Big business vets

[Boosted LS1]

untakenname said:

My cat suddenly needs her teeth out after going for a routine checkup and I'd rather she retains them as sometimes scuffles with foxes, is it worth getting a second opinion?

Cats use their claws to fight. Their bite would be useless against a fox. If she has dental isues those need addressing. Foxes and cats usually give eachother a respectful distance as neither want to risk an eye injury for no real reason.

[African Grey]

Doofus said:

Not only do the 'big' name vets charge more, but they do unneccessary work. They are very keen to remove cats' teeth, for example, which earns them money and has very little negative effect on the cat.

Had to take my parrot the vet but she was on a maternity leave so found another local practice that can treat birds, eventually the bird was diagnosed with cancer that could not be treated so it was only palliative treatment. The vet demanded that I bring the bird every 3 months for a check otherwise they won't provide the medicine, when I protested (as it caused the bird lots of stress) I was told that this is a demand of the Vets regulator. One day I ran out of medicine 3-4 days before the 3 monthly visit, I have asked for the med but was refused so had to take the bird to an emergency provider. Luckily, few weeks later the regular vet returned from her leave and when I mentioned the 3 monthly checks she did not understand why because the rule is a check every 6 months.

I will never take any of my animals to the Big name vets (unless have no another option) and especially to the one that was on Watch Dog few years ago.

[ChocolateFrog]

Doofus said:

Not only do the 'big' name vets charge more, but they do unneccessary work. They are very keen to remove cats' teeth, for example, which earns them money and has very little negative effect on the cat.

Exactly this.

My dog picked up a virus a couple of years ago, in hindsight he would have got through it fine in a week or so but they managed to get £300 odd quid out of me for 3 lots of antibiotics/ anti inflammatory injections and most annoyingly of all about £30 for some special food that "he'd definitely love". Obviously he didn't touch it and I've never been back since.

When he was castrated I asked them to remove his dew claws that were only attached by skin, which they did but when the bill came they charged for two lots of anaesthetic, "because it's two proceedures" they didn't get away with that one.

That reminds me I must register him at another vets.

[8bit]

Thevet said:

8bit said:

I appreciate everything that "thevet" has said and I sympathise but from this side of the situation it appears very much like pet care and indeed the pets themselves are becoming commoditised by the larger corporations. Our pets are part of our family and I for one won't have them treated as part of the revenue stream of a large corporation in order to extract as much money from our pet insurance company as possible.

You are of course entitled to yout view of the situation, but park this thought on the situation in your mind for a few years, as the general nature of the vets qualifying changes from animal lovers who are motivated to work for their clients and patients towards high flyers who can't take the strain of expectation and demand, and have to accept that a four day week with no on-call requires greater cost to the patient, then you will find that it is not the corporates who are screwing the clients. If you are able to get out of your bed for a client who often doesn't pay but expects everything, then you should have been a vet.
The profession is changing along with society, soon due to the nature of incoming vet graduates, you will struggle to find a vet. Many practices are struggling with staff and the pressure of modern life, vetting and expectations.
If you think that your vets are ripping you off, then please please vote with your feet

I'm not sure I'm reading your post correctly but it sounds like maybe along the lines of "the whole vet industry is going this way so we should just suck up the higher costs and lower standard of care"?

[ChocolateFrog]

8bit said:

Thevet said:

8bit said:

I appreciate everything that "thevet" has said and I sympathise but from this side of the situation it appears very much like pet care and indeed the pets themselves are becoming commoditised by the larger corporations. Our pets are part of our family and I for one won't have them treated as part of the revenue stream of a large corporation in order to extract as much money from our pet insurance company as possible.

You are of course entitled to yout view of the situation, but park this thought on the situation in your mind for a few years, as the general nature of the vets qualifying changes from animal lovers who are motivated to work for their clients and patients towards high flyers who can't take the strain of expectation and demand, and have to accept that a four day week with no on-call requires greater cost to the patient, then you will find that it is not the corporates who are screwing the clients. If you are able to get out of your bed for a client who often doesn't pay but expects everything, then you should have been a vet.
The profession is changing along with society, soon due to the nature of incoming vet graduates, you will struggle to find a vet. Many practices are struggling with staff and the pressure of modern life, vetting and expectations.
If you think that your vets are ripping you off, then please please vote with your feet

I'm not sure I'm reading your post correctly but it sounds like maybe along the lines of "the whole vet industry is going this way so we should just suck up the higher costs and lower standard of care"?

