Gobsmacked by RCVS reply

Valli

Hachette you are going to make yourself ill, or lose everything you have (having to pay for the legal costs) if you continue.

Or both.

YTO - what can I say? You have tried to help and you have had that help acknowledged by others but completely disregarded by Hachette; who is, not to put too fine a point on it, utterly obsessed by all this to the extent that she cannot and will not say 'enough is enough'.

peachyprice

hachette wrote: »

Treatable with tablets.

So he did have something wrong that you knew about? If he was up to date with his meds why was his platelet count still low? You keep saying that he was a happy little dog, but he wasn't a healthy little dog.

goonarmy

This topic always seems to be top in this section. Nothing much changes.

yorkshire_terrier_owner

Valli wrote: »

Hachette you are going to make yourself ill, or lose everything you have (having to pay for the legal costs) if you continue.

Or both.

YTO - what can I say? You have tried to help and you have had that help acknowledged by others but completely disregarded by Hachette; who is, not to put too fine a point on it, utterly obsessed by all this to the extent that she cannot and will not say 'enough is enough'.

You are completely right.

However, I do have to thank the OP for not only providing me with the material for the next class I teach on tort law, but a scenario for a role play on dealing with clients and the basis of a moot (mock trial). Saved me hours of work!

Money-Saving-King

hachette wrote: »

So if it is not OK for them to be negligent and nobody will stand up to them then what? Let them carry on? Why beacuse they are vets? Vets are allowed to make mistakes but the rest of us are not? I don' see the difference between the 2.

She made one mistake, you write as if she's set out to do this on purpose and plans to carry on. Can't you see how wrong what you are saying is?

hachette

I don't know why people are still posting on this thread at the moment. I said all is with my solicitors and if I get any news and will let all who are interested know. So what is the point of this battle?

hachette

yorkshire_terrier_owner wrote: »

Uncalled for.

Your one was uncalled for too. So what is the big problem that I have read Tort of Law?

hachette

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

She made one mistake, you write as if she's set out to do this on purpose and plans to carry on. Can't you see how wrong what you are saying is?

How do you know she made 1 mistake?

peachyprice

hachette wrote: »

Grow up. I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT IT VET KNEW ABOUT SHE IGNORED IT. Hope your heard it this time.

You are so rude and arrogant.

You speak in riddles and expect everyone to know what you mean.

You said that whatever was causing the low platelet count was treatable with tablets as if it was an already known illness.

IF THEY ONLY FOUND OUT ABOUT THE ILLNESS THAT WAS CAUSING THE LOW PLATELET COUNT WHEN HE WAS AT THE VET FOR THE LUMP BIOPSY HE WAS ALREADY NOT A WELL DOG. I hope you manage to comprehend that this time.

Money-Saving-King

hachette wrote: »

How do you know she made 1 mistake?

That's all we do know for fact. You write as it's a deliberate habit.