Money Grabbing Vet!!!

looby75

marleyboy wrote: »

Vets are hero's as much as Doctors and surgeons. Id much rather take my dog to a vet that I have more faith in their abilities.

one of my BILs sisters is a vet, if he's ever ill he goes to see his sister. Obviously she can't treat him but he only ever sees a GP after seeing her first and checks back with her to confirm what his GP has said. His reasoning is it takes longer to become a vet than a GP and if they can test human treatments on animals then vets must know more than doctors I can kind of see his logic.

smartsuit

Well it seems thaere has been a lot of activity on this thread during my absence, and especially since the RCVS declared the case closed.
I would like to just confirm a small fact though.
Although the RCVS have closed the case with no action here is a copy of the letter received from them explaining the reasons. It seems that it is clear that Daisy was mistreated but the actions of the "Vet" were not serious enough to warrant him being struck off, and as that is the only course of action they can take they had to close the case.
I would like to add that Daisy has now recovered fully and you would never believe that she ever had broken her leg. I cannot thank Summerhill Vets, Newport enough for thier professionalism and compassion. They truly are a credit to themselves and the profession.

dangeroussports

smartsuit,

Shame on you.

Infact, just like a car, no one should be allowed to keep a pet unless they have insurance.

This wouldnt of happened had you had insurance. You too are partly responsible for your pets pain.

smartsuit

dangeroussports wrote: »

smartsuit,

Shame on you.

Infact, just like a car, no one should be allowed to keep a pet unless they have insurance.

This wouldnt of happened had you had insurance. You too are partly responsible for your pets pain.

Like a car, no one should be allowed to use this forum without a license. What a handy thing the ignore button is

superscaper

dangeroussports wrote: »

This wouldnt of happened had you had insurance.

But didn't I read on this thread that some vetinary practices still require you to pay upfront yourself and then claim the money off the insurance company later? If that happened here then the OP would be in the exact same position of not having enough cashflow at that instant even with insurance.

dangeroussports

smartsuit wrote: »

Like a car, no one should be allowed to use this forum without a license. What a handy thing the ignore button is

OH my god...this proves my theory. Again the OP has buried her head in the sand.

I rest my case.

Lavendyr

smartsuit wrote: »

Like a car, no one should be allowed to use this forum without a license. What a handy thing the ignore button is

Indeed, I can imagine that said poster is probably on a lot of ignore lists, mine included.

Thank you for posting that letter, it clarifies the situation and was interesting to read.

superscaper

dangeroussports wrote: »

Again the OP has buried her head in the sand.

I think the OP is just tired of your trolling.

dangeroussports

Just because I make a controversial point people start to ignore me.

Nothing to do with trolling.

Just because i didnt say 'bad vet naughty vet' and 'poor daisy poor poor daisy'.


Seems as though people refuse to acknowledge their own issues but are quick to point the finger at the vet.

Tut tut

superscaper

dangeroussports wrote: »

Just because i didnt say 'bad vet naughty vet' and 'poor daisy poor poor daisy'.

Neither did I but I don't deliberately try to make inflammatory remarks about posters and rather hypocritical to accuse others of pointing the finger and being judgemental.