Section 75 claim for pet surgery?

Mister_E

Hi,


We have a large breed of dog that is known for having breed related hip problems and so we insured the dog when we got him.


He was diagnosed with hip dysplasia and it was managed for a couple of years prior to it being operated on. In the lead up to this, we saved the money to pay the difference between what insurance would cover (about £2000) and what the animal hospital would charge (about £4000). I opted to pay for it on my credit card to get loyalty points.


The dog went in for his surgery and when we collected him 4-5 days later, the leg to hip did not look right but the surgeon did the hand over, showing us the x-ray taken immediately after the surgery and said everything was well. I took a picture of this when we got home but the dog was not settled (constantly moaning, crying etc) at home so the hospital agreed to keep him for 2 weeks at a cost of an additional £250 - quite reasonable.


During the 2 weeks, the hospital said that he was making good progress and he was fine at home for the subsequent 6 weeks. The Surgeon postponed the 8 week check up to 12 weeks even though it's normal to have a check at 8 weeks and we were hoping for the check at 8 weeks due to slow progress in dog's recovery.


During the check at 12 weeks, The dog's hip was x-rayed and was found to have a dislocated leg! The surgeon was surprised as he was showing no signs of it and concluded that the dog had gotten used to there being no pain after the surgery because there was no rubbing (due to reprofiled bone but I took that as dislocation too).


The hospital asked for more money to reattempt it and we felt that given it's probably been like that since hand over after the surgery, we shouldn't be paying for it. We reluctantly negotiated the reattempt for an additional £1500.


When we collected the dog this time, his hip to leg joint looked normal (another picture taken) and since then, he's made great progress together with a good xray during the 8 week check.


We'll still be managing the recovery for another 4-8 weeks but he's out of the woods for re-injury.


I know that in the eyes of the law, a dog is seen as property and damaging a dog is criminal damage rather than any kind of murder yet they are recognised as beings under cruelty to animal laws.


What I'd like to know is whether I have a section 75 claim for the original service not being delivered correctly and as such, make a claim for the £1500 that we had to pay for the second attempt along with the kennal fees of £250 because the dog was not comfortable at home.


Can anyone offer any advice?


Thanks in advance.

nearlyrich

Surely if the Vet did a duff job they should not have charged anything for the 2nd op...

Mister_E

Unfortunately, the animal hospital do not admit that they did a duff job.


I had tried to get them to do it without charge but their options were that if I did not/could not want to pay for the 2nd attempt, I was given the option of putting the dog to sleep (and I would not be refunded anything paid to date for not delivering the professional service requested).


It goes without saying that I did not pick this option and I leaned on my credit card to help fund the second attempt, as the insurance cover was exhausted with the first attempt.


Their initial second attempt fee was close to £3000 so I did well to negotiate this down to 1500.


I also negotiated a payment plan over 6-9 months but again, this is being debited to the credit card on a monthly basis and paid immediately each month by me.


Does any one have any thoughts on if this any chance of success under S75?


Whilst I appreciate that this is a CC board, any thoughts on small claims court chance of success too?

jonesMUFCforever

If you paid for the second operation then you accepted their diagnosis - so IMO you do not have S75 cover here.
You paid for an operation the dog got an operation.
I would be very surprised if you get any medical professional willing to guarantee his/her work 100% because of all kinds of variables.

bigadaj

It's easy to say with hindsight but the only way to address this when you were initially unhappy would be to go to another vet to get a preofessiomal opinion of the situation. Whether they could or would critique the work of another vet is another matter but in question of opinion about quality of work you need to consult someone who is suitably qualified. With their report you would have a good case for reimbursement or remedial work by another vet with recompense, as it is then their excuse, valid or not, is that the additional work was required and couldn't have been foreseen originally.

Mister_E

Thanks for the feedback all.


We didn't address it immediately as the vet assured us that the dog was normal even though I pointed things out and asked questions at the consultation - I had no reason to doubt them as they're a well known animal hospital.


Going to another vet at the 12 week check wasn't an option as the dog was still sedated and we were put under a lot of pressure to make a decision very quickly as to whether to operate or to put the dog to sleep to prevent suffering - they implied that one of those would have to be done immediately.


I was hoping that S75 would apply because the dog is viewed as property in the same way a car is viewed as property. Using that anaology, a car mechanic that doesn't do a part replacement correctly, they can be asked to complete the repair again.


It's not ideal news but then sometimes that's life unfortunately.


It's a shame it wasn't done after October 2015 as it would have been covered under the consumer protection act as a "repeat performance".

bris

Unless you can prove negligence then you will have little to no chance winning any claim.


I am sure however the VET will have a very good excuse ready to fight the claim.


You can but try however, you have nothing to lose.

chattychappy

Mister_E wrote: »

I was hoping that S75 would apply because the dog is viewed as property in the same way a car is viewed as property. Using that anaology, a car mechanic that doesn't do a part replacement correctly, they can be asked to complete the repair again.

You do not need to show that the law views a dog as property. S75 applies where you pay for something (goods or services) on a CC and there is breach of contract of misrepresentation. (A few other provisos which appear not to apply here.)

If you paid for an operation on yourself then S75 applies.

The problem is showing breach of contract - in this case that the work wasn't done properly.

MEM62

Since when is any kind of surgery an exact science? There is an element of risk in all procedures and no vet (or doctor for that matter) will guarantee the outcome of any procedure.

You paid for surgery the dog got surgery. You will certainly struggle with a S75 claim as I do not think you will be able to prove breech of contract. Unless you are able to make a case for negligence, which will require spending money on expert opinions, legal frees and such, I think you'll have to suck it up and move on.

Keeping_Motivated

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/pets-and-vets/vets-and-pets/vets/complaining-about-misconduct-or-negligence-vets/


Have you taken guidance from the CAB?