Isn’t it interesting that the insurance firms say they should be able to charge homeowners more for having dogs yet it is now proven that 1) dogs are one of the best security alarms and protections that anyone can have and 2) having dogs prolongs healthy life! So if insurance companies can charge us more for having dogs then they should also have to charge doglovers less on health and life insurance.
Bottom line — it looks like the insurance companies are just looking for ways to make up on their horrendous losses from Katrina and bad investing!
This article comes from the StarTribune.com.
Dog’s breed may drive up insurance cost
Insurers say they’re looking out for liability in dog attacks; owners say it’s discrimination.
Thomas Lee, Star Tribune
Benefits and risks for ‘off-shifting families
Rita is known by her foster owners as a “velcro dog,” a pet that needs to be near people 24/7. She loves children, plays tug of war, and lounges on the couch all day.
Beth DeLaForest, a director for A Rotta Love Plus rescue group in Minneapolis, says Rita would make a perfect apartment dog. But she can’t find an owner for Rita, who has been with the group for a year now.
One big reason: Rita is a pit bull.
Rescue groups are having a hard time placing dogs such as Rita because prospective owners are struggling to find an insurance company willing to provide coverage for a home inhabited by a dog the industry has deemed dangerous.
“Some people don’t want to go through the hassle of adopting a dog if they had to change insurance companies,” said DeLaForest.
Of the 30 applications A Rotta Love receives every month, about 5 drop out because of insurance problems.