LD
Lauren Dixon-Paver

1 reviews | Active since Mar 2024

17 Nov 2025, 12:57

Pets are Not Cars

I have been an OUTsurance client for many years, so when time came for me to get pet insurance, they seemed like the obvious choice.

However, it seems OUTsurance jumped on the Pet Insurance bandwagon without considering that pets are living creatures that require regular medical attention, rather than cars or cameras or household goods that need to be covered against occasional accidents.

I submitted a claim on Friday for my dog's skin condition - a claim that does not exceed my annual available claim limits - and was told that I could reconsider whether I wanted to submit a claim, as I had been identified as a "multi-claimant" and my policy was now going to be handed over to actuaries for review. I am truly shocked, as when I asked the consultant to send me the multi-claimant "accusation" via email to review, she said she couldn't do that. Is this a threat used only telephonically? Why should I not be allowed to review official communications in writing?

The OUTbonus is also a **** in this kind of policy. With annual check ups and routine care, every claim shifts the OUTbonus out by 3 years - meaning it is consistently unattainable.

This seems like a really poor way to treat a family with a long-standing relationship with OUTsurance. I'll be reviewing other pet insurance options ASAP to find one that doesn't treat me like a ******** and threaten to cancel my policy for using the available claim limits on my account.

0
Replies (4)
OUTsurance
OUTsurance's reply17 Nov 2025, 13:24
Official
Hello Lauren

Our premiums are calculated on an individual basis using scientific underwriting criteria.  By employing this method, we ensure that we accurately determine the probability of an incident occurring and the correct premium to charge for such an event.   For this reason, no one client at OUTsurance would subsidise any other client based on a different claims profile.   As when you first joined us, a client who claims less frequently than somebody else with a similar age and financial history, would expect to pay a lesser premium, so too we make allowances in our premium calculation for our clients who do claim on a more regular basis.    When the frequency of claims however reach a point that we are no longer able to make allowances within our premium scope, we may act upon our right to end the contract with a fair notice period or caution our client if a new claim is submitted, that the client will reach a multi claims status.

We understand your disappointment. Our claims manager will call you and discuss your concerns with you.

Regards
The OUTsurance Team

LD
Lauren Dixon-Paver's update17 Nov 2025, 13:30
Reviewer Update
Why would my available claims limit not be what guides this? Why should the number of claims be a concern when I pay for my premiums to have those limits? Why can I not be sent the "multi claimant" notice in writing?
LD
Lauren Dixon-Paver's update17 Nov 2025, 13:31
Reviewer Update
To confirm, should my dog be left with a skin condition that isn't dealt with because the timing is "inconvenient", even though the funds are available according to my claims limits?
LD
Lauren Dixon-Paver's update19 Nov 2025, 10:41
Reviewer Update
What a disappointing experience. Your team eventually called me at the requested time, only to essentially communicate that my claims couldn't exceed what was paid into the policy. By this logic, I'm better off having a savings account and putting my policy in there. I'll be cancelling my cover with you after 4 years. I don't understand why you feel the need to threaten long-standing customers, but clearly we're not on the same page in terms of covering your client's needs.