Money Grabbing Vet!!!

slinks

steph25 wrote: »

everyone is entitled to their own opinion. actually.

i, for one, think you are a muppet for being so rude to me

so, you agree that i'm an a r $ e, but then i think you're a muppet - yay! it's just like infant school again!

can't afford pet insurance? then you can't afford a pet. simple. even to a simpleton like you sweetie :rolleyes:

grow up. people can have their own opinions. we're in modern day england for chrissakes.

Labman_2

smartsuit wrote: »

....We were able to pay £60 now and would more than likely be in the posistion to pay in full upon collecting the dog....

So the vet would have had to take a chance on you being able to pay?

Can I ask why you didn't have insurance or hadn't factored vet bills into the responsibility of owning pets so that you could pay for treatment? IMHO being able to pay vet bills is a big, big part of the responsibility of owning pets...again IMHO you failed your pets. You are responsible for your pets not the vet.

dangeroussports

A friend of mine paid £1800 for his cat to be fixed with a maybe attached to it.

It cost him a further £250 to have it killed after the maybe turned into a 'no chance'.

Personally I wouldnt gamble with £1800. £250 sounds like a sensible option and he could of brought another cat!

But then again I dont treat pets as family members/children or lovers!

steph25

Slinks everyone is entitled to their own opinion. actually.

i, for one, think you are a muppet for being so rude to me

so, you agree that i'm an a r $ e, but then i think you're a muppet - yay! it's just like infant school again!

can't afford pet insurance? then you can't afford a pet. simple. even to a simpleton like you sweetie :rolleyes:

grow up. people can have their own opinions. we're in modern day england for chrissakes

.

Humm, you must be very very bored...
1.I have not been rude, I pointed out the facts which you ignored..how is that being rude?
2.Did I insult you or "call you names"? no I did not.I said you have been rude and sarcastic in your replies, thats what you have been so how is that being rude?
3.Maybe you should read your replies from the start of this thread as if you were in the op's position, I think you would topple off your high horse pretty quickly.
4.You have been rude, agressive, pendantic and extremely childish even saying that the op does not care for the pet!
5.The whole issue was not about insurance, it was and still is, about a vet that has ignored the guidelines set out.
6.I must be a muppet because I deffinatly think your an @ss :cool:
7.I can not be bothered to waste by time typing this message because you will do what you have done on this whole thread ie take out bits you choose to see and turn it arond then get sarky again. :j

black-saturn

I'm afraid from experience I know that vets arn't animal lovers. They are just a number to them and they don't get emotionally involved about anything. Its the same kind of scenario as a mother worrying about their baby and the doctor not being able to book an appointment for another week. If I was you I would either change my usual vet or maybe give to dogs to someone who can afford to treat them if they need it.

asea

i don't think you can generalise like that. I'm sure that there are many vets who's number one priority is the animal & i'm lucky enough to have met some of them!

dangeroussports

They have to be good actors too.

slinks

steph25 wrote: »

.

Humm, you must be very very bored...
1.I have not been rude, I pointed out the facts which you ignored..how is that being rude?
2.Did I insult you or "call you names"? no I did not.I said you have been rude and sarcastic in your replies, thats what you have been so how is that being rude?
3.Maybe you should read your replies from the start of this thread as if you were in the op's position, I think you would topple off your high horse pretty quickly.
4.You have been rude, agressive, pendantic and extremely childish even saying that the op does not care for the pet!
5.The whole issue was not about insurance, it was and still is, about a vet that has ignored the guidelines set out.
6.I must be a muppet because I deffinatly think your an @ss :cool:
7.I can not be bothered to waste by time typing this message because you will do what you have done on this whole thread ie take out bits you choose to see and turn it arond then get sarky again. :j

i don't think i'll bother readin this... it just looks like 'blah blah blah'

Chesnut1

After carefully reading through this entire thread I am becomming very angry with some of the snide comments toward 1, the original poster and 2 regarding people without pet insurance being clumped in the same group. Point1: To my way of thinking the emergency vet acted shockingly as he could have given pain relief. Furthermore a couple of my friends are vets and they are disgusted by this persons actions. Furthermore they would like it pointed out that although they have all had large student loans to pay out they are also very well paid in comparrison to most of the poulation and these people are not partners. Also as they state if they see a dog run down in the street they immedietly stop to assist sometimes never finding out the owner but that is not the priority.Point2: I own 2 dogs and 2 horses. Although both dogs are insured the horses are not this make me a terrible owner according to some posters!!!! I have no credit cards and always pay my bills at the end of the month when I am paid. The horses are not insured because 6 years ago the older horse contracted a near fatal disease he pulled through costing me £5000 extra in aftercare after insurance paid out. No and I mean NO insurance company will now insure him as they all state he should not be alive and could contract this again. So far I have not been able to obtain Insurance for the younger horse because with horse insurance they are not happy if they are not all insured. It is a no win situation and I am deeply angry as I am now being put in the bracket of the it's your fault for not having insurance bracket/ unfit owner. Not everything is black and white my alternative would have been to shoot the older horse which I am sure some of you would feel appropriate. As to the dogs even with insurance in my case I still have to pay the first £70 of a claim, now if this was withing a couple of days before the end of the month I may not have that on me so why should the animal suffer. I know this post is about this appauling vet but the fact remains if only people with plenty spare and available cash owned animals regardless of insurance then the vast majority of veterinary practices would close down. To the original poster I hope Daisy is doing well.

viktory

I am not going get involved in the arguments on this thread. Suffice to say that I am disappointed that a vet would leave any animal in pain - pain relief would not have cost the earth, even if s/he was unhappy to carry out further works without an insurance plan or payment.

However, I cannot emphasise enough how important pet insurance is. I gather from the first post that the OP has two dogs (apologies if this is wrong) but even with only one pet insurance is so important, especially with dogs. An accident can happen at any time and when you are worried about your pet the last thing you need to be worrying about at such a scary time is how you are going to pay for treatment. It can be hideously expensive to have an animal treated at the vets.

I have a cat and she is insured. It costs me less than a tenner a month and the peace of mind I get is worth every penny.

Hope Daisy is making a full recovery.