The only Vets I know personally no longer practice, IIRC they only did it for a few years but they went to Cambridge which I get the feeling is a bit different and is treated by some as more if a generic degree from a good uni that's used as a stepping stone to do other things.

Annoying when it's such a desirable profession and they effectively throw it away after a couple of years.

[Thevet]

ChocolateFrog said:

8bit said:

Thevet said:

8bit said:

I appreciate everything that "thevet" has said and I sympathise but from this side of the situation it appears very much like pet care and indeed the pets themselves are becoming commoditised by the larger corporations. Our pets are part of our family and I for one won't have them treated as part of the revenue stream of a large corporation in order to extract as much money from our pet insurance company as possible.

You are of course entitled to yout view of the situation, but park this thought on the situation in your mind for a few years, as the general nature of the vets qualifying changes from animal lovers who are motivated to work for their clients and patients towards high flyers who can't take the strain of expectation and demand, and have to accept that a four day week with no on-call requires greater cost to the patient, then you will find that it is not the corporates who are screwing the clients. If you are able to get out of your bed for a client who often doesn't pay but expects everything, then you should have been a vet.
The profession is changing along with society, soon due to the nature of incoming vet graduates, you will struggle to find a vet. Many practices are struggling with staff and the pressure of modern life, vetting and expectations.
If you think that your vets are ripping you off, then please please vote with your feet

I'm not sure I'm reading your post correctly but it sounds like maybe along the lines of "the whole vet industry is going this way so we should just suck up the higher costs and lower standard of care"?

The only Vets I know personally no longer practice, IIRC they only did it for a few years but they went to Cambridge which I get the feeling is a bit different and is treated by some as more if a generic degree from a good uni that's used as a stepping stone to do other things.

Annoying when it's such a desirable profession and they effectively throw it away after a couple of years.

Annoying when it's such a desirable profession and they effectively throw it away after a couple of years.

Well as a cambridge graduate, I really don't agree and feel that the achievement of a desirable degree is no different from the other vet schools, I like many vets, have dedicated my career and life to this job, many, in fact too many vet graduates are very unsutable to cope with the stress of this calling, amongst that stress is the expectations from the public.
I think you are not getting the point of my post, I certainly do not mean the public should have to suck up the change. If you want different, then you will have to accept reasonable pricing, and you should be prepared to vote with your feet if you don't like the service you receive. I also really object to the suggestion that you suggest lower standards of care or unnecessary testing is carried out, many of the advances in the level of care have been driven by public expectation (of us being your local supervet) so please embrace it, discuss it, and even disagree with it but understand why it is offered.
"such a desiable profession"?? what is good about being on call 24/7, being grumbled at for charging for our expertise, and then finding you don't get a suitable reward. Many professions get better pay, don't work on call and weekends.......so today's vets don't want to do this, what a surprise.

[8bit]

Thevet said:

Well as a cambridge graduate, I really don't agree and feel that the achievement of a desirable degree is no different from the other vet schools, I like many vets, have dedicated my career and life to this job, many, in fact too many vet graduates are very unsutable to cope with the stress of this calling, amongst that stress is the expectations from the public.
I think you are not getting the point of my post, I certainly do not mean the public should have to suck up the change. If you want different, then you will have to accept reasonable pricing, and you should be prepared to vote with your feet if you don't like the service you receive. I also really object to the suggestion that you suggest lower standards of care or unnecessary testing is carried out, many of the advances in the level of care have been driven by public expectation (of us being your local supervet) so please embrace it, discuss it, and even disagree with it but understand why it is offered.
"such a desiable profession"?? what is good about being on call 24/7, being grumbled at for charging for our expertise, and then finding you don't get a suitable reward. Many professions get better pay, don't work on call and weekends.......so today's vets don't want to do this, what a surprise.

I personally have no problem with paying the proper costs for the care of my pets, and I don't think anyone else on this thread so far would disagree; the issue most have had is that their previously independent vet practice gets acquired by a large multinational corporation and suddenly the fees are increased significantly and in many cases the standard of care appears to drop - I can't see how that wouldn't stick in anyone's gullet. Obviously a large firm will have greater overheads perhaps than a small one but equally they'll have better buying power and economies of scale so it's hard to see how that's not simple profiteering, especially when said "new" vet suddenly starts telling you that your pet needs <insert list of previously un-discussed of treatment here>.

Many clients will have pet insurance in place and I realise this may sound cynical but I have wondered sometimes if the large firms push these clients harder because they know the client will just let the insurance pick up the bill. Perhaps that's overly cynical on my part though.

Sounds to me like you had enough of the sort of treatment from clients that you suggest many new or trainee vets find it hard to cope with from the outset - if that's correct then I'm sorry to hear that but not all clients are unreasonable people.

