Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/21/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Purchased FIGO Pet Medical Insurance. Coverage was confirmed by **** as $10,000 max per year with a $900 deductible, then 70% coverage. Submitted a claim for $1467. **** confirmed $1293 were eligible expenses under the policy. The then process a payment of only $5. The actual amount should have been $275. $1293 - $900 = $393. $393 x 70% = $275.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/28/2025

  Case No.: 23632681
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by ***** *********** on July 21, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Mr. *********** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/28/2025

   
  Complaint: 23632681
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  Subject: Formal Dispute of Claim Reimbursement Policy Misinterpretation on Claim #**FP0235351

  After reviewing the policy language and FIGO's reimbursement calculation, I must respectfully dispute the method by which the deductible and coinsurance were applied.
  ****'s team has interpreted the policy to mean that coinsurance is applied before the deductible. This contradicts both standard insurance industry practices and the actual language of the policy.
  Key Policy Language (Section 3: Cost Shares):
  Once Your Policy Annual Deductible is reached, We will pay Your Claim subject to Your Coinsurance.
  This clause is unambiguous: the deductible must be met first, and only after that is coinsurance applied to the remaining eligible charges. Your method applying the 70% reimbursement rate to the full eligible amount and then subtracting the deductible from the insurance's share does not align with this contractual language.
  
  Correct Calculation (Based on $1,293 in eligible expenses):
  Eligible charges: $1,293
  Deductible applied first: $900
  Remaining after deductible: $393
  Insurance pays: 70% of $393 = $275.10
  My responsibility: $900 (deductible) + $117.90 (coinsurance) = $1,017.90
  FIGO's calculation, which reimbursed only $5.10, shortchanges the reimbursement by $270, violating the intent and letter of the policy.
  
  Request:
  I respectfully request that this claim be reprocessed based on the correct interpretation of the deductible and coinsurance order. Figo continues to use a calculation method that contradicts its own policy language,

  
  Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your resolution.
  Sincerely,
  ***** ***********
  Claim #**FP0235351
  Pet Name: ******
  ******************************** / ************
  
  
  

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** ***********

  Business Response

  Date: 07/29/2025

  Case No.: 23632681
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the follow up complaint filed by ***** *********** on July 28, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Mr. *********** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  Figo considers this matter to be resolved.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/29/2025

   
  Complaint: 23632681
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  I am following up on Figo Pet Insurances response to my claim (#**FP0235351), where FIGO again denies the appropriate reimbursement, totaling $1,293 in eligible expenses for my pet.Figo has improperly calculated the reimbursement by applying coinsurance first and then subtracting the deductible, resulting in an unjustified reimbursement of only $5.10. This interpretation is inconsistent with their own policy language and industry standards as explained below:.
  Why This Is Incorrect:
  Figo is selectively interpreting one sentence in the policys 'Cost Shares' section to support their method:
  We will apply the Per Incident Copay, if elected, and the Coinsurance to Your Allowable Charges and then pay Your Claim subject to Your Policy Annual Deductible.
  
  However, this directly conflicts with:
  1. Their definition of Coinsurance, which states:
  Coinsurance is the amount You are responsible for in addition to any Per Incident Copay, if elected, and Policy Annual Deductible
  This shows that the deductible is applied before coinsurance.
  2. Their contract Coverage language in Part III, Section 1:
  We will reimburse You, subject to Coinsurance requirements,for any Allowable Charges Your Pet receives in excess of the Policy Annual Deductible
  This confirms reimbursement begins after the deductible is applied.
  3. The second sentence of the Cost Shares section itself:
  Once Your Policy Annual Deductible is reached, We will pay Your Claim subject to Your Coinsurance.
  This clearly states that the deductible must be met before coinsurance is applied.
  
  Correct Calculation Based on the Contract:
  - Total eligible expense: $1,293
  - Deductible applied first: $900
  - Remaining balance: $393
  - Figos 70% share: 70% $393 = $275.10
  - My responsibility: $900 + $117.90 = $1,017.90
  - Figo owes: $275.10, not $5.10
  
  Requested Resolution:
  I am asking Figo Pet Insurance to:
  1. Reprocess claim #**FP0235351 using the correct policy sequence: apply the deductible first, then coinsurance.
  2. Issue an additional reimbursement of $270.00 to reflect the corrected payment amount.
  3. Clarify and align their internal claims handling procedures to match the stated contract language.
  
