Gobsmacked by RCVS reply

SeaLion_2

Whether YTO was telling porkies or simply exceedingly mistaken, personally I think it is bullying to wave the law around as if you were an expert when you are clearly very mistaken or simply deluded.

Apart from anything else it plays into the quite offensive posts on this thread questioning Hachette's mental condition.

lostinrates

SeaLion wrote: »

Whether YTO was telling porkies or simply exceedingly mistaken, personally I think it is bullying to wave the law around as if you were an expert when you are clearly very mistaken or simply deluded.

Apart from anything else it plays into the quite offensive posts on this thread questioning Hachette's mental condition.

There is a reason we are reminded not to take advice on the forum over things like medicine and veterinary care. Its because ANY poster can say they are anything.

chris_n_tj

I think this is another thread that needs locking down.
The OP has created any threads about this matter, and I think its not doing her/him any good to be honest.
None of the advice, and from what I have read there has been plenty has been deemed not good enough. Some good and some not so good advice has been given over the last few months.
Haffiana before you brandy about posters being bullies I would check back and then judge for yourself. People have tried and failed to help the OP. So enough is enough before this thread turns nasty.

Haffiana

You know, I don't particularly agree with the OP myself. Neither do I agree with the advice-givers for that matter. However I would have thought the only person who can judge whether the advice is 'good enough' or 'helpful' is the OP, not the advice-givers.

Why do the advice-givers feel so outraged that their advice is not accepted? Why can't they accept that the OP feels differently to them? Or is it because they are many and the OP is just one, does that makes them right? I wonder how many whistle-blowers were also just one against the opinion of many...

hachette

Haffiana wrote: »

You know, I don't particularly agree with the OP myself. Neither do I agree with the advice-givers for that matter. However I would have thought the only person who can judge whether the advice is 'good enough' or 'helpful' is the OP, not the advice-givers.

Why do the advice-givers feel so outraged that their advice is not accepted? Why can't they accept that the OP feels differently to them? Or is it because they are many and the OP is just one, does that makes them right? I wonder how many whistle-blowers were also just one against the opinion of many...

Thank you for that.

Of course I accept that any vet can make a mistake but if you had a dog who went just for a biopsy and you have been given back a dog with active bleeding caused by the vet and dog died in your arms 2 hours later bleeding to death how would you feel about your vet ? What if it had happened to your dog ? I know lots of you mean well but I have not posted the full report by the forensic vet ( 12 pages) that without a doubt states that my vet was negligent. In fact I was quite shocked by some of his findings.

I am sure that if it happened to any of your dogs you would do the same.

gettingready

Hachette - I do not think I have posted on this thread before but believe me, I would do exactly the same if it was one of my pets.

Nasty comments on this thread towards you do not really help. And I hope they will stop xx

Matt_ftb

hachette wrote: »

That is a very sweet comment. However my dog was not ill beyoned any help. He was a happy little dog and I took him to the vet as he had a small lump on his side. He went for a biopsy. Returned in critiacal condition because what vet did to him without me knowing it and died 2 hours later.

Yes we all make mistakes. If I killed a person on the road through my mistake would that be enough to avoid any punishment. The fact that it was a mistake? No. I would be charged with dangerous driving etc and given punishment by court. So why is it Ok for vets to make mistakes and get away with it and not other people?

Hachette,

I have great sympathy with your loss and I think some people have been unfair in what they have said. In my view you have however ignored a large amount of insightful, constructive and well founded advice.

I quoted the above as it's not quite accurate. If it was a genuine accident and your driving was deemed competent and you showed due care then it would be deemed accidental.

The point is to show that accidents do happen and sometimes there isn't anyone to blame.

I also feel while my experience is in the criminal courts progressing legally may upset you further. A judge is unlikely to even set eyes on your 'expert' report which is compromised by the fact it was paid for. The judge will also refer to your past pet as property and treat the matter no different to if a garage incorrectly fixed your car. If you win then it's unlikely to be a on the grounds you'd want and I would be amazed if you got any more than what was quoted as offered.

Your best approach would be speak with others who have experienced similar and discuss how you can move it forward (outside of a legal process)

hachette

Matt_ftb wrote: »

Hachette,

I have great sympathy with your loss and I think some people have been unfair in what they have said. In my view you have however ignored a large amount of insightful, constructive and well founded advice.

I quoted the above as it's not quite accurate. If it was a genuine accident and your driving was deemed competent and you showed due care then it would be deemed accidental.

The point is to show that accidents do happen and sometimes there isn't anyone to blame.

I also feel while my experience is in the criminal courts progressing legally may upset you further. A judge is unlikely to even set eyes on your 'expert' report which is compromised by the fact it was paid for. The judge will also refer to your past pet as property and treat the matter no different to if a garage incorrectly fixed your car. If you win then it's unlikely to be a on the grounds you'd want and I would be amazed if you got any more than what was quoted as offered.

Your best approach would be speak with others who have experienced similar and discuss how you can move it forward (outside of a legal process)

Thank you for that, but as this stands the whole case is now with my insurers laywers so what will be will be. I am hoping to hear from them in the next week or so. I gave them all my documents on 5/2 and they said up to 28 days or sooner. It is best to wait and hear what they think.

Ozzuk

yorkshire_terrier_owner wrote: »

You have misunderstood and misquoted several points I have made.

I repeat:
I will not enter into argument. As soon as I have pressed the submit button here, I will be logging off and not returning to this thread.

I think you're logging off because someone with real knowledge came along. I know nothing about law, though I watch Ally Mcbeal quite a bit, but your comment about a few threads about a dog prejudicing a jury was quite shocking and obviously designed to make an impact.

I mostly lurk around car forums but its always scary to see people give advice, which may be acted on, and they don't quantify their experience and that advice is sometimes completely wrong and occasionally dangerous. Its the downside of going on the internet for something you really should go to a professional for.

Just a sad thread in general.