Pet's Best Insurance Services

While I was meeting my deductible they were average in processing claims and being reasonable. The moment my deductible was met they were impossible. They were asking for information that didn't exist and even when I and both vets were prompt with getting them the information they wanted, they closed the claim and I had to email and call three times to get them to reopen it. Then they denied the claim even though they had approved the exact same issue when I was still meeting my deductible and there was no imminent payout.

Here is what unfolded....

April 2 - Claim sent and confirmation received from Pets Best
April 9 - Apologies from PetsBest for the delay via email
April 17 - Email to me that Vet 1 has not provided the last 12 months of records.
April 17 - I called Vet 1 and they told me that they had sent over the records on April 12th.
April 23 - I got an email from Pets Best that Vet 1 has not provided the last 12 months of records.
April 24 - New email to me to request for records from Vet 1 dating June 1 to present.
April 24 - I replied back that we have not been going to Vet 1 since May 2018. I also called the Vet 1 and they called Pets Best to say the same thing.
April 26 - I got an email from Pets best saying that the claim is closed because despite multiple attempts you could not get the records requested. Both Vet 1 and I had communicated with PetsBest that there are NO Additional records to be sent because the dogs have not been to VCA HOLLY ST since mid 2018!
April 26th - I called to communicate to PetsBest that the vet and I had both sent information about this and I was told that the email was just automated and that it had not actually been closed and that you had received the information from me and the VCA vet.
April 29th - I get a phone call from Pets Best saying that the case has indeed been closed and the only way to have it opened is to have VET 2 send the last 12 months of records! When I asked if pets best had even contact VET 2 the answer was no.

They then denied the claim a week later saying that it was because of an observation about the dogs anatomy and they have a right to deny it now even though they paid for it before!

I am currently in the appeals process but am not optimistic based on the above and if that fails, I will be taking it up with California Department of Insurance.

What an unbelievably misleading name for this insurance. When we adopted our dog, it was recommended we get insurance on her. Therefore in the event on an emergency, we had the peace of mind that cost would not be an object in providing the best quality of life for our pet. We chose this insurance, over countless other pet insurance. The mission statement even states they want to "strive to give pet owners peace of mind by taking the financial worry out of owning a pet, so you can make the best decisions for your dog or cat." So much for taking out our financial worry.
It wouldn't bother us so much that they denied our claim and appeal, if it wasn't for the fact that I called the company roughly a week before my dogs surgery and asked what would be covered. I understand that talking to them isn't a guarantee, but their job to give us the best answer and most accurate answer. I assured it would be covered. Why was there absolutely no mention of this 6 month ligament tear window? Had we'd known we would have made the decision to post pone surgery or explore other options until we were financially ready. The lack of understanding their own insurance limitations is inexcusable. At least give they can give customers the decency to know the true extension of their coverage.
The basis of the denial is purely based weak evidence. Our dog hurt her leg in January of 2018 and after taking her to the vet who stated it was a ligament tear versus injury to the surrounding tissue. There was no imaging done. No evidence that it was a true tear and she got better within a few weeks. Then, almost a year later, after a traumatic fall, she actually did tear it fully. There's no evidence that this was a continuation from the previous injury. It's a technicality that they gladly latched on to.
What's the point of even having pet insurance? To cover my $50 wellness visits? Or to cover a $4,000 surgery? Do not invest in the insurance. They will find any excuse not to pay when you need it most.

What an unbelievably misleading name for this insurance. When we adopted our dog, it was recommended we get insurance on her. Therefore in the event on an emergency, we had the peace of mind that cost would not be an object in providing the best quality of life for our pet. We chose this insurance, over countless other pet insurance. The mission statement even states they want to "strive to give pet owners peace of mind by taking the financial worry out of owning a pet, so you can make the best decisions for your dog or cat." So much for taking out our financial worry.
It wouldn't bother us so much that they denied our claim and appeal, if it wasn't for the fact that I called the company roughly a week before my dogs surgery and asked what would be covered. I understand that talking to them isn't a guarantee, but their job to give us the best answer and most accurate answer. I assured it would be covered. Why was there absolutely no mention of this 6 month ligament tear window? Had we'd known we would have made the decision to post pone surgery or explore other options until we were financially ready. The lack of understanding their own insurance limitations is inexcusable. At least give they can give customers the decency to know the true extension of their coverage.
The basis of the denial is purely based weak evidence. Our dog hurt her leg in January of 2018 and after taking her to the vet who stated it was a ligament tear versus injury to the surrounding tissue. There was no imaging done. No evidence that it was a true tear and she got better within a few weeks. Then, almost a year later, after a traumatic fall, she actually did tear it fully. There's no evidence that this was a continuation from the previous injury. It's a technicality that they gladly latched on to.
What's the point of even having pet insurance? To cover my $50 wellness visits? Or to cover a $4,000 surgery? Do not invest in the insurance. They will find any excuse not to pay when you need it most.

