Hi all, sorry I'm going to gripe again :D but these new laws are just stupid - is anyone policing them to make sure they are being complied with and aren't being abused?

Firstly, vets aren't allowed to charge prescription charges now but can 'cover their costs in issuing prescriptions', ie the same prescription charge but with a different name .  Not only that but if you also need to see the vet, you end up paying several times - once for consultancy to decide what drugs are necessary (no problem with that) and then again for the prescription to be issued and each time subsequently for repeat prescriptions.

Then they are supposed to tell you if you can buy the medication cheaper elsewhere.  Well, I recently got issued with saline eye drops for which I was charged over double what they cost at the local pharmacy.  I wasn't told about them beforehand, they just got added to the bill.  This after a different vet at the same practice had previously told me to buy them at the chemist because they would be cheaper!

Surely if these laws are to protect the consumer as they were meant to, a set charge for issuing prescriptions should have been included in the law and not just left for each practice to decide.  As for advising you if the drug is available cheaper elsewhere, this seems to be merely the luck of the draw as to the vet you see and I doubt there is any effective way of policing it. :(

Much as I love my dogs and begrude them nothing, does this make anyone else as mad as it makes me?

I was amazed that this law was even passed.  Doctors charge for private prescriptions so I really can't see how the Government thought it fair to take away this piece of income for a professional service although I believe it is just for a trial period of 3 years.  Most drugs should be not repeated without some assessment by the profession to determine if it is the appropriate prescription so it should always involve more of their time and therefore reasonable to incur a further fee.  With this loss of income it seems obvious to me that vets are going to need to increase charges in other area, something allowed for in the act, so it doesn't surprise me to see them add things like non prescription items automatically such as the case with your eye drops.
I agree it is a stupid law and doesn't seem fair to anybody.

I think the idea of the law Isabel was to allow the consumer to shop around for drugs which carried a very high mark up at the vets.  By charging high amounts for a prescription, they were restricting the consumer from doing this.  However, as I said, now they just seem to be charging the same high amount but in a more covert way!  There are some drugs that are long term and do not need repeated consultations, such as drugs for elderly dogs.  One of my dogs is on Vivitonin 100 and although the vet has said he does not need to see him for 3 months, each repeat prescription only lasts for 3 weeks.  Don't know about all doctors charging for private prescriptions - mine doesn't :).

You may not be surprised to see them having huge mark ups on things like the saline drops but the new law also states that they are supposed to be advising clients that it would be cheaper to buy such things from the local chemist!

Whether you agree with the new rules or not, they certainly do not seem to be working :(

PS  Do I take it from your post Isabel that you think vets are having difficulty scraping a living? :D

If your vet says he does not need to see the dog for 3 months I think it is reasonable to ask him for a prescription for that length of time.  Again, as you say, he should be telling you you can get non prescription stuff cheaper but you would have to have that out with him as an individual.
You are very lucky if your Doctor does not charge for prescriptions they are cetainly entitled to.  My GP friend charges for private prescriptions, letters to insurance companies, all that sort of thing.  It is private work not covered by his NHS salary so why should he work as a charity, would you do extra work without being paid?  And why should vets?  The consumer can look around for cheaper drugs but the professional work that the vet does to determine a prescription should be paid for if that means no saving then I'm afraid we shouldn't be asking vets to work for nothing to faciliate it.
I don't think either of us is agreeing with the new rules and we clearly neither of us believe it is or will work :)

But Isabel, determining what drugs are needed is surely covered by the consultancy fees, which are in many cases considerable?  Having said that, I would personally prefer to pay a higher consultancy charge than these other charges.  At least then you would only pay them when the vet needed to see your dog.  Anyway, I certainly wouldn't bother to shop around (in fact I am only just starting to think about it) if there wasn't such a high mark up on drugs at the vets - who would? - so to a degree, I feel the vets have brought this problem on themselves.  

I'm just very lucky with my doctor Isabel - he is very much a 'people person', one of the old school who really cares about his patients, and we have a very good doctor/patient relationship so maybe it is just his favourites he doesn't charge :D.  I shall miss him so much when he retires.