[Thevet]

8bit said:

I personally have no problem with paying the proper costs for the care of my pets, and I don't think anyone else on this thread so far would disagree.

Many clients will have pet insurance in place and I realise this may sound cynical but I have wondered sometimes if the large firms push these clients harder because they know the client will just let the insurance pick up the bill. Perhaps that's overly cynical on my part though.

Sounds to me like you had enough of the sort of treatment from clients that you suggest many new or trainee vets find it hard to cope with from the outset - if that's correct then I'm sorry to hear that but not all clients are unreasonable people.

So, no intentional suggestion that most clients don't want to pay reasonable prices for reasonable service.
Insured clients are not targeted for higher cost, nor for extra options, they are options but have to be justified to client and insurer, many people don't question what is offered though.
I "love" most of my clients, I have virtually lived for them, but there are A-holes in every area, so there are some I have removed from the practice over the years, usually the sort that say "do whatever it takes, I don't care about the cost"! Most of my clients are brilliant, those that don't like us have left for the cheap practice 8-10 miles away, where there are no nurses nor in house blood test machines/digital xrays etc etc

[African Grey]

Thevet said:

Well as a cambridge graduate, I really don't agree and feel that the achievement of a desirable degree is no different from the other vet schools, I like many vets, have dedicated my career and life to this job, many, in fact too many vet graduates are very unsutable to cope with the stress of this calling, amongst that stress is the expectations from the public.
I think you are not getting the point of my post, I certainly do not mean the public should have to suck up the change. If you want different, then you will have to accept reasonable pricing, and you should be prepared to vote with your feet if you don't like the service you receive. I also really object to the suggestion that you suggest lower standards of care or unnecessary testing is carried out, many of the advances in the level of care have been driven by public expectation (of us being your local supervet) so please embrace it, discuss it, and even disagree with it but understand why it is offered.
"such a desiable profession"?? what is good about being on call 24/7, being grumbled at for charging for our expertise, and then finding you don't get a suitable reward. Many professions get better pay, don't work on call and weekends.......so today's vets don't want to do this, what a surprise.

My vet works 3 days a week, and I think that this is true to the other PAYE vets, the two owners are there 5 days a week. The treatment and commitment is second to none and the pricing is although not very cheap but way cheaper than the big name, so is the service. In an emergency the Royal Vet is not too far.

I agree with you that it is a very tough and demanding position but even in a rural are there can be a workable solution, but I guess that I know what you mean, the "You Owe Syndrome".

[8bit]

Thevet said:

So, no intentional suggestion that most clients don't want to pay reasonable prices for reasonable service.
Insured clients are not targeted for higher cost, nor for extra options, they are options but have to be justified to client and insurer, many people don't question what is offered though.
I "love" most of my clients, I have virtually lived for them, but there are A-holes in every area, so there are some I have removed from the practice over the years, usually the sort that say "do whatever it takes, I don't care about the cost"! Most of my clients are brilliant, those that don't like us have left for the cheap practice 8-10 miles away, where there are no nurses nor in house blood test machines/digital xrays etc etc

I wasn't suggesting for a nanosecond that you would have milked insured clients, just voicing a sense that I'm getting about these practices that are owned by large, commercially-motivated organisations. I'm not alone in this regard either, I posted a thread here a few months ago about this very subject and got a lot of familiar stories. When I worked out which company had acquired our previous practice I did some googling and found some fairly telling tales about their business practices on glassdoor.com, the site for current and former employee reviews of companies. The running theme seemed to be that they pushed their staff hard to upsell and cross-sell via referrals etc. and that certainly matched our experience of the practice after they were acquired.

[Thevet]

8bit said:

I wasn't suggesting for a nanosecond that you would have milked insured clients, just voicing a sense that I'm getting about these practices that are owned by large, commercially-motivated organisations. I'm not alone in this regard either, I posted a thread here a few months ago about this very subject and got a lot of familiar stories. When I worked out which company had acquired our previous practice I did some googling and found some fairly telling tales about their business practices on glassdoor.com, the site for current and former employee reviews of companies. The running theme seemed to be that they pushed their staff hard to upsell and cross-sell via referrals etc. and that certainly matched our experience of the practice after they were acquired.

