Insurance query re: stomach problems - can anyone help?

Hoping someone more medically knowledgable than me could offer some advice :wave:

Barney went to the emergency vet a few months ago for GI stasis (usual symptoms, not eating or pooing, pressing stomach to floor, not moving around.) first time he's had this problem and the vet treated it no problem and he recovered well. Cost was about £200.

Tried to claim this through Petplan and have been refused as Barney had previously been seen for 'gastro-intestinal problems' before being insured and thus is not covered.

The only previous thing he saw the vets for (apart from his sneezing which has been treated) was for excess/slightly runny caecotrophs. Am I right in thinking that the caecum is a seperate organ? And caecotrophs pass from here to the bowel and straight out, not through the stomach or intestines? If this is the case then how is it a gastro-intestinal problem?

Just wondering if I have any chance of challenging the insurer's decision as I would really like that 200 quid back!

No, personally I can see where Petplan are coming from. From their point of view excess caecals will be a 'poo' issue and therefore is an gastro-intestinal problem.

I would appeal as they appear to be saying they won't cover anything related to the gut at all. That is like saying a person's appendicitis isn't covered because they had a stomach ulcer previously.
It is "conditions" that are excluded, not areas of the body so they might exclude excess caecotrophs but stasis is not the same thing and I don't think they can exclude whole areas of the body like that.
I'd appeal in writing and ask your vet to write explaining the two incidents are unrelated and NOT the same condition.

RedFraggle said:

I would appeal as they appear to be saying they won't cover anything related to the gut at all. That is like saying a person's appendicitis isn't covered because they had a stomach ulcer previously.
It is "conditions" that are excluded, not areas of the body so they might exclude excess caecotrophs but stasis is not the same thing and I don't think they can exclude whole areas of the body like that.
I'd appeal in writing and ask your vet to write explaining the two incidents are unrelated and NOT the same condition.

Click to expand...

Ahhh, I didn't realise it was only specific conditions that are excluded. I thought once you'd had a 'gut/stomach' issue that meant all similar issues would be excluded. This is good to know for future reference.

Ailstar said:

Ahhh, I didn't realise it was only specific conditions that are excluded. I thought once you'd had a 'gut/stomach' issue that meant all similar issues would be excluded. This is good to know for future reference.

Click to expand...

Yeah this is what they've told me, don't think she really understood what I was on about mentioning caecotrophs etc. but said any 'gastro' issues were now excluded. I think that's a bit of a rip-off to be fair, if your bunny was treated for a cut on his ear before he was insured, then later down the line got ear mites, would they exclude that, as they're all 'ear' issues? :?

I agree that it is worth challenging because it's clearly not the same issue and realistically it should be covered, although if they have stated in their terms and conditions it's not covered then they probably won't back down. It is very unfair though not to be covered for stasis just because of the previous problem.


Looking at Rudy's policy his exclusion states: "Excluding claims resulting from or connected to Gastro-Intestinal/Digestive system Disorders".

So they are excluding everything digestive not just one condition. (However, this exclusion is because of GI stasis episodes).


With Rudy also we have an exclusion for mouth and oral disorders and eye disorders and facial abscesses.... all of this one stems from him needing to have dental spurs burred once at the age of one (now 7 with no further problems. I could understand them excluding mouth/dental but they are taking the Michael with eyes and facial abscesses.

Lucy-Lou said:

Yeah this is what they've told me, don't think she really understood what I was on about mentioning caecotrophs etc. but said any 'gastro' issues were now excluded. I think that's a bit of a rip-off to be fair, if your bunny was treated for a cut on his ear before he was insured, then later down the line got ear mites, would they exclude that, as they're all 'ear' issues? :?

Click to expand...

Yeah to be fair now I'm actually thinking about this, it does seem ridiculous that they exclude all related issues. Maybe part of the problem is that the insurance people don't understand individual conditions so when asked they will tell you that you can't claim. So maybe the best thing to do is to get your vet to write a letter explaining how these issues are unrelated....

One of mine had a GI problem prior to insurance, she had an exclusion for 3 months - during this time she had no further problems so te exclusion was lifted. She has subsequently had a number of GI issues all of which have been covered.

If an exclusion has been made I was told that after 3 months clear you can ask them to consider lifting it.

If you feel this issue has nothing to do with the per insurance/excluded issue I would submit all vet records and ask it to be reconsidered.

Lucy-Lou said:

Am I right in thinking that the caecum is a seperate organ? And caecotrophs pass from here to the bowel and straight out, not through the stomach or intestines? If this is the case then how is it a gastro-intestinal problem?

Click to expand...

According to my understanding caecum is part of the intestines. I've just been flicking through text books for clarification but I can't find any suggestion that it's a separate organ, it's just another part such as "small intestine", "large intestine" and "caecum" and bowel just being another name for intestines generally.

Dustyrabbit said:

One of mine had a GI problem prior to insurance, she had an exclusion for 3 months - during this time she had no further problems so te exclusion was lifted. She has subsequently had a number of GI issues all of which have been covered.

If an exclusion has been made I was told that after 3 months clear you can ask them to consider lifting it.

If you feel this issue has nothing to do with the per insurance/excluded issue I would submit all vet records and ask it to be reconsidered.

Click to expand...

Which insurer? That seems really good. I was told by Pet Plan that they would reconsider Rudy's GI disorders exclusion after 2 years but when I rang to say he'd gone two years they denied every having told me it would be taken of his exclusions :evil:

It was pet plan earlier this year - we had a stray rabbit we took on who had some old bite wounds so abscesses were excluded (although no abscesses developed in the year we had him).

If pet plan told you something over the phone it will be recorded and you can request that they check it, I have had to do this - took a while but proved I was telling the truth.

Thanks everyone for all the replies :wave: I don't think I will get out of paying this but I might talk to my vets practice and appeal it with Petplan anyway. Probably won't work but worth a try!