Pet's Best Insurance Services

Unfortunately, no coverage is available for this claim as the onset of symptoms was within the waiting period outlined in both the application and policy documents. The injury this pet suffered has a specified waiting period of 6 months from the start of the policy. Because this injury occurred prior to the end of the mandatory waiting period, the condition was not covered. Further, as these documents note, prescription coverage is available only for covered conditions. Since the injury was specifically excluded, prescriptions for this injury are likewise excluded.

Unfortunately, as our application, policy, website, and marketing materials all indicated, there are waiting periods applicable to each and every pet insurance policy. These are prominately displayed and applicants are asked questions during the application process in regard to the Pre-existing Condition exclusions. For this particular claim, or any other, you may appeal the claim denial decision for additional review. Please contact our Customer Care representatives if you would like to begin the appeal process for your claim(s).

Hi ***, claims cannot be processed without the required medical records. You may re-submit with the required information for processing.

Hi ***, claims cannot be processed without the required medical records. You may re-submit with the required information for processing.

Hi ***, claims cannot be processed without the required medical records. You may re-submit with the required information for processing.

Hi ***, claims cannot be processed without the required medical records. You may re-submit with the required information for processing.

Mr. submitted his claim on 9/11/19 with an invoice from his clinic. Additional records were need for review since the only document uploaded was an invoice. The medical records detail the pet’s history, treatment, and care and are often necessary for review in processing claims. On 9/23/19, Mr. was advised records would be needed from 6/8/18-present for review. Mr. noted that his pet had not been seen by a veterinarian in years, other than in October 2018. We advised that we would need information regarding where he had adopted his pet since they would have had vaccination records. An adoption records were received on 9/27/19.

Mr. inquired about the claim status on 9/30/19 and was advised that the records were still awaiting review to determine whether they were complete. Upon review, records submitted were not complete. Mr. had not submitted the medical records from October 2018. On October 24, 2019, Mr. was again advised that we needed records from the current examination and claim, as well as from the October 2018 examination. Records were received that day from one clinic and were received the next day from the other.

It does appear that Mr. claims were erroneously denied as incomplete after we had confirmed all records had been received. This matter has been escalated the claim will be reopened and processed immediately.

Mr. submitted his claim on 9/11/19 with an invoice from his clinic. Additional records were need for review since the only document uploaded was an invoice. The medical records detail the pet’s history, treatment, and care and are often necessary for review in processing claims. On 9/23/19, Mr. was advised records would be needed from 6/8/18-present for review. Mr. noted that his pet had not been seen by a veterinarian in years, other than in October 2018. We advised that we would need information regarding where he had adopted his pet since they would have had vaccination records. An adoption records were received on 9/27/19.

Mr. inquired about the claim status on 9/30/19 and was advised that the records were still awaiting review to determine whether they were complete. Upon review, records submitted were not complete. Mr. had not submitted the medical records from October 2018. On October 24, 2019, Mr. was again advised that we needed records from the current examination and claim, as well as from the October 2018 examination. Records were received that day from one clinic and were received the next day from the other.

It does appear that Mr. claims were erroneously denied as incomplete after we had confirmed all records had been received. This matter has been escalated the claim will be reopened and processed immediately.

Mr. submitted his claim on 9/11/19 with an invoice from his clinic. Additional records were need for review since the only document uploaded was an invoice. The medical records detail the pet’s history, treatment, and care and are often necessary for review in processing claims. On 9/23/19, Mr. was advised records would be needed from 6/8/18-present for review. Mr. noted that his pet had not been seen by a veterinarian in years, other than in October 2018. We advised that we would need information regarding where he had adopted his pet since they would have had vaccination records. An adoption records were received on 9/27/19.

Mr. inquired about the claim status on 9/30/19 and was advised that the records were still awaiting review to determine whether they were complete. Upon review, records submitted were not complete. Mr. had not submitted the medical records from October 2018. On October 24, 2019, Mr. was again advised that we needed records from the current examination and claim, as well as from the October 2018 examination. Records were received that day from one clinic and were received the next day from the other.

It does appear that Mr. claims were erroneously denied as incomplete after we had confirmed all records had been received. This matter has been escalated the claim will be reopened and processed immediately.

