Dog needs URGENT OPERATION: Can't afford it

MrsTinks

MrsE wrote: »

I agree, I would never suggest fraud.
But shes stuck between a rock & a hard place with an injured animal.
If a charity won't help her, what can she do?
Get a loan shark loan

She can still sign the dog over to the RSPCA or The Dogs Trust.
Fraud is fraud and personally I don't think her lack of foresight is an excuse. If she takes the dog to one of the larger charities they should take it on even if full as the dog is suffering.
Just because the charities are not helping her pay for the treatment whilst keeping the dog does not mean they won't let her sign it over to them to avoid the dog suffering.

MrsE_2

tine wrote: »

She can still sign the dog over to the RSPCA or The Dogs Trust.
Fraud is fraud and personally I don't think her lack of foresight is an excuse. If she takes the dog to one of the larger charities they should take it on even if full as the dog is suffering.
Just because the charities are not helping her pay for the treatment whilst keeping the dog does not mean they won't let her sign it over to them to avoid the dog suffering.

But if she signs the dog over to a charity they will need to rehome it after anyway.
The dog has a home (she has already paid out £500, so shes not against contributing towards vets treatment).
I'm sure she will have learn her lesson & buy insurance from now on.

leoetal19

shrewdal wrote: »

Hi barbiegirl, sorry to hear of the wee dogs predicament. It is so sad how these accidents happen and the owners are hit with high medical bills, not to forget the V.A.T the government adds on to the bill....a tax on sick animals.
I have to disagree with the posters who say you should take insurance on your pets. I had 3 cats 2 of my girls lived for 17 and a half years and my tom cat lived for 14 years. They only required treatment for the final stages of their lives. in fact the tom cat passed away very quickly with only £16 cost for putting him to sleep. My 2 girls struggled over their final 6 monthswith kidney/ liver problems which happens a lot with geriatric cats.
Anyway, the overall costs with tests and treatment I estimate to be about £1500 but this was spread over a year. If I had paid say £8 per cat per month i.e £24 per month over 14 years for the tom and 17 years for both females then the overall cost to me would have been £4008. A lot depends on individual circumstances.So no one should sit in judgement here. shrewdal
I really hope the wee dog gets well.

i totally agree noone should sit in judgement at all. we all do the best we can. but i have to disagree with the insurance thing (sorry)
its INsurance because its there INcase as opposed to life ASSurance which your assured to need. the only time i would advocate not taking it is if you have the funds to pay an out of the blue bill of £1k plus-which sadly not many of us do
my sister paid for 18 yeras for her cat and never claimed once, so when she ot a dog could easily have not bothered and few would have blamed her at the time. but her dog is 4 now and the insureres have paid out over £3k so far-its cost my sis £50 in excess payments plus the premiuims
i would hate not to be able to afford to pay for my cats to be made well-the monthly paymnets are for thier helath but as much for my own peace of mind
i have 4 cats, so far
8 year old-claimed c £1,200 in 2 claims
4 year old-no claim
1 year old-£378 claim
4 month old-no claim
peace of mind?? PRICELESS for everyhting else theres *%"**CARD (but at 28.3 apr its crippling) x
do we know what actually happened to the poor dog?? hope hes not laid suffering while we all come to agreement-mite take a while n he didnt seem to have that luxury xx

MrsTinks

MrsE wrote: »

But if she signs the dog over to a charity they will need to rehome it after anyway.
The dog has a home (she has already paid out £500, so shes not against contributing towards vets treatment).
I'm sure she will have learn her lesson & buy insurance from now on.

Yes they would rehome it. Otherwise this would be nothing more than a free vet service... I just hope she's managed to do something by now for this little dog - I don't like the thought it's possibly still sat in a little cage in extreem pain in her house.
If she doesn't get the dog treatment soon though and someone reports her to the RSPCA then it won't be a problem for much longer... they can seize the dog and prosecute for failing to provide adequate medical treatment. OK so they rarely do but technically they can...
Then she'll have a whole new set of dilemmas...
OP please let us know what has happened to this little doggy?

maxfactor_3

I imagine the dog is being helped ,as the op hasnt been back!.
I had another idea!.
The lady is on child tax credit right !.It would have to be higher rate / working tax credit.
I think but Im not 100 % sure that it may be a qualifying benefit worth a phone call to the RSPCA vets.
If your animal is ill you cant just hand it over at the vets its a vets and why would someone who has made a doggy part of the family want too ?.
The RSPCA has a national phone number for strays etc and cruelty.
But my local RSPCA vets is a separate place woth looking in the phone book for !.
Like I said thats not free its something like half price.

pulliptears

I have 2 dogs and dont have insurance.

