Lame pony

[stressedmuma]

Just a question regarding a vetting that was done to a pony I bought. The vet in question is friends with the previous owners and did not declare to me that the pony had been lame the previous year with Xrays been taken. I’m now stuck with a lame pony and my daughter is heartbroken we have done all of nerve blocks Xrays and finally the coffin injection which has not worked 😢

 

[AmyMay]

Welcome to the forum.

What’s your question?

 

[twiggy2]

A vetting is just the vets opinion on the horses the day of the vetting.
Any previous history on the horse is confidential and nothing to do with the vetting.
A vet cannot release previous history about the animal without consent from the current owner/holder of the vet records, it would go against client confidentiality.

 

[Red-1]

If you asked permission for the previous vet records to be released ten the vet should have told you. If you did not ask the previous owner for permission to release the records then the vet is not allowed to tell you. All they can do is vet the horse on the day and if it is sound then that is that.

This is why many vets won't vet a horse in their care, although many more will now as long as records are released.

 

[be positive]

As above but in the circumstances most vets would have refused to do the vetting due to a conflict of interests, which is fairly normal.

The owners really should have been honest, assuming you actually asked whether it had any veterinary history, and told you it had been treated or at least investigated the previous year but there is nothing you can do now other than to concentrate on fixing the pony.

If the coffin joint is the issue look at barefoot rehab, it may take a while but can be very successful if the vet cannot suggest other treatment, or in many cases as the first option, sadly having lame horses is all part of being an owner and we need to do our best for them even if life seems unfair at times, focus in the future not the past.

 

[honetpot]

If I have read it correctly the vet that did the vetting was friends with the previous sellers,which I would think was a conflict of interest.
On the day he was being paid by you to act in your best interests and did he ask about previous medical history.
One of the questions that should be asked when you are buying/ vetting a horse should be has it ever been lame and what was the outcome of any investigations. The owner doesn’t have to a answer truthfully but if you later find out they’ve lied it would help in any court case. The vet is working for you.
I would get a report from the vet who is treating your pony now, send it to the vet that did the vetting and ask what questions he asked about previous lameness/ medical history.He may not have known but if he didn’t ask he should have done.
Have a look at your house insurance it may cover you for this sort of thing, and sue the vet for the difference.
If the vets defence is they lied about it’s medical history you sue them the venders.
Sorry about the pony.

 

[teddypops]

If the vet has previously treated the pony then they do have to declare the history. However if the vet is just a friend and hasn’t treated the pony, then they wouldn’t have to.

 

[twiggy2]

If the vet has previously treated the pony then they do have to declare the history. However if the vet is just a friend and hasn’t treated the pony, then they wouldn’t have to.

No they don't, it's a client confidentiality issue if they do so without their clients consent.

 

[teddypops]

No they don't, it's a client confidentiality issue if they do so without their clients consent.

Yes they do. There is even a question on the vets form relating to this.

 

[be positive]

Yes they do. There is even a question on the vets form relating to this.

I think they do which is why most vets would decline to act for the purchaser if they knew the horse had been treated, it is a conflict of interest and as a buyer it will be a bit of a red flag so at that point they should ask for the full history if they want to proceed with any vetting.

In this case the pony had been lame and xrayed but no mention of the findings or even if it is the same limb, if there had been no diagnosis or treatment following the investigations then although it should have been declared we have no idea whether it is related in any way so may have made no difference to the purchase or current situation.

 

[stressedmuma]

If I have read it correctly the vet that did the vetting was friends with the previous sellers,which I would think was a conflict of interest.
On the day he was being paid by you to act in your best interests and did he ask about previous medical history.
One of the questions that should be asked when you are buying/ vetting a horse should be has it ever been lame and what was the outcome of any investigations. The owner doesn’t have to a answer truthfully but if you later find out they’ve lied it would help in any court case. The vet is working for you.
I would get a report from the vet who is treating your pony now, send it to the vet that did the vetting and ask what questions he asked about previous lameness/ medical history.He may not have known but if he didn’t ask he should have done.
Have a look at your house insurance it may cover you for this sort of thing, and sue the vet for the difference.
If the vets defence is they lied about it’s medical history you sue them the venders.
Sorry about the pony.

