He finally complained to Financial Ombudsman Service and Petplan then decided to accept his claim.
The Guardian reports how the company (Petplan) agreed to pay the claim in full, but stresses anyone finding themselves in a similar position should consult their insurer before admitting culpability and paying up.
Certain breeds of dog are exempt from insurance policies. These are dogs registered under The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and 1997. Owning a Pitbull, Dogo Argentino, Perro de Presa Canario, Japanese Tosa or Fila Brasileiro can land you a £5,000 fine and/or 6 months in prison. The courts decide if the dog is safe, and if deemed so must be microchipped, neutered and muzzled when in a public place.