What an unbelievably misleading name for this insurance. When we adopted our dog, it was recommended we get insurance on her. Therefore in the event on an emergency, we had the peace of mind that cost would not be an object in providing the best quality of life for our pet. We chose this insurance, over countless other pet insurance. The mission statement even states they want to "strive to give pet owners peace of mind by taking the financial worry out of owning a pet, so you can make the best decisions for your dog or cat." So much for taking out our financial worry.
It wouldn't bother us so much that they denied our claim and appeal, if it wasn't for the fact that I called the company roughly a week before my dogs surgery and asked what would be covered. I understand that talking to them isn't a guarantee, but their job to give us the best answer and most accurate answer. I assured it would be covered. Why was there absolutely no mention of this 6 month ligament tear window? Had we'd known we would have made the decision to post pone surgery or explore other options until we were financially ready. The lack of understanding their own insurance limitations is inexcusable. At least give they can give customers the decency to know the true extension of their coverage.
The basis of the denial is purely based weak evidence. Our dog hurt her leg in January of 2018 and after taking her to the vet who stated it was a ligament tear versus injury to the surrounding tissue. There was no imaging done. No evidence that it was a true tear and she got better within a few weeks. Then, almost a year later, after a traumatic fall, she actually did tear it fully. There's no evidence that this was a continuation from the previous injury. It's a technicality that they gladly latched on to.
What's the point of even having pet insurance? To cover my $50 wellness visits? Or to cover a $4,000 surgery? Do not invest in the insurance. They will find any excuse not to pay when you need it most.

What an unbelievably misleading name for this insurance. When we adopted our dog, it was recommended we get insurance on her. Therefore in the event on an emergency, we had the peace of mind that cost would not be an object in providing the best quality of life for our pet. We chose this insurance, over countless other pet insurance. The mission statement even states they want to "strive to give pet owners peace of mind by taking the financial worry out of owning a pet, so you can make the best decisions for your dog or cat." So much for taking out our financial worry.
It wouldn't bother us so much that they denied our claim and appeal, if it wasn't for the fact that I called the company roughly a week before my dogs surgery and asked what would be covered. I understand that talking to them isn't a guarantee, but their job to give us the best answer and most accurate answer. I assured it would be covered. Why was there absolutely no mention of this 6 month ligament tear window? Had we'd known we would have made the decision to post pone surgery or explore other options until we were financially ready. The lack of understanding their own insurance limitations is inexcusable. At least give they can give customers the decency to know the true extension of their coverage.
The basis of the denial is purely based weak evidence. Our dog hurt her leg in January of 2018 and after taking her to the vet who stated it was a ligament tear versus injury to the surrounding tissue. There was no imaging done. No evidence that it was a true tear and she got better within a few weeks. Then, almost a year later, after a traumatic fall, she actually did tear it fully. There's no evidence that this was a continuation from the previous injury. It's a technicality that they gladly latched on to.
What's the point of even having pet insurance? To cover my $50 wellness visits? Or to cover a $4,000 surgery? Do not invest in the insurance. They will find any excuse not to pay when you need it most.

My dog, Harley, has been diagnosed with a torn ACL, requiring surgery. I was asked by the pet insurance company, Pets Best Insurance, to submit an 18 month medical history, which I did. I was told it is best to get a pre surgery itemized estimate, which I did, also. I have completed everything I have been asked to do by the insurance company. Now the insurance company is asking again for an 18 month history so they can decide if the claim will be covered. I was told last week that, since the insurance company paid a doctor's visit on the claim, that meant it was covered. Now I am being told the claim is under review. It seems as though they are looking for loopholes and excuses not to pay.

My dog, Harley, has been diagnosed with a torn ACL, requiring surgery. I was asked by the pet insurance company, Pets Best Insurance, to submit an 18 month medical history, which I did. I was told it is best to get a pre surgery itemized estimate, which I did, also. I have completed everything I have been asked to do by the insurance company. Now the insurance company is asking again for an 18 month history so they can decide if the claim will be covered. I was told last week that, since the insurance company paid a doctor's visit on the claim, that meant it was covered. Now I am being told the claim is under review. It seems as though they are looking for loopholes and excuses not to pay.

My dog, Harley, has been diagnosed with a torn ACL, requiring surgery. I was asked by the pet insurance company, Pets Best Insurance, to submit an 18 month medical history, which I did. I was told it is best to get a pre surgery itemized estimate, which I did, also. I have completed everything I have been asked to do by the insurance company. Now the insurance company is asking again for an 18 month history so they can decide if the claim will be covered. I was told last week that, since the insurance company paid a doctor's visit on the claim, that meant it was covered. Now I am being told the claim is under review. It seems as though they are looking for loopholes and excuses not to pay.

My dog, Harley, has been diagnosed with a torn ACL, requiring surgery. I was asked by the pet insurance company, Pets Best Insurance, to submit an 18 month medical history, which I did. I was told it is best to get a pre surgery itemized estimate, which I did, also. I have completed everything I have been asked to do by the insurance company. Now the insurance company is asking again for an 18 month history so they can decide if the claim will be covered. I was told last week that, since the insurance company paid a doctor's visit on the claim, that meant it was covered. Now I am being told the claim is under review. It seems as though they are looking for loopholes and excuses not to pay.