Aww thank you. Unfortunately the dishonesty of some people is disgusting and they told me the pony had NOT been lame before. The vet was not going to give me my pre purchase certificate and only sent it pp

 

[stressedmuma]

Obviously the previous owners told me it had never been lame but my understanding is that the vet should of declared to me that he had treated this pony to lameness and X-rays the previous year.

 

[honetpot]

I would have a look on the RCVS web site and see if there is any guidance about the procedure. If you can prove the vet had treated the pony before and not declared to you that is very poor practice and I think unethical.
If you paid for the vetting you are entitled to the report and it’s yours not the sellers.
I sold a horse that failed the vet, the buyer paid for the vetting and the vet would not discuss with me at all why it had failed as I was not his client and he was there to advise her.
There used to be a standard form that had to be completed and signed by the vet on the day which should be sent to you.
Not sure if it’s the same now because it’s a long time since I have one vetted.
So if you have paid the invoice for the vetting you want a copy.

 

[teddypops]

Obviously the previous owners told me it had never been lame but my understanding is that the vet should of declared to me that he had treated this pony to lameness and X-rays the previous year.

Yes the vet should have told you if they were the treating vet. How do you know the pony was lame etc if seller and vet didn’t tell you?

 

[View]

Who instructed this vet to carry out the vetting, was it a 2 stage or a 5 stage, and who paid the invoice for the vetting?

 

[twiggy2]

A vet can only give out information with the consent of the person paying the bill/owning the horse at the time of treatment, I agree there is a conflict of interest but client confidentiality rules. It's not ethical or the right way to do business and if there was a conflict of interest the vet should have refuse to carry out the vetting.

 

[teddypops]

A vet can only give out information with the consent of the person paying the bill/owning the horse at the time of treatment, I agree there is a conflict of interest but client confidentiality rules. It's not ethical or the right way to do business and if there was a conflict of interest the vet should have refuse to carry out the vetting.

The vet cannot do a vetting on a horse that they have treated without disclosing history. If the seller doesn’t give consent for this, the vet can not do the vetting.

 

[stressedmuma]

The vet cannot do a vetting on a horse that they have treated without disclosing history. If the seller doesn’t give consent for this, the vet can not do the vetting.

Yes that is true I have been told by a solicitor

 

[stressedmuma]

Who instructed this vet to carry out the vetting, was it a 2 stage or a 5 stage, and who paid the invoice for the vetting?

I paid for the vetting I did want a 5 star but went on the advice of the vet to go for a 2 star. Stupidity I know I put my trust in the vet in question 😟

 

[View]

I paid for the vetting I did want a 5 star but went on the advice of the vet to go for a 2 star. Stupidity I know I put my trust in the vet in question 😟

Sorry, more questions. Is the seller a dealer? Did the seller suggest using this vet? Why did you change your mind and opt for a 2 stage vetting? How much did this pony cost? How old is this pony?

 

[stressedmuma]

No the seller was not a dealer and they are quite well respected. I went on the advice of the vet I never dreamed this would happen my daughters trainer had suggested going with this vet who is also good friends with the previous owner in question. The pony cost £2000 and it is 10 years old It’s an absolute nightmare. My daughter is heartbroken this is meant to be a very special time for her.

 

[View]

OP, so sorry that you are in this situation. I suggest that you search for the both the seller's and the vet's name in the Dodgy Dealers Facebook groups and then have a think. Unfortunately, the 2 stage vetting was a mistake, which you have now realised.

Are you a BHS member? If so, now is the time to use the legal helpline and see where you stand. However, nothing in the equine world is easy and if legal advice is that you do have a case against the vet, be prepared for their insurer to make it both painful and a long drawn out process.