Personally I am much happier putting that money aside for them than paying an insurance company. They are 7 and 5 years old and have never needed any expensive treatments, so there is enough money there should they ever need anything.

ANGLICANPAT

tine wrote: »

She can still sign the dog over to the RSPCA or The Dogs Trust.
Fraud is fraud and personally I don't think her lack of foresight is an excuse. If she takes the dog to one of the larger charities they should take it on even if full as the dog is suffering.
Just because the charities are not helping her pay for the treatment whilst keeping the dog does not mean they won't let her sign it over to them to avoid the dog suffering.

Its not right for charities to be used as bill payers for people who havent made provision for their animals care . Why should they get back their 'cured' dog from the vets and suffer no serious outlay when other people scrimp and do without to get their dogs treated and allowed home?

On the other hand , imagine if the dog is well loved , but not really homeable? Older, unattractive, a few bad habits for instance. How is he
going to fare , undergoing medication/surgery , and taken into rescue kennels which however good, are hardly home from home. Animals find it harder to recover in strange circumstances, and what then -- an unhomeable dog who had an owner that still loves and wants him , languishes in kennels maybe for years. That doesnt sound right either.

For me, the answer would be more scope available within charities to set up a proper formal paying back system . Sure , theyd get defaulters, it wont be perfect , but it would enable them to keep some loved dogs from being added to the kennel count whilst not allowing owners to escape their financial obligations.

Anyone who's an AR person will have come across the type of people who'se dogs get injured/ ill through their own fault eg . they dont bother securing their garden , or they gaily breed to make money but cant afford the bill when the dog gets a pyo or they keep the dog outside and cant afford the arthritis drugs . They make me sick and they are the ones I would happily take the dogs off to be treated and rehomed , but there ARE genuine cases , the problem is having a system which can sort them out.

asea

pulliptears wrote: »

I have 2 dogs and dont have insurance.

Personally I am much happier putting that money aside for them than paying an insurance company. They are 7 and 5 years old and have never needed any expensive treatments, so there is enough money there should they ever need anything.

Good luck because if anything DOES happen you may need a pretty big amount to cover treatments. My cat has just started having fits & so far it has cost over £5000 (in three weeks) to have her treated

MrsTinks

ANGLICANPAT wrote: »

For me, the answer would be more scope available within charities to set up a proper formal paying back system . Sure , theyd get defaulters, it wont be perfect , but it would enable them to keep some loved dogs from being added to the kennel count whilst not allowing owners to escape their financial obligations.

Unfortunately most charities simply do not have the finances to fund peoples lack of responcibility. Well they do, but there has to be some consequences... In this instance it would be handing the dog over to the rescue who would then find a suitable home. As for a formal paying back system etc... I think this is in exsistence... it's called a bank loan
Seriously though, charities get set up with a specific purpose, adding something like a "free" loan ability to the list would probably be blocked by the charities commission even if the charities wanted to do it. Which personally I can't see... I mean look at the problems banks and CC companies have getting the money back they are owed. And these would be people already struggling so I would expect a MUCH higher amount of defaults and that is a direct impact on the amount of animals the rescue can in return rescue and rehome.

Barbiegirl_2

Hi all,

Sorry I have taken some time to update you on the situation. I had been trying to contact me friend all weekend and only found out this morning when I bumpted into her at school that she had lost her mobile.

Basically, her little dog is still being cared for by her in a dog cage? in her kitchen. She has also said that she cannot pay out £2,500.00 and has been everywhere for help. All the dog charities, the RSPCA, PDSA and Blue Cross have refused to help her because she is in work. She has disclosed her income details to everyone and they say she has enough money!!!!

In my opinion this is very unfair. If anyone can think of anything else please let me know.

Thanks again.