Mr. submitted his claim on 9/11/19 with an invoice from his clinic. Additional records were need for review since the only document uploaded was an invoice. The medical records detail the pet’s history, treatment, and care and are often necessary for review in processing claims. On 9/23/19, Mr. was advised records would be needed from 6/8/18-present for review. Mr. noted that his pet had not been seen by a veterinarian in years, other than in October 2018. We advised that we would need information regarding where he had adopted his pet since they would have had vaccination records. An adoption records were received on 9/27/19.

Mr. inquired about the claim status on 9/30/19 and was advised that the records were still awaiting review to determine whether they were complete. Upon review, records submitted were not complete. Mr. had not submitted the medical records from October 2018. On October 24, 2019, Mr. was again advised that we needed records from the current examination and claim, as well as from the October 2018 examination. Records were received that day from one clinic and were received the next day from the other.

It does appear that Mr. claims were erroneously denied as incomplete after we had confirmed all records had been received. This matter has been escalated the claim will be reopened and processed immediately.

On August 8, 2019, Ms. had her feline examined by ***, which identified a mass on the pet’s abdomen. Records state “lump on stomach- noticed a couple days ago[;] smaller lumps by shoulder[.]” The Plan Section further states “FNA [Fine Needle Aspiration] of mammary gland-scanned at clinic-marked RBCs-some clusters of red cells have oval pale to blue staining non-descript cells which may be significant[.] Sent slides to pathology[.]” The veterinarian also documented discussions regarding surgical treatment as a result of this examination. On August 13, 2019, the records document additional conversations with the veterinarian stating “Discussed malignant cytology findings which indicates radical mastectomy… Owner mentioned they purchased insurance about a month ago and if we ‘take it’ – I told her it is a reimbursement process to best to check with insurance on waiting period for problems after purchase and what may be covered with insurance[.]” The mass was removed on September 12, 2019.

The next day, Ms. purchased her insurance policy with Pets Best, which had a start date of August 10, 2019. This policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a mandatory waiting period before coverage is available. Ms.’s policy had a 14-day waiting period with Illness coverage beginning August 24, 2019. Further, this policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a Pre-existing Condition exclusion.

Ms. purchased her policy the day after her pet was examined and found to have lump. The veterinarian informed Ms. of the findings on that day, sent samples for additional laboratory analysis, and discussed the abnormal cell findings. Only after knowing her cat would require surgery and potentially had cancer requiring extensive care and treatment, Ms. purchased her insurance policy on August 9, 2019. On August 13, 2019, Ms. asked the veterinarian whether they would accept her pet’s insurance “purchased about a month ago.” The veterinarian explained pet insurance was reimbursement only and to check with the insurer on applicable waiting periods.

Ms. submitted claims for reimbursement on September 20, 2019 for examinations on August 8 & 25, 2019. Medical records were then requested for review since this was the first claim for the pet and there had been an examination right before the policy was purchased. The claim was denied on October 16, 2019 since the records showed the mass was documented before coverage was available. Ms. cancelled her policy on October 17, 2019 and received a pro-rated refund of her policy.

Ms. has had her canine insured with an Accident – only policy since July 26, 2018 and has received reimbursement for claims during the time that policy was in force. As noted, it was only after she discovered her feline would require significant medical care that she decided to purchase an Accident & Illness policy. Both policies have waiting periods and Pre-existing Condition exclusions. These exclusions are necessary to ensure rates for all insurance plans are affordable and to prevent situations where a pet owner obtains an insurance policy only after discovering that the pet was ill or would need medical care. Had Ms. obtained the Policy for her feline before the lump was present, her claims would have been covered.

On August 8, 2019, Ms. had her feline examined by ***, which identified a mass on the pet’s abdomen. Records state “lump on stomach- noticed a couple days ago[;] smaller lumps by shoulder[.]” The Plan Section further states “FNA [Fine Needle Aspiration] of mammary gland-scanned at clinic-marked RBCs-some clusters of red cells have oval pale to blue staining non-descript cells which may be significant[.] Sent slides to pathology[.]” The veterinarian also documented discussions regarding surgical treatment as a result of this examination. On August 13, 2019, the records document additional conversations with the veterinarian stating “Discussed malignant cytology findings which indicates radical mastectomy… Owner mentioned they purchased insurance about a month ago and if we ‘take it’ – I told her it is a reimbursement process to best to check with insurance on waiting period for problems after purchase and what may be covered with insurance[.]” The mass was removed on September 12, 2019.

