Some advice for my friend please

hethmar

If you say there is already litigation ongoing for negligence against this firm, then I think your friend should engage the same solicitor and go for it. They have falsified their records and apparently charged for an overnight stay which didnt happen. I cant see why she isnt going at it hell for leather, I certainly would be.

hethmar

Macdexter, why are you spamming a law practice in the states??

Paradigm

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I am truly saddened to read that a b*t*h and her pups suffered, but I don't think grief alone is a reason to try to ruin someone's career, to put a professional under the strain of dealing with a formal complaint or legal action. IMO it would be better for your friend to honour the memory of the lost pups by drawing something positive from something negative: to educate friends, relatives and colleagues so that this tragedy is not repeated?

I'm of the totally opposite opinion! It's got nothing to do with "ruining someones career"... to be honest, if the OPs account is true & the advice given by a "professional" is as described, then said "professional" doesn't deserve the letters MRCVS after their name!

To leave a dog in labour for anything like 48hrs is scandalous & the fact the OPs friend contacted the Vet(s) on at least 6 occasions (possibly more) makes it even worse!

Yes let's take something positive from this, find another vet!

Fire_Fox wrote: »

You should not be throwing words like negligent around - not on MSE nor with your friend as the language is inflammatory and can get you into hot water.

Negligence, Malpractice... I can think of far worse words to chuck about in this case! I'd be sending a formal letter of complaint &, if no satisfaction, I'd be issuing court proceedings in a heartbeat!

Quite how anyone can even try to defend the Vet here is beyond me, it's negligence... no other word for it!

blue_monkey_2

Hi all, I have amended my post because she is speaking to a solicitor today and complaining to RVCS too.

Macdexter

happy35 wrote: »

http://www.bva.co.uk
http://www.rcvs.org.uk/home/

these may be able to help you

These links are nice!

Fire_Fox

Paradigm wrote: »

I'm of the totally opposite opinion! It's got nothing to do with "ruining someones career"... to be honest, if the OPs account is true & the advice given by a "professional" is as described, then said "professional" doesn't deserve the letters MRCVS after their name!

To leave a dog in labour for anything like 48hrs is scandalous & the fact the OPs friend contacted the Vet(s) on at least 6 occasions (possibly more) makes it even worse!

Yes let's take something positive from this, find another vet!

Try reading what I actually wrote instead of what you wrongly inferred from it. I said "... grief alone is [not] a reason to try to ruin someone's career, to put a professional under the strain of dealing with a formal complaint or legal action." Emboldened for clarity.

You can take something positive from any situation by learning from the situation and teaching others how to avoid making the same errors. The OP's friend is hardly blameless, she did not do her own research and did not plan her finances ahead of the birth. Does that excuse the vet from falsifying records? Absolutely not, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Paradigm wrote: »

Negligence, Malpractice... I can think of far worse words to chuck about in this case! I'd be sending a formal letter of complaint &, if no satisfaction, I'd be issuing court proceedings in a heartbeat!

Quite how anyone can even try to defend the Vet here is beyond me, it's negligence... no other word for it!

Once again, try reading what I actually wrote instead of what you you wrongly inferred from it. There is no defence of the vet only trying to look at the case with dispassionate eyes which is exactly what any solicitor, magistrate or veterinary body would do. At this stage negligence/ malpractice IS lay opinion and would NOT stand up in court without expert backing. Chucking that sort of language around can be deemed to be slanderous or libellous, what exactly is the benefit to risking a counter claim? Why do you finish every sentence with an exclamation mark?

Paradigm

As the OP hasn't posted on this thread for over a month this is all a bit "off topic" but hey ho....

Fire_Fox wrote: »

You can take something positive from any situation by learning from the situation and teaching others how to avoid making the same errors. The OP's friend is hardly blameless, she did not do her own research and did not plan her finances ahead of the birth. Does that excuse the vet from falsifying records? Absolutely not, the two are not mutually exclusive.

I'm not sure how the OPs friend not planning her finances is relevent, they were being guided by the vet(s).... having plenty of money wouldn't have changed the advice given would it? I agree that a little research would (maybe) have helped but when anyone visits a vet they assume that the advice/treatment given is correct & follow it accordingly.

Fire_Fox wrote: »

At this stage negligence/ malpractice IS lay opinion and would NOT stand up in court without expert backing. Chucking that sort of language around can be deemed to be slanderous or libellous, what exactly is the benefit to risking a counter claim? Why do you finish every sentence with an exclamation mark?

Of course it's lay opinion, mine to be precise & I make no apology for it. Would it stand up in court? Who knows but given what I remember from the OPs original post (sadly now edited) I would say there is a very good chance of damages being awarded.

If the Ops facts are accurate then the vet(s) are on a hiding to nothing. Leaving a dog in labour for 48hrs is whatever you want to call it, I'll call it negligence & risk a libel action. Falsifying records only adds weight to the claim & kinda proves the vet was wrong don't you think?

For the record I went through something a similar thing 4 years ago & a very strongly worded letter, including the "N" word, meant a settlement without any court action.

Now doing a check for exclamation marks...... nope, not one