Source: Radio New Zealand
It could be easier for people to work out whether it was worth buying insurance if vets were more transparent about their fees, says an insurance expert. File photo. ekarin/123RF
Niki Bezzant says that when her cat was dying of cancer, she was relieved to have taken out pet insurance to help with the vet costs.
“I was able to claim for a lot of her very expensive treatment in the last months of her life.”
But she said she was caught out by a feature of the policy that she had not fully understood.
“The excess on the premium in my case was $1000. This is per condition, per policy period. I assumed this meant – per condition – i.e. the jaw cancer that took Lily – per the period I held the policy, which seems fair enough.
“But no, this actually means per condition, per policy year. As it happened, my policy renewed in January, in the middle of Lily’s illness, and with that, another $1000 excess kicked in. So I ended up $2000 down.”
She said she had complained and been offered a small refund as a goodwill gesture.
All up, she said the vet bills totalled $6649 and she was reimbursed $3501.
“That’s not nothing, I paid about $1300 of premiums over the policy life. I suppose it was worth it to know that I didn’t have to weigh up treating my beloved puss with whether I could afford it or not – I knew I’d be reimbursed for most of it. Vet bills are super expensive and I know I’d have really struggled to cover that $6000 if I had not had the insurance. But there are fishhooks.”
She said on balance she thought it was worth having the insurance, which had been in place for a year. “But you could go either way.”
Consumer NZ insurance expert Rebecca Styles said the clause that caught Bezzant out was used across pet and health insurance.
“Insurance contracts are annual, so in the case of pet insurance, an insurer can alter the condition of cover when renewing it and can even decide not to renew it. We think these aspects should be clearly explained before people buy the product and be clearly communicated in the policy documents.”
She said whether it was worth taking out pet insurance was something owners would need to weigh up for themselves.
“When I looked into the prices a few years ago, the cheapest monthly premium for a six-month-old cat was $27.45 and the most expensive $78. For a 6-month-old puppy, monthly premiums ranged from $55 to $106.
“On top of those premiums, if you make a claim, you’ll need to pay an excess – which could be around 20 percent or a fixed amount of $100 to $200 – and in some cases a co-payment as well between 10 percent and 30 percent.”
She said it was also important to look at exclusions.
“Pet insurance won’t cover everything. It’s not often that routine check-ups and vaccinations are included. And some breeds aren’t covered because of known health conditions.”
She said a study in 2019 found most dog owners spent less than $500 a year at the vet and for cat owners, $200.
“Even allowing for inflation, what you pay in premiums may be more than that.”
Canstar said the average cost across all policies was $821 a year, but this could vary a lot depending on the animal insured. It found just over half of respondents had claimed on their insurance.
Southern Cross paid out $15,000 for a dog with immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia in 2025, and $11,000 for a ragdoll cat with pneumonia.
Styles said there were more brands entering the pet insurance market, such as Mighty Ape.
“However, I do think self-insuring – popping some money away regularly to have access to if the worst happens is a good option.”
She said it could be easier for people to work out whether it was worth buying insurance if vets were more transparent about their fees.
“I know when I take my cat or dog it’s hard to guess how much it will cost.”
Moneyhub founder Christopher Walsh said vet costs could quickly add up because treatment and medication was not funded in the same way as for human healthcare.
He said self-insuring was an option for some pet owners but there was also a large range of different pet insurance policies available.
“There are so many options out there… if you want to consider an accident-only pet insurance because you are worried about a dog or cat being run over, rather than the long-term costs that dogs and cats can pick up, it comes down to pricing and getting quotes for what you can afford.”
He said people who chose to self-insure needed to make sure they really were putting aside enough money to cover eventual vet bills.
Research by Leena Awawdeh, now at Charles Sturt University, said pet insurance offered several advantages, including making people more willing to pay for vet care and a reduced likelihood of pre-surgical euthanasia.
“Insured pet guardians tend to spend more on veterinary services, potentially improving access to care. However, pet insurance has limitations, particularly for owners with limited financial resources who struggle to afford premiums or veterinary costs.
“The uptake of pet insurance remains relatively low, with only a minority of pet owners utilising it. Factors influencing insurance adoption include education about treatment costs and disease risks. While pet insurance can reduce the costs associated with veterinary clinics, its uptake has been slow.”
Southern Cross said it insured about 65,000 pets and last year paid out 78,000 claims worth $30.2 million.
Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