The next day, Ms. purchased her insurance policy with Pets Best, which had a start date of August 10, 2019. This policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a mandatory waiting period before coverage is available. Ms.’s policy had a 14-day waiting period with Illness coverage beginning August 24, 2019. Further, this policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a Pre-existing Condition exclusion.

Ms. purchased her policy the day after her pet was examined and found to have lump. The veterinarian informed Ms. of the findings on that day, sent samples for additional laboratory analysis, and discussed the abnormal cell findings. Only after knowing her cat would require surgery and potentially had cancer requiring extensive care and treatment, Ms. purchased her insurance policy on August 9, 2019. On August 13, 2019, Ms. asked the veterinarian whether they would accept her pet’s insurance “purchased about a month ago.” The veterinarian explained pet insurance was reimbursement only and to check with the insurer on applicable waiting periods.

Ms. submitted claims for reimbursement on September 20, 2019 for examinations on August 8 & 25, 2019. Medical records were then requested for review since this was the first claim for the pet and there had been an examination right before the policy was purchased. The claim was denied on October 16, 2019 since the records showed the mass was documented before coverage was available. Ms. cancelled her policy on October 17, 2019 and received a pro-rated refund of her policy.

Ms. has had her canine insured with an Accident – only policy since July 26, 2018 and has received reimbursement for claims during the time that policy was in force. As noted, it was only after she discovered her feline would require significant medical care that she decided to purchase an Accident & Illness policy. Both policies have waiting periods and Pre-existing Condition exclusions. These exclusions are necessary to ensure rates for all insurance plans are affordable and to prevent situations where a pet owner obtains an insurance policy only after discovering that the pet was ill or would need medical care. Had Ms. obtained the Policy for her feline before the lump was present, her claims would have been covered.

On August 8, 2019, Ms. had her feline examined by ***, which identified a mass on the pet’s abdomen. Records state “lump on stomach- noticed a couple days ago[;] smaller lumps by shoulder[.]” The Plan Section further states “FNA [Fine Needle Aspiration] of mammary gland-scanned at clinic-marked RBCs-some clusters of red cells have oval pale to blue staining non-descript cells which may be significant[.] Sent slides to pathology[.]” The veterinarian also documented discussions regarding surgical treatment as a result of this examination. On August 13, 2019, the records document additional conversations with the veterinarian stating “Discussed malignant cytology findings which indicates radical mastectomy… Owner mentioned they purchased insurance about a month ago and if we ‘take it’ – I told her it is a reimbursement process to best to check with insurance on waiting period for problems after purchase and what may be covered with insurance[.]” The mass was removed on September 12, 2019.

The next day, Ms. purchased her insurance policy with Pets Best, which had a start date of August 10, 2019. This policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a mandatory waiting period before coverage is available. Ms.’s policy had a 14-day waiting period with Illness coverage beginning August 24, 2019. Further, this policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a Pre-existing Condition exclusion.

Ms. purchased her policy the day after her pet was examined and found to have lump. The veterinarian informed Ms. of the findings on that day, sent samples for additional laboratory analysis, and discussed the abnormal cell findings. Only after knowing her cat would require surgery and potentially had cancer requiring extensive care and treatment, Ms. purchased her insurance policy on August 9, 2019. On August 13, 2019, Ms. asked the veterinarian whether they would accept her pet’s insurance “purchased about a month ago.” The veterinarian explained pet insurance was reimbursement only and to check with the insurer on applicable waiting periods.

Ms. submitted claims for reimbursement on September 20, 2019 for examinations on August 8 & 25, 2019. Medical records were then requested for review since this was the first claim for the pet and there had been an examination right before the policy was purchased. The claim was denied on October 16, 2019 since the records showed the mass was documented before coverage was available. Ms. cancelled her policy on October 17, 2019 and received a pro-rated refund of her policy.

Ms. has had her canine insured with an Accident – only policy since July 26, 2018 and has received reimbursement for claims during the time that policy was in force. As noted, it was only after she discovered her feline would require significant medical care that she decided to purchase an Accident & Illness policy. Both policies have waiting periods and Pre-existing Condition exclusions. These exclusions are necessary to ensure rates for all insurance plans are affordable and to prevent situations where a pet owner obtains an insurance policy only after discovering that the pet was ill or would need medical care. Had Ms. obtained the Policy for her feline before the lump was present, her claims would have been covered.