Well, I sold to Independent Vet Care/IVC and we can still set our prices and policies, even if the company position is different, it's just a case of saying "this is what will happen, if you don't need me, I can leave from which you will lose" it works and just takes some belief in what you have done for the last 35 years, if it was so wrong, then why did you buy the practice.
Anyway, this is business, it has been my business for the last 30 years (and my predecessor here had a reputation for quite aggressive price updates) so it should contribute to my life and retirement, I've built it up from a 500k p.a. turnover to 3million, from 5 vets to 12, zero nurses to 6, and now there are a good bunch coming on to take up the baton. I hope it will continue to offer top class services for a fee that reflects our expertise and investment.

[rpguk]

My local vet was sold to Medivet - they kept their old branding and were (and still are) very opaque about the whole situation. There's a small bit of text in the window with the ltd name on it but that's about it. Companies House details the actual sale yet the receptionist bullstted me and when challenged the founder acted like it was nothing.

I only looked into it when the regular annual check-up became a huge fishing expedition looking for problems. Funnily enough I moved to this practice when my previous vet went through a similar trajectory. The local dog groups on facebook have lots of people who have had similar stories.

I'm now back with a non-VC backed vet and my dog has had 2 annual check-ups that cost less and resulted in a clean bill of health and some friendly advice on things to keep an eye on.

The major concerns the last bunch flagged which had ££££ of testing - clearly not fun for my dog but apparently fine as the insurance would pay - were resolved with eye drops.

With the huge payouts offered I don't blame vets for selling up. But that money comes from somewhere. You might have more pet ownership leading to more 'sales', you might have some savings from consolidation but at the end of the day if you can take a £120 check up and upsell £500 of 'testing' well that's how you fatten the goose (in unrelated news https://www.business-sale.com/news/business-sale/v... )

Edited by rpguk on Wednesday 23 June 19:01

[Thevet]

rpguk said:

The major concerns the last bunch flagged which had ££££ of testing - clearly not fun for my dog but apparently fine as the insurance would pay - were resolved with eye drops.

With the huge payouts offered I don't blame vets for selling up. But that money comes from somewhere. You might have more pet ownership leading to more 'sales', you might have some savings from consolidation but at the end of the day if you can take a £120 check up and upsell £500 of 'testing' well that's how you fatten the goose (in unrelated news https://www.business-sale.com/news/business-sale/v... )

Edited by rpguk on Wednesday 23 June 19:01

Not quite sure what the first bit of your post means, but obviously you feel money overruled your pet's health.
Huge payouts?? how much is huge when you have worked your arse off and put up with doctors, dentists, architects, lawyers, financial advisers, in fact every other profession (which also never does out of hours) gets more than you, and you still get treated as though you should have to do everything for nothing. Anyway, £120 check up is ste, £500 testing equally so, so therefore, vote with your feet and let your vet know they are actually worth having.
Good night

[gl20]

Can only throw in one nugget from the business side. I’m in no way involved in the profession but trained as a Chartered Accountant way back. I had two vet clients and remember with one of them that, aside from the regular audit, we always had an additional piece of work to review and write off a significant amount of customer debt each year ie for whatever reason, large numbers of customers couldn’t or wouldn’t settle up. I had no other clients, in any sector, that warranted this much focus on debtors. So the point made that many people seem to consider them a charity does resonate.

On a lighter note I do remember seeing a pet care document for a tortoise where ‘lethargy’ was noted as a key symptom. Have often wondered how they could tell..!

[Gretchen]

gl20 said:

Can only throw in one nugget from the business side. I’m in no way involved in the profession but trained as a Chartered Accountant way back. I had two vet clients and remember with one of them that, aside from the regular audit, we always had an additional piece of work to review and write off a significant amount of customer debt each year ie for whatever reason, large numbers of customers couldn’t or wouldn’t settle up. I had no other clients, in any sector, that warranted this much focus on debtors. So the point made that many people seem to consider them a charity does resonate.

On a lighter note I do remember seeing a pet care document for a tortoise where ‘lethargy’ was noted as a key symptom. Have often wondered how they could tell..!

I applied for an admin job with a corporate vet a few years ago. At the interview I was quite taken aback at the attitude toward money by the company. A lot of focus on taking payment / credit card before the appointment, A LOT of debt chasing (a client will do anything to save their pet but don’t always realise the cost and have the funds to pay) not only this but there was a big focus on ‘sales’ too with targets to be met. Walked away feeling quite saddened by it all and deciding it wasn’t somewhere I wanted to work.

I use several vet practices, for both my personal and my voluntary work, and just one is still small family run business. My family have used them since the ‘70s and have had and still receive wonderful service at reasonable prices with realistic opinions. Also interesting how these change if you don’t have insurance.

[Thevet]

Gretchen said:

Also interesting how these change if you don’t have insurance.

meaning?