Unethical Pet Insurance Bill

Opposition to HB 78 – Protecting Montana Families from Unethical Pet Insurance Practices

Dear Committee:

I write today in strong opposition to HB 78, the Montana Pet Insurance Act, a bill that prioritizes corporate profit over the well-being of Montana families and their pets. 

While this bill is framed as providing consumer protections and regulatory oversight, it in fact empowers insurance companies to deny claims, exploit loopholes, and increase profits while leaving pet owners with financial burdens and difficult medical decisions for their animals.

Overview of HB 78 – The Montana Pet Insurance Act

HB 78 introduces new regulations for pet insurance policies in Montana, requiring insurer disclosures, policy conditions, and training requirements for insurance producers. While the bill claims to create a regulatory framework for transparency, it contains provisions that favor insurance companies at the expense of pet owners, allowing insurers to:

• Deny claims based on vague preexisting condition clauses

• Impose waiting periods that delay coverage when treatment is most needed

• Exclude coverage for hereditary, congenital, and chronic conditions

• Reduce coverage or increase premiums based on claims history and pet age

These provisions prioritize corporate financial gain over the health and well-being of pets and their owners, creating a system where insurers profit from denied claims rather than providing fair coverage.

HB 78 continues the disturbing trend of corporations taking advantage of Montanans, a pattern that has fueled national discord and public frustration with unchecked corporate greed. Montana’s hardworking families deserve protection from predatory insurance practices—not a bill that codifies their ability to be exploited.

Furthermore, I must ask: 

1. Who benefits from this legislation? 

2. Who in this legislature is receiving campaign contributions or lobbyist support from the insurance industry while pushing a bill that allows insurers to fleece Montana’s people and deny them fair coverage?

1. HB 78 Encourages Insurance Companies to Deny Claims by Exploiting Preexisting Condition Loopholes

This bill allows pet insurers to define nearly any condition as "preexisting", meaning insurance companies can collect premiums while denying claims for the very conditions pet owners seek coverage for. Insurers would be allowed to deny claims based on:

• Any prior veterinary consultation or diagnosis, even for unrelated issues.

• Any signs or symptoms before policy activation, even if no formal diagnosis existed.

This system benefits only the insurance companies, allowing them to reject claims after years of collecting premiums, forcing pet owners to pay out-of-pocket when their pets need care the most.

2. HB 78 Imposes Unfair Waiting Periods That Delay Urgent Care

This bill allows insurance companies to impose waiting periods of up to 30 days, ensuring that even after purchasing a policy, Montanans may be forced to pay out-of-pocket for emergency care.

• Emergencies cannot wait. Accidents, sudden illnesses, and life-threatening conditions often require immediate medical attention, but under this bill, insurance providers can delay coverage and deny claims during an arbitrary waiting period.

• This provision incentivizes insurers to collect premiums while limiting their responsibility to pay for critical care, leaving families with unexpected, unaffordable medical costs.

If this bill truly prioritized consumer protection, it would eliminate or significantly reduce waiting periods for urgent care needs.

3. HB 78 Discriminates Against Pets with Chronic, Hereditary, or Congenital Conditions

Under HB 78, insurance companies would be permitted to exclude coverage for hereditary, congenital, and chronic conditions—a move that will have devastating consequences for purebred animals, senior pets, and those with long-term medical needs.

• Many common conditions, such as hip dysplasia, heart disease, and diabetes, are hereditary or chronic. By excluding these conditions, insurance companies refuse coverage for the very illnesses they are supposed to help treat.

• This exclusion deceives pet owners into believing they have financial security for their pets' medical needs, only to discover too late that their claims will be denied.

Insurance should exist to help families care for their pets—not as a loophole-laden scheme designed to minimize corporate payouts.

4. HB 78 Allows Unethical Premium Increases Based on Claims History and Pet Age

HB 78 allows insurance providers to penalize pet owners for using their coverage, permitting companies to increase premiums simply because a pet needed medical care.

• This "use it and lose it" approach discourages policyholders from seeking necessary care, defeating the very purpose of insurance.

• Senior pets—who need coverage the most—would face rising costs solely due to aging, forcing owners to make heartbreaking financial decisions about their care.

• Pet owners in rural areas could face premium hikes based on geography, a move that unfairly targets Montana’s agriculture and working dog owners.

This provision ensures that only the wealthiest Montanans will be able to afford long-term coverage, while working-class families are squeezed out by rising costs. Are only the wealthy considered “deserving” of animal companions in Montana?

5. Who Profits? The Need for Transparency in Legislative Influence

HB 78 raises a critical ethical concern: who is truly benefiting from this legislation? Insurance companies and their lobbyists stand to make millions by collecting premiums and denying claims, yet this bill does nothing to protect the financial well-being of Montanans who responsibly insure their pets.

I urge this committee to disclose any insurance industry contributions received by those backing this bill. Are we truly working for the Montana people—or for the corporate interests who profit at their expense?

6. Legislative Fixes Needed to Truly Protect Montana Consumers

If the goal of HB 78 is truly to regulate pet insurance for fairness and transparency, then it must be amended to:

Tighten preexisting condition definitions to prevent unfair claim denials.

 Reduce or eliminate waiting periods for emergency conditions.

 Require coverage for chronic, hereditary, and congenital conditions.

Ban premium increases based solely on claims history or pet age.

 Require full disclosure of all exclusions and coverage reductions before policy purchase.

Without these changes, HB 78 is nothing more than a corporate giveaway that enables insurance companies to take advantage of Montana’s people.

Personal to Me

As a longtime pet owner, I know firsthand how much our animal companions mean to us. They are not just pets; they are family members, bringing joy, companionship, and love into our lives. But owning pets also comes with financial responsibilities, and responsible pet owners invest in pet insurance under the belief that it will help us care for our animals in times of medical need.

Unfortunately, my own experience with pet insurance has been deeply frustrating and financially harmful. I have already dealt with arbitrary claim denials, including refusals to cover routine dental cleanings, despite no pre existing dental issues. Insurers use loopholes to deny even basic procedures, leaving pet owners to pay out-of-pocket despite paying premiums for years. HB 78 does nothing to correct these unethical practices—instead, it further empowers insurance companies to exploit customers by expanding their ability to deny care.

This bill is deeply personal to me, and I know many other Montana pet owners share similar experiences. We trust pet insurance providers to help us when our animals need care, yet this bill ensures insurers can continue manipulating policy language to maximize profits while denying Montanans the services they paid for.

HB 78 Prioritizes Corporate Greed Over Montana Families

Montanans deserve honest, ethical insurance policies that provide fair coverage for their pets without deceptive clauses, financial penalties, and outright fraud. 

HB 78, in its current form, does nothing to protect consumers—instead, it actively codifies corporate loopholes that allow insurers to deny claims and hike premiums without consequence.

Furthermore, the lack of transparency regarding potential financial influence from the insurance industry raises serious concerns about whether this bill was drafted in the best interest of Montanans—or in service of corporate profits.

I urge this committee to reject HB 78 unless substantial amendments are made to prevent insurance companies from abusing Montanans for financial gain. Our state cannot continue allowing big corporations to fleece our people while offering them nothing in return.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I welcome further discussion on how true consumer protections can be implemented to hold insurers accountable and ensure fair, ethical pet insurance coverage.