Does seem unfair when the risk has been wiped out, to still expect us to pay for non-existent cover.

I know the actuarial risk calculation may be be over a year, but with today's computers it seems lazy not to refine the calculations to allow for the cessation of risk.

Surely there's a greater risk in negative customer loyalty, losing referrals, and image tarnishing?

Hi - Yes, although the sentiments and emotions are entirely different between a much loved pet and a car, which to some people a written off car is simply a lump of inert metal. I was using it as an analogy for comparison reasons of how insurers still expect the full premium, which when not paid upfront for the year is collected by instalments only for reasons of affordability.

Good points, and thanks for the kind words.

I'm not totally convinced by the car analogy. You normally replace a wrecked car quickly for practical reasons and the insurer is happy to replace the premiums with a new insurance for another vehicle so they retain your business.

Losing pets is different as you have a relationship with a sentient being and need a period of adjustment.

Sorry to hear of your loss. - Where monthly premiums have been agreed and are being paid for any annual contract of insurance, it is normal practice for insurers to charge for the full annual premium where a claim on the policy has been made. Although it is insensitive in your case, the act of being humane is not usually of paramount importance to the insurance companies interests.

This applies equally to car insurance where someone has been paying it by direct debit, then makes a claim because the car was involved in a traffic accident resulting in the car being a 'write off', the full yearly premium is still charged and obtained by the insurer one way or another.

Something no-one seems to mention about pet insurance is the ongoing liability for the premiums over the rest of the year. Talk about rubbing salt into a wound! I really didn't expect that from Marks & Spencer.

It is adding insult to injury to have to pay to insure a cat that is no longer with us.

I don't recall this happening with other pet insurances I've had in the past. Is it standard practice?

I explicitly phoned them to notify them of the death and asked whether they automatically cancelled the policy. They said yes. That seems to indicate: no more premiums.

But they deducted the remainder of the premiums for the year from the cheque they sent to cover the euthanasia and cremation expenses.

This is a horrid twist to an already upsetting experience. The timing is rotten. The action is thoughtless and insensitive. I think it's iniquitous.