Pet owners considering a change in insurance provider are being urged to weigh the risks carefully. A new alert from Money Saving Expert (MSE) highlights how switching policies could leave thousands unable to claim for existing conditions.
The advice, shared in the latest weekly update from the consumer finance platform founded by Martin Lewis, focuses on the financial consequences of moving to a cheaper insurer. While rising veterinary costs and household pressures are prompting many to shop around, the guidance makes clear that savings may come with significant trade-offs.
Pre-Existing Conditions Could Block Future Claims
According to MSE, most new pet insurance policies do not cover pre-existing medical conditions, whether a claim has previously been made or not. The organization warns that owners who switch providers may find that any past illness or injury is excluded from their new cover.
The guidance states: “Warning. Beware switching providers if your pet has an existing condition. Most new policies won’t cover past issues, whether you’ve claimed for them or not.” This means that even if a pet has fully recovered, a recurrence of the same issue may not be covered under a new insurer.
MSE explains that owners who remain with their current insurer are likely to face higher premiums if their pet has an ongoing condition. This creates what it describes as a difficult choice: either switch to a cheaper policy that excludes the specific condition, or stay put and pay more to retain coverage for it.
The advice is particularly relevant for policyholders who are still claiming for treatment and have not yet reached the maximum payout limit or time restriction set out in their policy. According to MSE, those with comprehensive “lifetime” policies that do not impose such exclusions may be better off remaining with their existing provider.
Weighing Costs, Policy Limits, and Regulatory Protections
The organization also outlines a practical example to illustrate the risk. If a dog develops cataracts in both eyes and treatment costs reach the policy’s payout limit, the owner is free to switch insurers afterward. Yet the new insurer will classify the cataracts as a pre-existing condition, meaning any future recurrence is unlikely to be covered.
MSE stresses that all pre-existing conditions must be declared when applying for a new policy, even if they are expected to be excluded. Failure to disclose medical history could invalidate the policy entirely.
Beyond switching concerns, MSE provides several broader reminders about pet insurance. Policies generally cover major health issues such as broken bones or tumors rather than routine check-ups. Owners who cannot afford cover and receive certain benefits may be eligible for assistance with veterinary bills through charities such as the PDSA, according to the organization.
The guidance also suggests that some owners of smaller animals may consider setting aside savings to cover potential fees instead of taking out insurance. It advises keeping routine vaccinations up to date, as failing to do so could invalidate a policy.
Finally, MSE encourages consumers to review policy details carefully, check exclusions, and confirm that the insurer is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. If a claim is rejected and the policyholder believes this is unfair, they have the right to escalate the complaint to the free and independent Financial Ombudsman Service once they have completed the insurer’s complaints process.
With veterinary bills capable of reaching substantial sums, the decision to switch insurers involves more than simply comparing premiums.