 

[stressedmuma]

Hi, yes I am a gold member and have been speaking with them and they say there is definitely a case against the vet. I just might have a look at the Facebook page people should definitely not get away with this. 😓

 

[be positive]

I paid for the vetting I did want a 5 star but went on the advice of the vet to go for a 2 star. Stupidity I know I put my trust in the vet in question 😟

I have yet to meet a vet who would recommend a 2 stage, most are less than happy to do this and will get the client to sign a disclaimer before they do the vetting as it does not cover as much as a 5 stage would, I often do just get a 2 stage done but usually have had to justify my reasons before the vet has gone ahead, it being a lower value animal is not really a good reason in itself.
If this vet has pushed you away from a 5 stage, which you asked for, and failed to disclose a conflict of interest, he did not need to give full details, then he is seriously lacking integrity and this should be referred to the RCVS as a complaint, it is professional misconduct and should be taken seriously.
The details are all online and they will look into it even though in my experience they are unlikely to actually do anything it will go on record and he will be questioned which even if he lies, which happened in my case, may make him think twice about doing anything similar in the future, if no one ever complains because they don't want to make a fuss then these professionals who are not being professional will just continue to get away with it completely.

They are no longer complaints, now called 'concerns' same meaning different slant. Link below.

https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/im-an-animal-owner-and-i-want-to-raise-a-concern/

 

[stressedmuma]

I have yet to meet a vet who would recommend a 2 stage, most are less than happy to do this and will get the client to sign a disclaimer before they do the vetting as it does not cover as much as a 5 stage would, I often do just get a 2 stage done but usually have had to justify my reasons before the vet has gone ahead, it being a lower value animal is not really a good reason in itself.
If this vet has pushed you away from a 5 stage, which you asked for, and failed to disclose a conflict of interest, he did not need to give full details, then he is seriously lacking integrity and this should be referred to the RCVS as a complaint, it is professional misconduct and should be taken seriously.
The details are all online and they will look into it even though in my experience they are unlikely to actually do anything it will go on record and he will be questioned which even if he lies, which happened in my case, may make him think twice about doing anything similar in the future, if no one ever complains because they don't want to make a fuss then these professionals who are not being professional will just continue to get away with it completely.

agreed completely. I have heard so many horror stories regarding this vet in question it is beyond believe that he is allowed to practice as a vet. I am not letting this go and will go to great lengths to make sure he will think twice before doing this to another person.

 

[be positive]

agreed completely. I have heard so many horror stories regarding this vet in question it is beyond believe that he is allowed to practice as a vet. I am not letting this go and will go to great lengths to make sure he will think twice before doing this to another person.

As so often happens once someone shouts about a vet others come out with their own stories having all kept relatively quiet because they just think it was one of those things or they were the unlucky ones, much the same in my case the vet in question had made some errors of judgement that had been resolved so they got away without doing any real harm but in one case the horse was very nearly pts her diagnosis of serious ligament injury which would need 6 months box rest, not suitable for a 25 year old arthritic, it turned out to be an abscess the farrier dealt with the next morning.

A rough indication of the area may bring a few more from the forum, not too specific as you do not want the thread removed.

 

[stressedmuma]

As so often happens once someone shouts about a vet others come out with their own stories having all kept relatively quiet because they just think it was one of those things or they were the unlucky ones, much the same in my case the vet in question had made some errors of judgement that had been resolved so they got away without doing any real harm but in one case the horse was very nearly pts her diagnosis of serious ligament injury which would need 6 months box rest, not suitable for a 25 year old arthritic, it turned out to be an abscess the farrier dealt with the next morning.

A rough indication of the area may bring a few more from the forum, not too specific as you do not want the thread removed.

That is horrifying. These vets have a duty of care to the animals and no diagnosis should be taken lightly.
I think I might post it in my country

As so often happens once someone shouts about a vet others come out with their own stories having all kept relatively quiet because they just think it was one of those things or they were the unlucky ones, much the same in my case the vet in question had made some errors of judgement that had been resolved so they got away without doing any real harm but in one case the horse was very nearly pts her diagnosis of serious ligament injury which would need 6 months box rest, not suitable for a 25 year old arthritic, it turned out to be an abscess the farrier dealt with the next morning.

A rough indication of the area may bring a few more from the forum, not too specific as you do not want the thread removed.

That is horrifying and the poor horse would of been pts over his error of judgment. Good idea about the area x