Filed
Great at collecting premiums. Even better at denying claims.
I recently cancelled my policy with Rainwalk, one I never chose in the first place as it was sneakily bundled in with my adoption paperwork, and other pet owners should know what they’re really paying for. While I was covered, they denied three of my claims. Two were denied for being “submitted too late,” even though both were filed in the same calendar/policy year as the treatment. Think about what that rule does. Most people don’t rush to file small claims. Then a big vet bill hits, you go back to submit everything to reach your deductible, and you find out those earlier bills no longer count. To me, that doesn’t look like an accident. It looks like an intentional rule built to keep you from ever reaching your deductible. The third was denied as a “pre-existing condition,” which was a real stretch. It was a very small claim. I hadn’t met my deductible yet, so approving it would have cost them nothing. They denied it anyway. When I pushed back, without even filing a formal appeal, they suddenly approved it. If they fight that hard over a claim that costs them zero dollars, imagine how they’ll treat a big one. The pattern is delay. Several weeks to review a claim. If it’s denied, another 10 days for an appeal. Every step adds friction, and friction means fewer payouts. My advice: do your own math. Add up a year of premiums plus your deductible and compare it to what you actually spend at the vet. This rarely pays off. You’re better off putting that monthly premium into a savings account for pet emergencies. That money is there when you need it, and nobody can deny it. Rainwalk will probably reply to this review with a polite apology and an offer to “look into it.” Judge them by what they do, not their empty words. Their actions show they take one part of their mission very seriously: denying claims.
Filed by Consumer