Brits are more likely to get cover for their pets than themselves, says a new survey. This seems crazy, but is there method in this madness? Are you someone who puts your pet first?
I don’t have any pets, I don’t even like animals, so buying pet insurance to protect a moggy or pooch is lost on me.
Then again, if you are a pet owner I can see the attraction. Not so long a go I read that it can cost in the region of £2,000 to fix a knee injury suffered by a dog, and even getting an x-ray will set you back £350. Sums like these bring it home how expensive a four-legged friend can be.
I think that the research, conducted by Provide, the insurer, has merit. But it has to be taken in context. One reason why we may not get health cover for ourselves, but buy insurance for our pets is that the NHS is there to help, whereas a sick or injured pet doesn’t have access to free treatment.
Putting your pet first
As good as the welfare state may be, it does have its shortcomings. Provide’s research illustrates one problem in particular – just 9% of self-employed or low paid workers have health cover.
If these people suffer long periods off work, they could get into serious financial problems. Even with money being tight, income protection may be worth considering – although not payment protection insurance (which is a con).
Life is tough right now. Around one in five single parents don’t have any savings to fall back on. So while protecting your pet may seem a sensible, caring thing to do, charity begins at home. If you have any spare cash, consider looking after yourself before your pets. After all, you’ll be able to tend after a sick animal, they won’t be able to do much for you.