On August 8, 2019, Ms. had her feline examined by ***, which identified a mass on the pet’s abdomen. Records state “lump on stomach- noticed a couple days ago[;] smaller lumps by shoulder[.]” The Plan Section further states “FNA [Fine Needle Aspiration] of mammary gland-scanned at clinic-marked RBCs-some clusters of red cells have oval pale to blue staining non-descript cells which may be significant[.] Sent slides to pathology[.]” The veterinarian also documented discussions regarding surgical treatment as a result of this examination. On August 13, 2019, the records document additional conversations with the veterinarian stating “Discussed malignant cytology findings which indicates radical mastectomy… Owner mentioned they purchased insurance about a month ago and if we ‘take it’ – I told her it is a reimbursement process to best to check with insurance on waiting period for problems after purchase and what may be covered with insurance[.]” The mass was removed on September 12, 2019.

The next day, Ms. purchased her insurance policy with Pets Best, which had a start date of August 10, 2019. This policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a mandatory waiting period before coverage is available. Ms.’s policy had a 14-day waiting period with Illness coverage beginning August 24, 2019. Further, this policy, like all pet insurance policies, has a Pre-existing Condition exclusion.

Ms. purchased her policy the day after her pet was examined and found to have lump. The veterinarian informed Ms. of the findings on that day, sent samples for additional laboratory analysis, and discussed the abnormal cell findings. Only after knowing her cat would require surgery and potentially had cancer requiring extensive care and treatment, Ms. purchased her insurance policy on August 9, 2019. On August 13, 2019, Ms. asked the veterinarian whether they would accept her pet’s insurance “purchased about a month ago.” The veterinarian explained pet insurance was reimbursement only and to check with the insurer on applicable waiting periods.

Ms. submitted claims for reimbursement on September 20, 2019 for examinations on August 8 & 25, 2019. Medical records were then requested for review since this was the first claim for the pet and there had been an examination right before the policy was purchased. The claim was denied on October 16, 2019 since the records showed the mass was documented before coverage was available. Ms. cancelled her policy on October 17, 2019 and received a pro-rated refund of her policy.

Ms. has had her canine insured with an Accident – only policy since July 26, 2018 and has received reimbursement for claims during the time that policy was in force. As noted, it was only after she discovered her feline would require significant medical care that she decided to purchase an Accident & Illness policy. Both policies have waiting periods and Pre-existing Condition exclusions. These exclusions are necessary to ensure rates for all insurance plans are affordable and to prevent situations where a pet owner obtains an insurance policy only after discovering that the pet was ill or would need medical care. Had Ms. obtained the Policy for her feline before the lump was present, her claims would have been covered.

The customer's claim was flagged for additional review because there had been alterations to the medical records/invoices themselves. Alterations are indicative of insurance fraud and warrant additional scrutiny and review. Ultimately, the claim was paid on October 18, 2019.

The customer's claim was flagged for additional review because there had been alterations to the medical records/invoices themselves. Alterations are indicative of insurance fraud and warrant additional scrutiny and review. Ultimately, the claim was paid on October 18, 2019.

The customer's claim was flagged for additional review because there had been alterations to the medical records/invoices themselves. Alterations are indicative of insurance fraud and warrant additional scrutiny and review. Ultimately, the claim was paid on October 18, 2019.

The customer's claim was flagged for additional review because there had been alterations to the medical records/invoices themselves. Alterations are indicative of insurance fraud and warrant additional scrutiny and review. Ultimately, the claim was paid on October 18, 2019.

The customer's claim was determined to be compensable on October 25, 2019. Prior to this, records were requested on 10/14/19 and received 10/18/19. The claim was processed in the order received and deemed compensable.

The customer's claim was determined to be compensable on October 25, 2019. Prior to this, records were requested on 10/14/19 and received 10/18/19. The claim was processed in the order received and deemed compensable.

The customer's claim was determined to be compensable on October 25, 2019. Prior to this, records were requested on 10/14/19 and received 10/18/19. The claim was processed in the order received and deemed compensable.