When her complaint fell at the first fence with the ombudsman, she asked for a review of her complaint and sent a copy of my article as part of this request.

I am delighted to say that at the second attempt the ombudsman took a different view and earlier this month upheld the complaint.

In his decision he said: “It does not feel fair for the clause to be tucked away on page 36 (under point 11.30 of general exclusions) of a 41-page policy document. Furthermore, I am satisfied that [the policyholder] would have acted differently had the clause been clearly highlighted in the policy summary.”

Animal Friends accepted the decision of this “stewards’ inquiry” and will meet the £1,950 claim, plus 8pc interest for the period since the vets’ bill was paid.

The firm says it will review feedback. I hope this will mean clearer presentation of such an important exclusion in future – or, better still, its removal altogether.