£6 charge for address update on dogs chip.

Andy_L

JIL said:

I'm not saying the vet should update the system I'm saying an interface that does it if you change your address at the vets.
The annual booster debate is another issue. 

Yes it may be a higher cost BUT it could be used for much more than it is at present.

@Debbie9009 I think that some firms charge to update an address and some dont, so if it can be done in one, it can be done in another. 

The firms that dont charge to change address charge more up front 

stuhse

Andy_L said:

JIL said:

I'm not saying the vet should update the system I'm saying an interface that does it if you change your address at the vets.
The annual booster debate is another issue. 

Yes it may be a higher cost BUT it could be used for much more than it is at present.

@Debbie9009 I think that some firms charge to update an address and some dont, so if it can be done in one, it can be done in another. 

The firms that dont charge to change address charge more up front 

Which begs the question, why should people who never change address pay for those who do ?

JIL

stuhse said:

Andy_L said:

JIL said:

I'm not saying the vet should update the system I'm saying an interface that does it if you change your address at the vets.
The annual booster debate is another issue. 

Yes it may be a higher cost BUT it could be used for much more than it is at present.

@Debbie9009 I think that some firms charge to update an address and some dont, so if it can be done in one, it can be done in another. 

The firms that dont charge to change address charge more up front 

Which begs the question, why should people who never change address pay for those who do ?

Then where does it end? I have never had to use the service. Aside from my address update.

So what takes more resource? Online changing my address or using the database to trace owners?

Because one has a charge and the other doesnt.

JIL

Sooler said:

Charging a nominal fee may also act as an extra security layer to have some trace as to who made the change.

As you have to have the chip number and verified details to log on, I doubt this is required.  

JIL

Andy_L said:

JIL said:

I'm not saying the vet should update the system I'm saying an interface that does it if you change your address at the vets.
The annual booster debate is another issue. 

Yes it may be a higher cost BUT it could be used for much more than it is at present.

@Debbie9009 I think that some firms charge to update an address and some dont, so if it can be done in one, it can be done in another. 

The firms that dont charge to change address charge more up front 

See page 3 for lists of charges.  Big variations between companies. 

As I have said previously I didnt know there were different companies using the database until after I posted.  I genuinely thought it would be one database with links, rather than seperate databases. 

Debbie9009

JIL said:

@Debbie9009 I think that some firms charge to update an address and some dont, so if it can be done in one, it can be done in another. 

None of the sites you listed are free, so again who do you think should pay for this ? You keep avoiding this question.

As you are so sure a free database would mean more people would update their details then why don’t you set one up ? This is a genuine question, and would surely resolve this issue. 

JIL

I'm really not avoiding the question, do you really believe it costs £6 for me to log on and change my address myself?

Heres my genuine question, I have paid £6 to update my address. However I have never had to use the service as my dog has never been lost.
However Mr R who lives a few doors away, ( not a real person) is forever leaving his back gate open and his dog, has escaped three times in the past year. The dog is chipped and each time the dog has been reunited with Mr R. Who picks up that cost?  Because that takes more resource than an address update.

Some of the companies do not charge to update an address. The ones with N/A just do a one off cost.

All these companies are registered on companies house.
I chose one  and read their accounts statements.

Heres an extract, which probably explains why there is a charge. 



I couldn't set one up because they have to be government approved and affiliated to vets.  

Some are actually owned by overseas companies.

As I have said previously, it's not so much about updating the address it's the charge to do it, when up to date details are paramount.

It is now a legal requirement that breeders, and that includes anyone who owns a dog that has had pups, is responsible for having the dogs chipped before the pups leave the mum.  Vets work to certain chipping companies.  How many chips are followed up once the dog is with a new owner?  
Is this checked by anyone? 

Lavendyr

Seriously - why are you on such a crusade over a tiny cost of pet ownership?! I'm genuinely baffled that you are still continuing on your line of argument.

Which business did you choose to call out in your screenshot? You are showing the note which provides a breakdown of turnover only, not their costs. WIthout the full picture it's incomplete, irrelevant information. If you're going to post figures, post a full P&L and post the note that breaks down their expenses. Your cut and paste means nothing. 

So now you are moving on to whether the legal requirement is enforced? That is a great question and a much better one than the issue on which you have been lingering. Personally I would never adopt (and I make a point of adopting from rescues rather than purchasing from breeders) an animal that was not microchipped and my vets are very good at following up on chips and ownership. This was proved to me about 18 months ago when a neighbour took one of my cats, who with a "do not feed" collar on, had been inviting himself in and helping himself to their cat's food, to a local vet. Not only was he in perfect health, he was chipped and registered to our address and they were very apologetic.

This is the same cat who, six months ago, was hospitalised with suspected FIP and eventual cholangiohepatitis. We nearly lost him over Christmas. He recovered, only to deteriorate with diabetes and neuropathy. At one point when re-hospitalised in May, he couldn't walk. Thankfully he hit a turning point. But he still can't walk properly and may never. 

I really think the bottom line is - if you care about your pets, you will ensure that everything is up to date and correct, and for me, a £20 lifetime fee for petlog - or a £6 fee to change address - is minimal compared to the costs I incur to feed, deflea and deworm them, plus the costs of caring for my poorly cat, which have exceeded my £7k cover in the first year, and are looking to go the same way this year. 

In that context I'm getting a bit fed up of you whinging - continually after days of debate - about £6 to change an address. I hope you can understand that. 

Abbafan1972

@Lavendyr too right. 

JIL

@Debbie9009, the database charges are the payments  received not the costs of running it. 


I honestly thought as posters kept asking me questions/making statements  a response was expected.

I'm genuinely baffled about why anyone would bother to take the time to respond if you didnt want the debate.  Especially when the responses get a bit personal and not in the ethos of the site,  which is when all is said and done a money saving site.

I wont post again.