  Figos current interpretation creates a material disadvantage to policyholders, disregards clear policy wording, and opens the door to bad faith insurance practices.
  
  Sincerely,
  *** ***********
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** ***********

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/17/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  They are scamming people out of their money. I have the pet insurance and I have the plan with a 500 deductible and a 90% reimbursement rate with a 10% coinsurance. My pet has met her deductible more then once and they are now trying to say she hasn't and they are not reimbursing the 90%. They have said that the deductible for pets is not the same as the deductible for humans and then do not want to elaborate more on it. I have 3 pets under this insurance and they have done this every time. Any time I give evidence on the information they just tell me I am wrong and that human insurance and deductibles are different from pets. And according to the paperwork I have they should be reimbursing me. I would like some kind of money back. They do not want to reimburse me for the pet visit and they don't want to reimburse me for the monthly payments i have been making. I don't even know what money to request back at this point.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/24/2025

  Case No.: 23614919
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by ****** **** on July 17, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. **** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/09/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I purchased a pet insurance policy (FPI30000414805) with Figo Pet Insurance LLC at ************************************** with a $500 annual deductible. Figo's plan document definition of deductible is "Policy Annual Deductible is the annual amount You pay for Treatments covered by this Policy and as indicated on Your Declarations Page before We will begin to reimburse You".Despite this policy definition, Figo is not applying all out of pocket costs for eligible reimbursable services towards my annual deductible, instead only applying 80% of my total costs towards my deductible.When I filed appeals for my claims with this incorrect accounting, the appeal was denied with no appropriate rationale to support the decision.I would like Figo to update their advertising materials to reflect the true cost of a deductible, which is inflated above the policy amounts with their accounting, or make the appropriate adjustments to my policy premium and previously submitted claims to ensure the terms and conditions of my policy as purchased are honored.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/16/2025

  Case No.: 23577153
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by ******* ******** on July 9, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to ******* ******** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/02/2025

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Summary of Issue:I am filing this complaint because Figo failed to honor my cancellation request and also increased my rates without providing the required advance notice.Details:On November 8, 2024, I contacted Figo via text message to cancel my recurring subscription/service. They claim they sent a text message informing me that I could not cancel via text. I did not receive this response. Despite my clear request to cancel, I continued to be billed for the service in subsequent months.Additionally, during this period, Figo increased the rate for my subscription/service without providing any advance notice. I was not informed by email, text, or any other method that my rates would be increasing prior to my account being charged.When I called them on 7/2/25, I was informed that cancellations could only be processed by phone, and that my subscription would be canceled as of that date. At no point was it clearly communicated to me that cancellation via text was not accepted, nor was this requirement made clear in the companys terms or in any response to my cancellation request.The lack of advance notice for the rate increase is concerning and, to my understanding, may violate state consumer protection laws and/or the terms of service.Desired Resolution:I am requesting a full refund of all charges incurred after 11/8/24, the date I first requested cancellation. I am also requesting a refund of any charges resulting from the rate increase that was implemented without proper advance notice. Additionally, I would like written confirmation that my subscription has been fully canceled and that no further charges will be made to my account.Why I Am Filing This Complaint:Figo failed to provide a clear and accessible cancellation process, continued to charge me after my cancellation request, and increased my rates without the required advance notice. These actions are unfair and deceptive, and I am seeking assistance from the BBB to resolve this matter.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/10/2025

  Case No.: 23549064
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by ***** ******* on July 2, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to ***** ******* directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/10/2025

