Bill would bar insurers from canceling pet policies because animals age or develop conditions

Representative Amy Wallen on Friday opened a public hearing on House Bill 1078, a proposal that would bar pet insurers from canceling or refusing to renew a policy because a covered animal ages or develops a health condition during a policy term.

Megan Movahel, staff to the Consumer Protection & Business Committee, told the committee that current state law now regulates pet insurance as a property-and-casualty product and that last year’s changes required certain consumer disclosures and unified definitions such as preexisting condition. "Pet insurance covers unexpected veterinarian visits and accidents, illnesses, emergencies, and surgeries for family owned pets," Movahel said during her briefing.

Wallen, the bill’s prime sponsor, said the measure expands last year’s consumer protections by preventing insurers from ejecting customers who pay premiums when a pet later develops an expensive illness or condition. "I think pet insurance is actually companion animal insurance and is needed as a public health issue," Representative Amy Wallen said, noting constituents who rely on companion animals for everyday tasks.

Officials from the Office of the Insurance Commissioner (OIC) expressed strong support for the bill’s goal but flagged technical issues for further work. Rory Payne Donovan, legislative director at OIC, praised the bill’s clarity about insurer obligations while offering to help with technical language. David Fort of the OIC confirmed that nothing in the current draft would prohibit insurers from raising rates at renewal: "There's nothing in the bill that would prohibit a rate change," he said when asked whether an insurer could increase premiums for a renewal if a condition developed during a policy term.

Industry representatives asked the committee to consider a clarifying amendment for cases in which a significant preexisting condition was not disclosed at the time of application. John Fielding, representing the North American Pet Health Insurance Association, urged adoption of language to address undisclosed conditions that some carriers said could justify different underwriting treatment.

No formal committee action or vote was recorded during the hearing. The committee suspended the HB 1078 public hearing earlier in the day and later resumed public testimony; members said they will continue technical discussions with OIC and industry stakeholders before any bill move.

The public hearing included testimony from pet owners describing premium increases and reliance on coverage for ongoing treatment, and from insurers and trade groups seeking clarifications about actuarial practices and preexisting-condition rules. The committee did not take final action at the hearing and left the bill as a work in progress.