We purchased Pets Best insurance for our puppy with an effective date of 1/1/2019. On 2/5 we took him to the vet because he was having skin issues. This was the first time he was seen for this issue. I submitted the claim to Pets Best for reimbursement. It was denied a few days later because his condition was “pre-existing” prior to the effective date of the policy. Since this was the first time Ihecwas seen for skin issues, I contacted Pets Best. They informed me that since he was treated for an ear infection in December, his hit spots and chewing his legs was pre existing. That is a reach at best. They also,said since he was prescribed Apoquel, he had an allergic issue. He was prescribed Apoquel on 2/5, the visit I was seeking reimbursement for, the first time his allergy was diagnosed. Pets Best will obviously use far reaching, ridiculous criteria to deny claims.

We purchased Pets Best insurance for our puppy with an effective date of 1/1/2019. On 2/5 we took him to the vet because he was having skin issues. This was the first time he was seen for this issue. I submitted the claim to Pets Best for reimbursement. It was denied a few days later because his condition was “pre-existing” prior to the effective date of the policy. Since this was the first time Ihecwas seen for skin issues, I contacted Pets Best. They informed me that since he was treated for an ear infection in December, his hit spots and chewing his legs was pre existing. That is a reach at best. They also,said since he was prescribed Apoquel, he had an allergic issue. He was prescribed Apoquel on 2/5, the visit I was seeking reimbursement for, the first time his allergy was diagnosed. Pets Best will obviously use far reaching, ridiculous criteria to deny claims.

We purchased Pets Best insurance for our puppy with an effective date of 1/1/2019. On 2/5 we took him to the vet because he was having skin issues. This was the first time he was seen for this issue. I submitted the claim to Pets Best for reimbursement. It was denied a few days later because his condition was “pre-existing” prior to the effective date of the policy. Since this was the first time Ihecwas seen for skin issues, I contacted Pets Best. They informed me that since he was treated for an ear infection in December, his hit spots and chewing his legs was pre existing. That is a reach at best. They also,said since he was prescribed Apoquel, he had an allergic issue. He was prescribed Apoquel on 2/5, the visit I was seeking reimbursement for, the first time his allergy was diagnosed. Pets Best will obviously use far reaching, ridiculous criteria to deny claims.

We purchased Pets Best insurance for our puppy with an effective date of 1/1/2019. On 2/5 we took him to the vet because he was having skin issues. This was the first time he was seen for this issue. I submitted the claim to Pets Best for reimbursement. It was denied a few days later because his condition was “pre-existing” prior to the effective date of the policy. Since this was the first time Ihecwas seen for skin issues, I contacted Pets Best. They informed me that since he was treated for an ear infection in December, his hit spots and chewing his legs was pre existing. That is a reach at best. They also,said since he was prescribed Apoquel, he had an allergic issue. He was prescribed Apoquel on 2/5, the visit I was seeking reimbursement for, the first time his allergy was diagnosed. Pets Best will obviously use far reaching, ridiculous criteria to deny claims.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, ***. *** has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 *** had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, Wilo. Wilo has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 Wilo had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, ***. *** has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 *** had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, Wilo. Wilo has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 Wilo had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, ***. *** has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 *** had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, Wilo. Wilo has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 Wilo had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.

An insurance claim was filed with Pets Best Insurance for my cat, ***. *** has a plan with her primary vet, that covers all her routine health care. I took out a policy with Pets Best Insurance Company for illness accidental emergencies. On 12/05/2018 *** had her yearly routine teeth cleaning exam, which discovered she had teeth lesions. I was not able to authorize the vet to remove the teeth that that time due to financial restraints and scheduled for the procedure to be done on 12/21/2018. After the procedure on 12/21/2018 I submitted for reimbursement to Pets Best for the cost of her procedure, which would include anesthesia, meds, and pre-surgery blood work. The claim was partially paid out, with 233.17 remaining, that was denied as Pets Best stated it was a routine teeth cleaning. I explained in an appeals packet to them, that the vet placed the procedure on 12/21/2018 under a dental cleaning package to reduce the cost of the procedure, as pricing it as a surgery would have been costlier. In addition, I submitted the medical records for the procedure on 12/21/2018, which outlines they removed teeth, in addition there was a teeth cleaning done. I was asked to provide the medical records from 12/05/2018, which was the routine teeth cleaning, and in the notes on 12/05/2018 it states the owner will not proceed with teeth extraction and call to schedule the procedure to be completed. Since the notes on 12/21/2018 state the teeth were cleaned, they will not pay the claim. They never contacted the vet provider and insist the procedure on 12/21/18 was a teeth cleaning. After speaking with the doctor who did the procedure, she advised that she did clean the teeth that were removed as that is procedure before being removed, however it wasn't a routine teeth cleaning. Had the company did a complete claim investigation, they would have been led to the conclusion, that 12/21/18 was a teeth extraction, not a routine teeth cleaning.