Even the act of writing out a prescription takes time that would not be taken up if he was dispensing himselves.  You may not mind increased consulting fees to compensate but that is your particular circumstances, someone else will also find themselves paying those higher rates when a prescription is not even required.  As you have found out the system was flawed anyway so nobody is benefitting.
I hope you are not suggesting my GP friend is not caring, I don't know anyone who works harder in his role for the NHS :)  We are talking about private prescriptions which are, in the main, travel prophylactics.  If people are travelling far flung they are generally not to be described as charity cases :)  Similarly insurance reports are paid for by the insurance companies untimately when the case is settled and I think few people would suggest their need is so great that my friend should give up his spare time for them ;)

Hi Isabel - I have PMd you.

I wouldn't be happy with increased consultancy fees, just feel it might be a more upfront honest method of recouping costs.  I would imagine that the number of people visiting the vet who don't get prescribed something is relatively small.

Anyway Isabel - thanks for your input to my troubled soul :).  I now have to take young Angus out for a walk - will wrap up warm, it is freezing here!

It's not a happy system :)  I think we should not loose sight, though, of the fact that although vets need to make a living and a pretty good one considering their accademic achievements (who would want less bright vets ;)) the vast majority have a true interest in animal welfare and understand the implications of how financial pressures on owners will reflect on that. 

IME I've found vets have little interest in how big bills will affect you or your animals' welfare.  Not saying they should because it is the owner's responsibility to fund their pet care, I'm just refuting your comment that they take this into account. :)  Apart, that is, from those who work for animal charities such as PDSA.

Those working for the charities will be salaried.   I'm sure they will need to take fees for treatment in exactly the same way as any other private vet if they leave that work and set up in business.

Our veterinary practice is superb and the costs of treatment are very reasonable, as is the consultation fee.  For this reason I would never dream of asking for a prescription and going elsewhere, even if it would mean financial benefit to me.  If all the clients did this other costs would have to go up to recoup the income, so it's likely any benefit in getting cheaper drugs elsewhere would be negated by having other vet costs rise.  I'm pleased that we have the sort of vets available that the pensioner round the corner can also take her dog to and not have to fret about the cost.  If me buying drugs there is subsidising this, than I'm happy to continue doing so.

That being said, I once thought I would price up wormers on the internet but then discovered that the vets charged the same price as the cheapest ones I could find online! :D

Lesley

"If your vet says he does not need to see the dog for 3 months I think it is reasonable to ask him for a prescription for that length of time".
I think by law the maximum amount allowed is 2 months worth, most vets only dispense a month at a time though.

I didn't know there was such a law, is that just veterinary?.  I've had 3 months worth of the OCP in the past although admittedly not for some time :D  I think if there is such a law it will be to ensure proper reassessment is done at regular occasions.
Even if you are calling in at the surgery for a prescription after any period of time, though, you should expect to pay for the time it takes to look up records, consider if it is still appropriate and write you out a prescription.
I would really prefer a straight and fair system ie each component of veterinary care is paid for not some thing being disallowed to be charged only to be permitted to add to the charges for something else then everyone knows where they are and it is all above board.

for long term medication- the animal needs to be seen every 6 months, thats if the animal is on it till he/she dies.

the client chooses to come and collect monthly- then they can be asked casually- hows he/she doing? if client is worried they can book appointment earlier than the 6 month mark of course, but if all is well then they can carry on with meds and make sure the vet see's patient every6 months- this is done to check health, reassess meds and dosage etc.

Our vet has a notice in the waiting area regarding this change. They are not charging for the prescriptions ( I don't think they are allowed to anyway), only say that if it is an ongoing condition then the animal will have to be seen every 6 months before prescription will be re-issued. The charge for that consultation will be £26.00.

They have also listed the top 10 prescribed drugs and what they charge.

Out of interest and because I have had so many items recently ( prescription and non prescription). I have checked out the online costs and found that although the vet does charge more, this saving is reduced once postage costs are taken in to account, so no real saving.
The only area where a saving could be made was for worming tablets which are postage free!