Brexit : UK dog with EU passport - how to enter EU?
Discussion
HocusPocus said:
Know Your Customer. That means copy of passport certified with true likeness of picture by lawyer/accountant/banker/notary plus proof of address using original utility bill less than 3 months old or annual rates bill. Where funds are received, information on the source of funds, eg information on occupation etc.
Recently had to present photo ID at the solicitors. We were wearing masks the whole time!We have Iris a GSD she is a rescue dog we got when we lived in France.
She has a french pet passport
All numbers match
Looking at the. Gov advice she is ok to travel to europe using this.
Bit I am cinfused about is the rabies jab.
It was dine in France and expires next year.
Does it have to be given in france for the passport to still be valid?
She has a french pet passport
All numbers match
Looking at the. Gov advice she is ok to travel to europe using this.
Bit I am cinfused about is the rabies jab.
It was dine in France and expires next year.
Does it have to be given in france for the passport to still be valid?
Thevet said:
No sir, mine is not a mistaken assumption, The vet involved, identified a client and a dog, decided that the legal document was incorrect by one digit and so rewrote a legal document to expedite something they probably had no evidence to corroborate. There is no debate about that within this post. He did that to enable someone to reenter the uk without no proof of rabies vaccination, nor animal identity.
That is "fact" within this deabte. My reply to the post was not lacking in lucidity, nor short in unabashed anger, it was dismayed by people choose to disregard the rules when it suits them.
Unless you were there and personally witnessed the entire episode and everything that happened in the lead up to the final decision by the Portuguese vet to reissue the pet passport, I'm sorry to say that it is you who has no proof of anything. The OP has given a brief account of what's happened, some of it behind closed doors. They may well have missed out small but vital details, seemingly unimportant to an owner but crucial to the bureaucracy of the paperwork. You have no idea. Yet you're making statements about your opinion being fact in this debate. It isn't, it's just your interpretation and your opinion, nothing more than that. That is "fact" within this deabte. My reply to the post was not lacking in lucidity, nor short in unabashed anger, it was dismayed by people choose to disregard the rules when it suits them.
Thevet said:
Anyway, with understatement,I'm not wrong, someone didn't do their job and then someone rewrote a legal document ===WRONG
You may well find that you are wrong. Don't they teach you lot in vet school that you're not infallible? They certainly did to us in medical school. You're no different, you're no better or worse at making mistakes, and you also get it wrong on a regular basis just like all humans do. If, as you claim, the Portuguese vet was wrong, how do you propose the error would be rectified? Where an error can exist, a protocol to correct the error also exists. If such a protocol doesn't exist, that in itself is an error that needs to be rectified... What exactly are the rules to rectify the error as described by the OP? Destroy the animal? Separate the pet from its owner? What paperwork is required? And how do you know the vet did not acquire the necessary documents and information since you were not present there at the time?
At times we can all benefit from a little humility and an acceptance that even if we are experts in a subject, we can still make mistakes in our fields of expertise.
QuickQuack said:
You may well find that you are wrong. Don't they teach you lot in vet school that you're not infallible? They certainly did to us in medical school. You're no different, you're no better or worse at making mistakes, and you also get it wrong on a regular basis just like all humans do.
If, as you claim, the Portuguese vet was wrong, how do you propose the error would be rectified? Where an error can exist, a protocol to correct the error also exists. If such a protocol doesn't exist, that in itself is an error that needs to be rectified... What exactly are the rules to rectify the error as described by the OP? Destroy the animal? Separate the pet from its owner? What paperwork is required? And how do you know the vet did not acquire the necessary documents and information since you were not present there at the time?
At times we can all benefit from a little humility and an acceptance that even if we are experts in a subject, we can still make mistakes in our fields of expertise.
What has happened previously at great expense to client and insurers, is that the dog stays in the EU, get's revaccinated and after 30 days. resampled to confirm positive blood titre, and can then re-enter UK. It is a huge nuisance and has happened a few times. I do appreciate that there may have been conversations behind closed doors which I am not privy to, but it still officially was against the law. If, as you claim, the Portuguese vet was wrong, how do you propose the error would be rectified? Where an error can exist, a protocol to correct the error also exists. If such a protocol doesn't exist, that in itself is an error that needs to be rectified... What exactly are the rules to rectify the error as described by the OP? Destroy the animal? Separate the pet from its owner? What paperwork is required? And how do you know the vet did not acquire the necessary documents and information since you were not present there at the time?
At times we can all benefit from a little humility and an acceptance that even if we are experts in a subject, we can still make mistakes in our fields of expertise.
What documents are there that you can think of that would change a microchip number in a passport that cannot be changed? There is no accepted way to alter a passport, that is why there are made in such a way that you cannot overwrite any of the critical details. This is what we are taught is the way to do it, with the reasoning of why. This was an innocent but negligent mistake by the issuing UK vet, which was sorted in a fashion that ignores the international rules.
And yes I completely accept that I am as fallible as the next person, but breaking the law in this way is unacceptable. The personal consequences for the pet and owner are poor, but the rules/guidance are there for a reason. Humility?? probably a failing for me, but I hope my integrity stands the test of time.
