Yes, insurance companies tailor policies to cover the risks associated with dogs known to be genetically dangerous. On other parts of this site, we discussed the unfair practice of breed-specific bans by cities and counties. As we discussed, such policies do not properly understand the potential risk of dogs based on their breeds. Furthermore, it builds public suspicion and stereotypes of each breed and its owners.
As a result, insurance companies also use similar means to survey the risk of a dog and its ownership. Often these fall upon the lines of the dog’s breed. In many cases, the extra payment is very high and does not necessarily cover the expenses the owner needs. Nor do these coverages always help with the expenses at the time the owner truly needs it.
In some cases, municipalities force owners of certain breeds to carry insurance to own their dogs. This often includes Pit Bulls, German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Akitas, and More. Some insurance companies simply refuse to insure these breeds and others. As a result, the risk for the dog owner increases dramatically. The average payout for dog bite insurance claims in 2014 was a whopping $32,000 and often leaves the owner with few options.
This is doubly the case if the insurance policy does not cover the breed of dog owned. Furthermore, insurance policies are infamously fickle. In some cases, these policies cover the cost of injuries after a dog attack, especially on the owner’s own property. However, these policies often have a cap on the amount available for the dog owner. Furthermore, they usually do not cover the cost or liability of lawsuits.
Too many, this is a crooked system for both the dog owner and dog bite victim. First, the owner is left without legal protection or the means to pay for it when they need it the most. Secondly, the victim may win in court against a dog owner that is bankrupted by the cost of fighting a dog bite lawsuit. Since the insurance company usually does not payout, both parties are likely to lose.