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/24/2025

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I purchased my policy via a link from ******. I chose the lowest premium of *****. At the end of the process my card was charged *****. I called and was told that there was a monthly 2.00 "conveniece fee" unless the annual plan is chosen or usng a checking account. This was only listed when listing the final tally prior to purchase, which is easily overlooked after all the screens completed. When I asked to switch to the annual plan, they deducted one payment of *****, but stated they could not refund the 2.00 fee, even though neither the plan nor the payment had been processed. The fee should be clearly listed in the price of the premium (ie. ***** monthly or 189 annually) if the business cares about transparancy. The fact that it is locked in and non-refundable suggests a money grab.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/07/2025

  Case No.: 23511372
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by **** ****** on June 24, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ****** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The ***************** reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/21/2025

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  We enrolled in **** in February 2025. Our pet needed surgery in June. We had the surgery. We tried to submit a claim but the website denied it and would not allow us to submit it. The website said your pet had to see a doctor. This seems like a scam. I called to cancel and Brianey was giving me a hard time and refused to allow to speak to a supervisor. We want our policy refunded back to February 2025 or we will file a small claims lawsuit and file a complaint with the attorney general of the state of California for fraud. We are requesting full refund for $404.20. We incurred a total cost of over $3,500 which now could not submit.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/02/2025

  Case No.: 23500983
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by Summer ****** on June 21, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ****** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/02/2025

   
  Complaint: 23500983
  
  I am rejecting this response because: horrible experience. We tried to cancel, but they would not refund us the money and would not cancel. Also we told them we have a claim to submit and then they started making it difficult with talking about if there were pre-existing conditions and that we have to prove to them that there were no pre-existing conditions In our experience Figo is a horrible company and our experience is horrible. We will file a claim in a court of law and we will file a formal complaint with the insurance commissioner. We do not recommend Figo to anybody. We demand a full refund. We will also file a complaint with the ************************ to investigate their practices and disclosures and failures to disclose.. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  Summer Edouni

  Business Response

  Date: 07/08/2025

  Case No.: 23500983
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by Summer ****** on June 21, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ****** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The ***************** reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  Figo considers this case to be resolved. If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/08/2025

   
  Complaint: 23500983
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Figo is hiding behind its claim about not being the decision maker. The issue here is not the insurance coverage, it is Figo is unclear policies and misrepresentations. We are demanding a full refund of our payments to Figo and to cancel our membership. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  Summer Edouni

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/18/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I submitted claims for my dogs allergy shots. I do this every month not a new thing to claim. O day dogs got shot and sent in claims. Yesterday **** were pending needed more information. I called the girl said the bill sent in didnt show ** name so I resent right away and she said good .Today one dogs was done and I dont no but who ever got my second dogs claim needed more information. I called and talked to someone and she didnt understand anything. The dog got a shot needed ** notes,really? How stupid and I said he doesnt write anything down just shot. I cant believe I going through this and I pay for this. This company is getting really bad and hire the wrong people to sit in there house and mess up everything.Please help

  Business Response

  Date: 07/01/2025

  Case No.: 23489448
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by *** ******** on June 18, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ******** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/22/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  For starters ,I found a cat that was extremely matted and had trouble breathing so I took him to an urgent care facility. That evening I purchased a policy from Figo Pet Insurance to cover potential congenial defects and diseases he may have. He is a pure bred peke face Persian. They are known to have health issues and the vet at the urgent care noted a heart murmur. From there I have had nothing but issues with Figo. For starters, when I enrolled in the insurance, at the top of the email it states that the insurance is applied after one day. I did not see at the very bottom of the very long email, that they actually have a two week waiting period. I never received communication about that from **** until well after the two week period. Well, two days before the end of the waiting period I took the cat back to the vet to follow up on his infections. Then after the waiting period, I took him to a vet with concern of another respiratory infection. At the vet, they provided care. I submitted that claim and was denied, being told that everything during that visit was for wellness, not illness and wellness isn't covered. Then a week later, I brought him back to the vet for further testing because of his breed. His breed is known how heart and kidney issues as well as reparatory infections and dental disease. The Vet issued tests to measure his stress on his heart, an x-ray to check for deformities, and a urine draw to check for a bladder infection, which was new concern. Yet, Figo Pet Insurance denied every part of the claim, stating that these were pre-existing conditions! I contested the first two claims and the associate denied them again, even after I pointed out that I has exam coverage and should have received credit for that. I am infuriated because I feel like I am being punished for helping an animal that needed help. I have followed all veterinary instruction and filed the needed documents with Figo Pet Insurance.

