It makes you wonder about the PDSA and RSPCA hospitals. Their clients usually belong to people on benefits with no insurance and very little or no disposable income. While they may not be as willing to do as much for an animal in the long term, you can bet they aren't ever going to take the mickey like that.

Well, Medivet's response to one of the first cases made me go cold - exactly the same experience with a vet that insisted my cat had been in a car accident because of scuffed claws.  Inspite of my insistence he hadn't - he'd been in for the last three days and developed a limp where I could see a bite - the vet reduced my daughter to tears and wore me down so much we did have the tests done - at a cost of over £600.  The results were that there appeared inflammation in his paw which they concluded was an infection and put him on antibiotics which was what I had said and asked for in the first place.
I'm pretty gobsmacked that the first case is almost identical.

>no it is not.

I'll need to tell the vets that the RCVS inspector has told them wrong.

> I'll need to tell the vets that the RCVS inspector has told them wrong.

Ditto

Our petsitter used to work for Medivet and knows the people involved. She was a trainee and was allowed to administer anisthetic without supervision. She knows Aaron who hit the dog and says he is nasty and the vets that are concerned were bad.
What I have seen and she has told me shocks me. I felt so sorry for the setter owners who watched how their dog was treated...poor poor people and dog.

Our petsitter left Medivet and hasn't gone back to her training and is currently looking for a placement to continue her training I have just told her best miss the medivet bit off her CV. She is a bit worried now.

I think Medivet have well and truly shot themselves in the foot now. It was laughable how their statements were the total opposite of what had, after all, been caught on film. A vet saying it was clever to make an insurance claim 3 separate ones, and then the statement saying it was an accident, for instance. They've really made themselves look bad.

I know the programme was largely about the use of un trained staff carrying out procedures and duties they shouldn't.  That aside, I was still wondering about the breeder who sold a puppy with a skin complaint!

I need to watch that part again, why would you sell / buy a puppy with a problem.

OH will need to watch again as he says he couldn't hear properly because I kept talking at the TV.

>That aside, I was still wondering about the breeder who sold a puppy with a skin complaint!

And why would the people buy a puppy with a skin complaint too? Surely they must have realised that it would involve vets bills.

I watched 10 minutes of the programme and that was enough for me, it just made me sick to my stomach. Although our vets are lovely and caring a small practice and I do trust them totally.. you can still never be 100% sure what goes on behind the scenes once you leave your beloved pet..at certain vets. I hope people after seeing this programme change vets and Medivet go out of business!

i forgot to say i was appalled at the poor dog that was hit when it had just had its leg amputated! that bloke was then promoted when he should have been sacked. also that poor dog whos paw was cut by the nurse who then claimed it had come in that way and charged them for cream as well- outrageous!

It was a much more balanced programme than PDE in that it a) explained 'best practice' and b) spoke to vets who deplored the bad practice shown, rather than accusing all vets of behaving so disgracefully. The public has been left rather better informed than before, rather than less so.

Completely agree with boxacrazy it highlights the need for qualified vet nurses.  Alot of people dont even no they exist.  The title should be protected because at the moment any one can call themselves a veterinary nurse.

because he is always there when I need him
He does not make me wait for 3 weeks for 1st available appt.
he does the job he has trained for, and is skilled enough to make decisions..
I trust his judgement, although I do question him sometimes (it helps ME understand and learn)
He listens to my point of view, whether he thinks I am a total fruitbat, he has respect for me (to my face

And yes.. he asks me to pay for this service..

I would agree with all of the above and I was horrified to see this programme last night and equally disgusted that it has been going on unchecked for so long but I have to say that my vet is a part of the Medivet group. Wil is a very kind, caring and sensitive vet who is just as caring of owners as he is the animals in his care, but as with any vet, our trust in him had been earnt and as one vet said on the programme last night "I'm only as good as my last diagnosis". I travel to see Wil because having had experience of our 'local' vet (10 min by car) I would prefer the journey than subject my animals to the unfeeling, conveyor-belt system of the posh and Private 'local' where the vet is visibly rough with the animals, tuts and is rude to owners, and having been behind the scene with an injured animal - I will not set foot in there again if you paid Me! Wil is a shining example of what a vet Should be, regardles of what group or practice they belong to.

> It was a much more balanced programme than PDE

I thought that too.

>ANY drugs opened, be them a bottle or box of tablets have to be used up or disposed by day 28 (after opening).

The vet has just confirmed that the 28-day rule only applies to injectible medicines, in particular those that require refrigeration. It does not apply to tablets of any sort.

Oh, and it's not a new rule; it's been in force for about a year.

Yes thanks Jeangenie, just got in from work and also confirmed its all injectables not just refridgerated, and not tablets (thank goodness). I also know it is not a new rule but is still relatively recent, and most vets are not happy with it as many bottles of drugs will get wasted before the 28 days. The inspections at practices are on the increase this year.

> Completely agree with boxacrazy it highlights the need for qualified vet nurses.  Alot of people dont even no they exist.  The title should be protected because at the moment any one can call themselves a veterinary nurse.