From a certifying vet point of view, this is an obvious failing/disaster, but from a public forum view, it got a pet of uncertain identity (to the authorities) back to its home. Anyway, I'm off this subject now.
QuickQuack said:
You may well find that you are wrong. Don't they teach you lot in vet school that you're not infallible? They certainly did to us in medical school. You're no different, you're no better or worse at making mistakes, and you also get it wrong on a regular basis just like all humans do.
Doctors and vets, pah! Infallibility and humility was beaten out of us as law students. Stunted humanity was also a necessary law school entry qualification.... ;-)
Thevet said:
What has happened previously at great expense to client and insurers, is that the dog stays in the EU, get's revaccinated and after 30 days. resampled to confirm positive blood titre, and can then re-enter UK. It is a huge nuisance and has happened a few times. I do appreciate that there may have been conversations behind closed doors which I am not privy to, but it still officially was against the law.
What documents are there that you can think of that would change a microchip number in a passport that cannot be changed? There is no accepted way to alter a passport, that is why there are made in such a way that you cannot overwrite any of the critical details. This is what we are taught is the way to do it, with the reasoning of why. This was an innocent but negligent mistake by the issuing UK vet, which was sorted in a fashion that ignores the international rules.
And yes I completely accept that I am as fallible as the next person, but breaking the law in this way is unacceptable. The personal consequences for the pet and owner are poor, but the rules/guidance are there for a reason. Humility?? probably a failing for me, but I hope my integrity stands the test of time.
From a certifying vet point of view, this is an obvious failing/disaster, but from a public forum view, it got a pet of uncertain identity (to the authorities) back to its home. Anyway, I'm off this subject now.
Now you've explained it in more detail, it makes much more sense, thank you. If the events happened as described by the OP, then I now fully understand, accept and agree with you that the rules and laws have been broken. I also agree with you on integrity and I would not have tried to circumvent the rules either, not as an owner and most certainly not as a professional, however costly that may have been. What documents are there that you can think of that would change a microchip number in a passport that cannot be changed? There is no accepted way to alter a passport, that is why there are made in such a way that you cannot overwrite any of the critical details. This is what we are taught is the way to do it, with the reasoning of why. This was an innocent but negligent mistake by the issuing UK vet, which was sorted in a fashion that ignores the international rules.
And yes I completely accept that I am as fallible as the next person, but breaking the law in this way is unacceptable. The personal consequences for the pet and owner are poor, but the rules/guidance are there for a reason. Humility?? probably a failing for me, but I hope my integrity stands the test of time.
From a certifying vet point of view, this is an obvious failing/disaster, but from a public forum view, it got a pet of uncertain identity (to the authorities) back to its home. Anyway, I'm off this subject now.
Thevet said:
From a certifying vet point of view, this is an obvious failing/disaster, but from a public forum view, it got a pet of uncertain identity (to the authorities) back to its home. Anyway, I'm off this subject now.
A dog with the 'wrong' passport is just like a dog without a passport. Any EU vet can issue a new one. There's no illegal modifying of documents going on.The thing which isn't entirely clear is what proof a vet needs to enter the old vaccination details on the new passport. I believe this is allowed, as otherwise you're going to get double-vaccinated animals. If he can get vaccination proof from the original vet, showing the (correct) microchip ID, I think the EU vet is allowed to enter them on the passport.
silentbrown said:
A dog with the 'wrong' passport is just like a dog without a passport. Any EU vet can issue a new one. There's no illegal modifying of documents going on.
The thing which isn't entirely clear is what proof a vet needs to enter the old vaccination details on the new passport. I believe this is allowed, as otherwise you're going to get double-vaccinated animals. If he can get vaccination proof from the original vet, showing the (correct) microchip ID, I think the EU vet is allowed to enter them on the passport.
I think this section from Thevet's response is the crucial bit, and yes, there would be multi-vaccinated animals as already mentioned in the post:The thing which isn't entirely clear is what proof a vet needs to enter the old vaccination details on the new passport. I believe this is allowed, as otherwise you're going to get double-vaccinated animals. If he can get vaccination proof from the original vet, showing the (correct) microchip ID, I think the EU vet is allowed to enter them on the passport.
Thevet said:
What has happened previously at great expense to client and insurers, is that the dog stays in the EU, get's revaccinated and after 30 days. resampled to confirm positive blood titre, and can then re-enter UK.
I may not know much about animal passports but obtaining an animal passport isn't just a matter of turning up with a bunch of documents at a random vet and getting a passport on the same day, I know that much! In addition, rules about entry of animals to the UK are much stricter than most EU countries as we don't have rabies on these shores. When my family moved back to the UK in 1991, our dog had to stay in quarantine for 6 months as dog passports didn't exist in those days. I totally understand Thevet's frustration, it's infuriating to see people breaking the rules in your field of expertise, especially when they're fellow professionals.Gassing Station | All Creatures Great & Small | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff