When a horse on loan is unwell is it normal for vet to only speak to owner ?

[Mary3050]

Hi guys,

One of my friends is full loaning a horse which has been unwell and is currently with the vets . She called the owner to let her know that horse wasn’t well and she wanted to get the vet. They did but vet wanted horse admitting so friend and owner took the horse to vets together. However my friend is annoyed because the vets always call the owner with updates and not her. I believe the owner give her all the information that the vet give her . The horse is insured by the owner so I am not surprised . The owner has said to the vets she is happy for the vet to speak with loaner too . I believe the owner has included friend in the decision. The vets seem a little reluctant to talking with the loaner expect from saying there no change etc .

Has anyone else found this is normal when owner is around ?

Many thanks

 

[Sossigpoker]

That would be because of data protection. The owner should speak to the practice staff /manager and put it in the records that the vet is allowed to speak to the loaner. The vets themselves won't have the time to make the same phone call twice so ideally the owner and loaner should decide which one the vet should call.

 

[silv]

Probably the vet is too busy to ring two different people with the same information. I don't see a problem with the vet ringing the owner and then her passing on the information.

 

[AmyMay]

Probably the vet is too busy to ring two different people with the same information. I don't see a problem with the vet ringing the owner and then her passing on the information.

This.

 

[ihatework]

Honestly, I’m not surprised and is it really such a big deal. It sounds like loaner is being kept fully in the loop.

 

[ester]

Seems a bit pointless them repeating themselves when loaner can just speak to owner ?‍. If I were in that situ I wouldn't expect them to speak to me separately.

 

[ArklePig]

I rang the vets about my dog the other week and they initially wouldn't speak to me as Mr AP registered her, then she clicked into the file and saw my name there too, apologised and filled me in. I guess people would complain if information was given out willy nilly and I would also guess the vet staff have enough to be doing without making the same phone call twice.

 

[Mary3050]

That would be because of data protection. The owner should speak to the practice staff /manager and put it in the records that the vet is allowed to speak to the loaner. The vets themselves won't have the time to make the same phone call twice so ideally the owner and loaner should decide which one the vet should call.

My friend said the the owner did that at the vets but it seems the vet only wants to deal with the owner. I did say to her if it was my horse I was loaning out I would expect the vet to talk to me if it’s insured by me especially.

 

[Sossigpoker]

My friend said the the owner did that at the vets but it seems the vet only wants to deal with the owner. I did say to her if it was my horse I was loaning out I would expect the vet to talk to me if it’s insured by me especially.

But you can't expect the vet to call the owner and loaner separately.
Unless the owner specifically doesn't want to be involved ,.I'm not sure I see the problem.

 

[Red-1]

I think the vet is doing right to call the owner, especially as it appears the owner is paying the bill.

I don't think it is fair to expect the vet to call 2 people to update. Even if the data protection issue has been solved with owner permission, it is just extra work. Is there an issue with the owner not updating the loaner? A reason they are not able to share the information?

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

I was going to say that the vet will speak to who ever is paying the bill. I t seems that the insurance is paid by the owner, so if it is in the owner's name, of course the vet will speak to the owner

 

[Toby_Zaphod]

As has been said there are data protection issues here. The owner pays the insurance on the horse & therefore the vet will speak to them. The owner can relate things to the loaner,.

 

[twiggy2]

That would be because of data protection. The owner should speak to the practice staff /manager and put it in the records that the vet is allowed to speak to the loaner. The vets themselves won't have the time to make the same phone call twice so ideally the owner and loaner should decide which one the vet should call.

I rang the vets about my dog the other week and they initially wouldn't speak to me as Mr AP registered her, then she clicked into the file and saw my name there too, apologised and filled me in. I guess people would complain if information was given out willy nilly and I would also guess the vet staff have enough to be doing without making the same phone call twice.

As has been said there are data protection issues here. The owner pays the insurance on the horse & therefore the vet will speak to them. The owner can relate things to the loaner,.