Absolutely!
It is not an easy qualification to get. I found it harder in parts than my degree. Vet nurses also do not get paid much money despite our LONG hours, and a lot of responsibility. I absolutely love my job and wouldn't change it for any other!

I think veterinary medication is an absolute rip off. Around 4/5 years ago, I was able to purchase phenobarbitone for my epileptic dog. This was the generic drug and would also be given to humans. However, there was a law brought in which meant that no human medication could be prescribed for animals unless there was no animal version of the same drug. So, my vet could only give me Epiphen which is the animal trade name for Phenobarbitone. EXACTLY the same medication but over TEN times the price.

This is not a criticism of my vet as they are also outraged at what almost constitutes a monopoly of business. Ridiculous laws leading to expensive treatment which may lead some people to simply not pay the costs!

>there was a law brought in which meant that no human medication could be prescribed for animals unless there was no animal version of the same drug.

The 'cascade' annoys most vets because they've had their right of choice taken away. They used to be able to help less well-off clients get (as near as makes no difference) the same medication at a cost they could more easily afford, thus benefitting the animals. Now they can't, legally.

I just cannot see why vets can't have the choice as to what brand of medication they can offer clients. We are not even talking about a different medication..Phenobarbitone IS Epiphen. The only difference is Epiphen is licensed as a medication for animals. They charge ten times the price for that particular label! I am paying ten times the price for a brand name because of this ridiculous European legislation!

As I say though, this isn't a criticism of my vet - they were even angrier than me about the situation when it first came into force!

I decided not to watch the programme which I taped last night. I have the utmost faith in my vet and didn't feel the programme would be at all educational for my personal circumstance :)

"We are concerned about allegations raised by last night's Panorama programme, and would like to reassure the public that we will investigate the claims made, says veterinary regulatory body, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, commenting on 'It Shouldn't Happen at a Vet's' (BBC 1, 9pm 22 July)"

RCVS: concerned about Panorama allegations, and will investigate

I remember years ago when attending the vet. college in Bristol with a very poorly dog to be asked to sign a petition. It was explained that there was a law coming in that would stop animal medicine being able to jump on the bandwagon of the human testing of the drugs, and even though it is exactly the same drug as used by humans it would have to be completely tested for animals separately. This I was advised would at least double the cost of animal medicine because the cost of separate testing instead of using the human results would be so costly that many people would no longer be able to afford to care for their animals. The petition was to try and stop this law coming in - if only.

   > I'm rather hoping someone might start a thread about the KC registering puppy farm dogs, for instance - something I've had a pop at them about in this week's DogWorld. Would join in on that one... :-)
    >

Sounds like it would be a good thread as most have strong views on this. Why not take the lead and post it?

Well, I tried. And thought there was a really good and thoughtful response from many. But I see this morning that the thread has been deleted.

Jemima

I doubt it has been deleted, just removed for editing as something inflammatory may have been posted, probably about the alternative registries who get very stroppy about their businesses being 'maligned' ;)  they have been know to threaten posters and champdogs with legal action.

New Topic

> I'm afraid Medivet (who have quite a few branches around here) have a very bad name for overcharging and pushing owners to put their animals through unnecessary tests and investigations.  None of what was shown tonight surprised me, apart from allowing unqualified trainees to perform procedures they shouldn't have been doing.

I agree, i have worked in a Medivet practice. When I started there it was owned by a local vet, who used to charge £15 for a rabbit spay. When Medivet took over the head vet nurse from the old practice stayed on. She was asked by a client how much to spay a rabbit, she relied £15 the regional Medivet manager was there at the time and tore the head nurse off a strip and told her she was not to tell clients how much operations would cost, as a rabbit spray by Medivet was £65 not £15! Not much profit there then???

Every evening after the practice closed all the sick and operated animals still at the practice were loaded into a van and transported over an hour away to their regional central practice was located, the following morning the animals were all loaded back into a van and transported back to the local vets, and the owners did not know this was happening.

Vets Now on the programme were highlighted as being a good organisation but I have covered stories for Our Dogs where treatment has resulted in the death of animals due to poor care. I would suggest you look up Justice For Ted on the internet if you want to know more about a campaign to regulate vets more closely than is currently done. This organisation is not out to knock vets they do say that there are some really good vets who go beyond the call of duty for our pets. They do recognise though that there are as in everything some rogues around.

Sorry my message has been deleted as it contravened the rules regarding posting up links to petitions
(the petition concerned wasn't mine nor was it still a live one) Must get myself a refresher on the rules and regs of the board :)

But in order for people to understand what I posted perhaps my original posted could have been edited
to remove the link to the petition?

Anyhow the general jist was that qualified Veterinary Nurses were trying to protect their title of Veterinary Nurse
one which they have to work hard to achieve the qualification.
Not everyone is aware that VN's work hard to get their qualifications and it's a position which they should be proud
to achieve that title and it should be protected to safeguard from such companies as was shown on the Panorama programme.