New vetting rules

IdoShowing

Well-Known Member
Joined
31 May 2008
Messages
266
Visit site
Usually when you get a horse vetted, you get a different vet than the horses usual one right? So that they are not biased etc.
But, someone told me today that now, if you request the horses usual vet, they have to disclose everything about the horse - is this new procedure correct, cos i think its a fab idea!! No more secrets illnesses & leg problems!!
 

shazza283

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 August 2008
Messages
202
Visit site
It's news to me
blush.gif
confused.gif
- I'd have doubts as the client confidentiality would be breached. If you had the vendor's permission it might work, but it might put vets in a difficult position at the off - bias works both ways - a vet that knows too much about the horse's history might prejudge or put too much emphasis on a known problem. - it's a mine field the vetting story - for a while they looked like ending up on the cutting room floor !
grin.gif
cool.gif
 

Syrah

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 November 2007
Messages
2,293
Location
Cheshire
Visit site
Yes, it is right.

My horse was vetted by 'my' vet. The buyer didn't know that they had requested a vetting from the vet I used.

They had to get my permission to disclose any information though.
 

ihatework

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 September 2004
Messages
23,023
Visit site
If a seller was happy for their vet to do it and gave permission for the vet to disclose medical history and equally the vet felt there was no conflict of interest, then in my eyes that is a big vote of confidence in the horse for sale.
 

Thistle

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2005
Messages
17,356
Location
North East Suffolk
Visit site
I recently bought a horse fairly locally, obviously I wanted to use my vet, however seller used same practice (4 vets). I used a vet from the practice who had never treated the horse but obviously he had access to all history, the practice was also happy to discuss history with me - not much to talk about though.
 
Top