When I left my long term job as a vets receptionist 4 and a half years ago data protection did not apply to animals records, I doubt that has changed but stand to be corrected.
We were however not allowed by our practice to give information out to anyone mentioned in the animals files, it was just seen as good practice.
The vets will be short on time and it is the owner who's more important to speak to as if any decisions need to be made its them making them.

 

[ycbm]

As has been said there are data protection issues here. The owner pays the insurance on the horse & therefore the vet will speak to them. The owner can relate things to the loaner,.

There's no data protection issue with the vet, the owner has informed the vet they can talk to the loaner.

It is, though, unreasonable to expect them to give the same information to more than one person.

And there may be data protection issues with the insurers, who probably only want to talk to the person who pays the bill.
.

 

[throwaway2022]

Without wanting to sound harsh, does it really matter providing loaner is being kept in the loop?

If I was the owner, I’d personally want to be the main point of contact anyway

 

[Julia0803]

I’d guess, like others have said, it’s due to time- the vet can’t be ringing two people and explaining in detail twice. If the owner is paying she’s the point of contact.

As a comparison our loan horse went to the vets for a full work up and treatment. I drove him there, but his owner came too. I was paying the bill and I was insuring him.

The vet was clear I was the client (as the bill payer!) and therefore spoke to me, not the owner. I would then speak to her and discuss the options together before then going back to the vet with decisions.

 

[Goldenstar]

The owner is the client the vet speaks the client or the clients agreed agent (example my groom if I am away).
So yes that’s normal .
I would expect the owner to have said the vet it’s ok to speak with the person loaning the horse where perhaps the loaner is caring for the horse .
But in this case the owner should be doing the updating .

 

[Landcruiser]

I’d guess, like others have said, it’s due to time- the vet can’t be ringing two people and explaining in detail twice. If the owner is paying she’s the point of contact.

As a comparison our loan horse went to the vets for a full work up and treatment. I drove him there, but his owner came too. I was paying the bill and I was insuring him.

The vet was clear I was the client (as the bill payer!) and therefore spoke to me, not the owner. I would then speak to her and discuss the options together before then going back to the vet with decisions.

It's not to do with being the bill payer, it's to do with who is registered as the owner with the vet - data protection is now VERY tightly adhered to and we (vet practices) are not allowed to give any details out to anyone without the express and noted permission of the owner, this includes passing on histories to other vets or to insurance companies. Vets can get into a lot of trouble if they break these laws/guidelines. And as others have said, they are always fighting the clock. It's hard enough find time to make one phone call, let alone two. And phone calls are a two way conversation - the owner and loaner may have different views on how to move forward with treatment - the vet can't be getting involved with that, so needs one point of contact. Owner and loaner can then discuss in their own time and decide what they want to happen next.

 

[rara007]

Yes one point of contact is much easier especially when it comes to decision making, let alone the time and gdpr side of things.

 

[maya2008]

When our Shetland got lami while on loan, vet dealt with me, which helped hugely when she subsequently came home, as there was continuity. I paid the bills throughout and she was insured by me.

 

[Julia0803]

It's not to do with being the bill payer, it's to do with who is registered as the owner with the vet - data protection is now VERY tightly adhered to and we (vet practices) are not allowed to give any details out to anyone without the express and noted permission of the owner, this includes passing on histories to other vets or to insurance companies. Vets can get into a lot of trouble if they break these laws/guidelines. And as others have said, they are always fighting the clock. It's hard enough find time to make one phone call, let alone two. And phone calls are a two way conversation - the owner and loaner may have different views on how to move forward with treatment - the vet can't be getting involved with that, so needs one point of contact. Owner and loaner can then discuss in their own time and decide what they want to happen next.

Yes, sorry perhaps I was unclear. I was the one in contact with the vet, making appointments etc, and was registered with them as their client (inc paying the bill). They knew that I was not the legal owner but my understanding is that the ‘contract’ for want of a better word was between us, not including the owner, therefore they reported to me, as the client/bill payer.

 

[stormox]

Honestly, I’m not surprised and is it really such a big deal. It sounds like loaner is being kept fully in the loop.

This.