  Business Response

  Date: 06/04/2025

  Case No.: 23365390
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by ******* ****** on May 22, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ****** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/19/2025

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Policy #: FPI30000351962 Policy Period: 11/07/2024 11/07/2025 Nature of Complaint:Misclassification of a neurological disorder as an orthopedic condition to deny future coverage.I am filing a complaint against Figo for denying future coverage for ***** by misclassifying a neurological condition as orthopedic. This contradicts medical evidence & reflects an unreasonable policy interpretation.***** developed ataxia in early 2025. UC ***** Veterinary Neurology diagnosed him with a T6T7 arachnoid diverticulum (SAD), a spinal cord malformation causing neurological signs.All *********************** (MRI, CT, neurosurgery) were performed by neurologists. ***** has never been evaluated by an orthopedic specialist, as this is strictly neurological.Despite a letter from neurologist Dr. ** ******* confirming the dx as neurological, Figo denied future coverage. Their reasoning: while neurological, the condition involves spinal ligaments & intervertebral spaces & is thus orthopedic.This is inaccurate & medically unsupported:- The disorder arises in the arachnoid layer, not the musculoskeletal system.- ********************* targeted neurological structures, not orthopedic ones - No CT or surgical findings established ligament abnormality as the cause.Figos interpretation misclassifies a CNS disorder & misapplies the orthopedic exclusion.Attempts to Resolve:I submitted 2 appeals, including the neurologists letter. Figo upheld the denial without addressing the neurological basis.Relief Sought:- Reversal of the ******************** of coverage for *****s condition.- Written confirmation that this neurological disorder is not excluded.- Internal review to ensure accurate classification of medical conditions.Figos actions undermine the purpose of pet insurance: to cover unforeseen illness. Mislabeling a neurological disorder as orthopedic avoids coverage unfairly & contradicts veterinary standards. I request BBB review & public accountability.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/28/2025

  Case No.: 23351185
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by **** ** on May 19, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/28/2025

   
  Complaint: 23351185
  
  Dear Figo Claims Team,
  
  Thank you for your response to my Better Business Bureau complaint and for taking the time to outline the policy terms and claim history associated with *****s recent veterinary treatment.
  
  As noted in your correspondence, a second-level appeal was filed on May 23, 2025. Since that time, I have received confirmation from Figo that *****s spinal arachnoid diverticulum (SAD) has been determined to be eligible for coverage. 
  

  While I appreciate that the second-level appeal led to a reversal of the prior denial, I must express my concern that no explanation or rationale was provided for this decision. Specifically, there is no information about the basis for the reconsiderationwhether the prior classification of *****s clearly neurological condition as orthopedic has been overturned, or whether Figo still views this condition through the lens of its orthopedic exclusion.
  
  If Figo continues to misclassify a neurologically diagnosed and treated condition as orthopedic, and yet is allowing coverage solely as an exception, it creates serious ambiguity regarding the terms of the policy and leaves open the risk that future claimseither for this condition or other unrelated orthopedic issuesmay be unfairly denied.
  
  For this reason, I am respectfully requesting the following, in writing, for my records:
  
  1. A clear confirmation that *****s spinal arachnoid diverticulum is not considered an orthopedic condition under the policys definition of Orthopedic Condition.

  2. A statement that ***** does not have a pre-existing orthopedic condition, and that the orthopedic waiting period clause is not applicable to this diagnosis.

  3. An explanation of the specific evidence or rationale used to reverse the denial of coverage, including whether the determination was based on the submitted neurology reports, the orthopedic waiver, or Dr. **** specialist letter.
  
  Without clear documentation of the current interpretation of *****s diagnosis, I am concerned we will face ongoing administrative hurdles and the risk of denial for future claims related to this conditionor any future conditions Figo may attempt to label as orthopedic.
  
  This lack of transparency throughout the review process has been extremely frustrating and has caused significant stress. I would appreciate your cooperation in formally resolving this issue and ensuring there is no ambiguity going forward.
  
  Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward to your written clarification.
  

  Sincerely,
  
  **** Do

  Business Response

  Date: 05/29/2025

  Case No.: 23351185
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the follow up complaint filed by **** ** on May 28, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/29/2025

   
  Complaint: 23351185
  

  Dear Figo Claims Team,
  
  Thank you for your most recent response regarding my Better Business Bureau complaint. While I appreciate the reiteration that Teddys subarachnoid diverticulum (SAD) is now being recognized as a non-orthopedic condition and that the decision to deny future claims for this condition has been overturned, your response unfortunately still fails to address several of the specific and reasonable requests I outlined in my previous correspondence.
  
  To be clear, I am not asking for a summary of prior decisions already communicated. I am requesting formal, written clarification on the following unresolved issues, which are critical to ensuring consistent application of policy terms and protecting against future misclassification of Teddys condition or unrelated claims:
  
  1. A clear statement that Teddys SAD is not considered an orthopedic condition as defined in the policyand not simply being treated as non-orthopedic as a goodwill exception.

  
  2. Confirmation that the condition is not considered pre-existing under the orthopedic exclusion clause, and that the orthopedic waiting period is not applicable to this diagnosis

  
  3. Disclosure of the specific documentation or rationale used in overturning the denial, including whether the reconsideration was based on:
  - Neurology specialist reports,
  - The orthopedic waiver submission, and/or
  - Dr. **** formal letter of clarification.
  
  4. Written assurance that the incidental mention of the interspinous ligament in Teddys surgical report will not be used to classify this or future conditions as orthopedic or pre-existing in future claims.
   
  5. Written confirmation that this condition and the incidental mention of interspinous ligament mentioned in surgery will not be used to justify denial of future unrelated orthopedic claims based on any perceived connection to the current diagnosis.
  
  As Ive noted previously in other correspondence, I am fortunate to have the background and clinical literacy to advocate on behalf of my pet. Many policyholders are not in the same position. The lack of transparency and consistency in how conditions are interpreted under your orthopedic exclusions presents a risk of significant harm to others who may not be able to question those decisions.
  
  Additionally, I must again emphasize that I have only received prompt and direct communication from Figo following the involvement of the California Department of Insurance and the Better Business Bureau. This reactive approach to customer communication is deeply concerning and inconsistent with Figos public commitment to policyholder support.
  
  I remain hopeful that your team will provide the requested clarification in writing so this issue can be resolved thoroughly and finally. I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and look forward to receiving your complete response.
  
  Sincerely,

  **** Do

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/16/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Figo pet insurance needs to be reviewed by authorities. The product claims to cover most important dog procedures. When you the websites homepage. It does seem like it covers all of what a dog would need but when you read the terms and conditions after, most important and common procedures are not covered. My had deciduous teeth removed but was not covered. I called a representative and said that i should at least received about $10 from this procedure because it is part of dental health. I did not receive such amount. The refund really didnt matter to me anymore and i did mot receive the $10 at all after. but it bothered me that they should have seen it on the initial review. Secondly, complications secondary to preventative surgery is not covered. My dogs spay site dehisced and it was MEDICALLY NECESSARY to repair the incision. I received 0 out of $2100 i paid. Comparing these procedures with all other insurances, others would cover. im not getting the most out of this insurance.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/27/2025

  Case No.: 23337456
  

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  

  Figo Pet Insurance (Figo) is responding on behalf of Independence American Insurance Company (the Carrier) to the complaint filed by *** Castrel (******** ******) on May 16, 2025, regarding the above-captioned matter.
  

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns shared with your office. We have responded to Ms. ****** directly as we are prohibited by law from releasing personal information without a signed third-party release.
  

  Please be advised that the information contained herein is meant to be responsive to your inquiry. It is not meant to constitute or be construed as a waiver of any other defense available to the Carrier. The Carrier expressly reserves all rights to assert any provision, limitation or defense provided for under the Policy and/or applicable law.
  

  If anything further is required, we are happy to assist.
  

  Figo Pet Insurance