Advice please! Rip off vet

benny1234black

visidigi wrote: »

Problem here is, if that person, out of hours, came and spoke to you and said you need an xray, its £130 what would you do?

Are you saying you wouldn't pay it?

What are you expecting by complaining about the principle?

I get they may have not told you, but are you telling me if they had you would have done things differently?

YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.

Firstly, the point is I would have then had a choice whether to or not. If I did want to go ahead, cool. If not then that would have been my choice.

(I would have done, but that is irrelevant)

benny1234black

iammumtoone wrote: »

So what did you say and in what tone of voice, what was their reply?

They said the fee for the consultation is £x and the fee for the xray is £x so you owe a total of £y.

I asked them if they were joking.

Told them I had no idea it would be that much.

And I wasn't told it would be anything like that.

On the phone they just said "bring him down we need to make him sick" as though they would just give him a tablet or something.

And to the person before who said about if they did that and didn't find one do they just keep making him sick... I don't know how they do things I am NOT A VET.

wealdroam

benny1234black wrote: »

I see the xray necessary sure. I am not disputing that.

I am disputing the fact the first time one was mentioned was AFTER it was done when I was given a bill.

You also told us:

benny1234black wrote: »

Just seen links posted.

One does say that if I said "do what it takes" then fair enough but I never gave the go ahead. They just took him and said somebody will be out in a minute.

You have only commented on one of the links... the one that almost matches what you wanted it to say.
You do realise that that is just someone's interpretation of the law, don't you?

What about the other link... the one that points you to the actual legislation?
You have totally ignored that. Could that be because you think it's not helpful?

To refresh your memory, here it is again:

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

And here is the legal side of it.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29

Again, it is the actual legislation which states:

15 Implied term about consideration.

(1)Where, under a contract for the supply of a service, the consideration for the service is not determined by the contract, left to be determined in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealing between the parties, there is an implied term that the party contracting with the supplier will pay a reasonable charge.
(2)What is a reasonable charge is a question of fact.

As we all seem to agree that £130 is "a reasonable charge", it is quite likely that a County Court Judge would also agree.

If that's the case, then Shaun was right when he said:

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

So if £130 is what the average vet will charge, they are perfectly within their rights to charge you this amount.

Again I ask... what did you agree to on the form you completed?

iammumtoone

benny1234black wrote: »

YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.

Firstly, the point is I would have then had a choice whether to or not. If I did want to go ahead, cool. If not then that would have been my choice.

(I would have done, but that is irrelevant)

I dont think that you would have done is irrelevant at all.

You are a responsible owner as you did the right thing by taking your pet to the vets.

I can't think of any instance that a person would take an animal to the vets find out the cost and walk straight out with that animal leaving it to suffer, that kind of person would not be at the vets in the first place, so its not irrelevant and vets know that people who come to them want to help their pet, and assume that they will pay reasonable costs to do that, if you were presented with an £1000 bill (without consent)you might have a case but not for this amount which on paper might seem a lot of money but its not when it comes to vets fees.

benny1234black

wealdroam wrote: »

You also told us:

You have only commented on one of the links... the one that almost matches what you wanted it to say.
You do realise that that is just someone's interpretation of the law, don't you?

I opened the other link but was on my phone and was far too long to read.

You quoted a part that said if under contract.

I wasn't in a contract

benny1234black

iammumtoone wrote: »

I dont think that you would have done is irrelevant at all.

You are a responsible owner as you did the right thing by taking your pet to the vets.

I can't think of any instance that a person would take an animal to the vets find out the cost and walk straight out with that animal leaving it to suffer, that kind of person would not be at the vets in the first place, so its not irrelevant and vets know that people who come to them want to help their pet, and assume that they will pay reasonable costs to do that, if you were presented with an £1000 bill (without consent)you might have a case but not for this amount which on paper might seem a lot of money but its not when it comes to vets fees.

Some people would.

And he wasn't suffering at all. He was fine. And the screw was SMALL.

I can't think of an instance that a person has something wrong with their car and after finding out the bill the sell or scrap the car, walking out of the garage without getting it repaired.

I don't care about the fee being 'reasonable' or could have 'been more'.

I am sure you would act the same if a garage did the same thing whether it was £100 or £1000?

iammumtoone

benny1234black wrote: »

They said the fee for the consultation is £x and the fee for the xray is £x so you owe a total of £y.

.

I suppose you could argue that you didn't have a consultation so shouldn't be paying for that. However I have never needed an out of hours service so not sure if it is different. Every time I had paid for a consultation I have had one, with the vet who discussed the options. Others can perhaps advise if this is also standard practice in out of hours surgery.

wealdroam

benny1234black wrote: »

You quoted a part that said if under contract.

I wasn't in a contract

Oh yes you almost certainly were.

As soon as you agreed to the vet doing something you were in a contract.
Verbal contracts are equally binding.

But it really would help if you could state what you agreed to in that form you completed.

visidigi

benny1234black wrote: »

YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.

Firstly, the point is I would have then had a choice whether to or not. If I did want to go ahead, cool. If not then that would have been my choice.

(I would have done, but that is irrelevant)

Why have you bothered posting here if all you are going to do is abuse people who don't say what you want?

The facts is you want to dispute it, but at the same time you would have gone ahead.

So in this scenario you need to inform the vet that they need to avoid doing this in future to allow people to make an informed decision. You then need to find yourself another vet.

We had issues with our first vet, we found another based on our feeling that the first wasn't cheap.

I'm not sure what your angle here is otherwise, as all I can think is you feel you shouldn't have to pay £130 because they didn't inform you upfront?!?! You were in a contract (verbal)

Just as an aside, first time you've had to take him to the vets...

Was he boostered?
Wormed?
Registered with this vet?
What day and time was this visit?

£130 is the cost for no screw - surgery isn't cheap - one of ours has just had £650 worth - Thanks PetPlan

photome

benny1234black wrote: »

I opened the other link but was on my phone and was far too long to read.

You quoted a part that said if under contract.

I wasn't in a contract

what was it you signed on arrival if it wasnt a contract.
have you read it now and if so what does it say about treatment and costs