Important update! We have recently reviewed and updated our Forum Rules and FAQs. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the latest version.
Quick links
Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support
Replies
Even if the total amount is a fair and reasonable charge for the work done, the point at issue is whether the OP had agreed to a "blank cheque"? Especially as they were asked for almost three times the original estimate, I would have to ask why give an estimate at all?
I frequently post on this board with my experience when I come across that opinion , £3k just to diagnose my late cat, sadly it was terminal so I opted not to treat. Still had a big bill though! And she was insured thankfully.
Yes, I entirely agree that any responsible owner should budget sensibly and where appropriate have good insurance. However even the best insurance has limits and there can be situations where treatment urgently needs to go ahead before the insurers will confirm that they will cover the cost.
It is not unknown for specialist vet bills to run well into five figures following major trauma. Are you saying that anybody who can't afford this should be excluded from owning a pet?
There are also varying opinions on the ethics of how much unpleasant treatment should be imposed on an animal that cannot understand what is happening, even if it has a good chance of being successful. Vets opinions are widely divided on this issue. Even the highest profile referral vet frequently says "just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done". Many people, including quite a number in his own profession, feel he sometimes goes too far, even if they admire the technical and pioneering skills.
The OP said, right back at the beginning.....
Now I know some of the keyboard warriors will (and already have) jumped on this but it is not by any means an unique view and it is certainly one an owner is legally entitled to take.
Even if you take the view that the OP "should" have happily agreed to pay the total cost, whatever it may be, they certainly should have been told clearly what they were agreeing to and not been presented with a fait accompli.
I doubt the vet was in a position to stop part way through and give you a running update on the cost.
Unfortunately, this is often complete BS, there are many many operations/treatments that cats and dogs might need that cost a fair amount of cash but are also highly effective and can give the animal many more years of a good quality of life with very minimal disruption/short term pain.
Deciding not to put an elderly, frail and sick animal through cancer surgery that might only buy them a few weeks is a humane decision. Deciding to kill your otherwise healthy young dog rather than pay for treatment for cuts and broken bones after a car accident (that was probably your fault anyway) is not.
As I said any pet owner should budget responsibly and either have insurance or the means to cover the level of treatment that insurance would provide. However worst case scenarios can wildly exceed this and as I mentioned, five figure bills are not unheard of and this will continue to increase. Many people, who are otherwise excellent pet owners, simply cannot afford that level and I am not sure they should be excluded from pet ownership.