New vetting rules

I

IdoShowing

Well-Known Member
Joined
31 May 2008
Messages
269
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!!
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top