Why can there not be a system where all vets histories can be linked together for a potential buyer?

[SOS]

Taking emotion and your experience, which I completely sympathise with, aside - this would be a near possible task.

Practice management systems costs thousands if not millions to set up, maintain and run. They are complex beasts and there are many different PMS across many different veterinary practices in the UK. It’s near impossible to seamlessly amalgamate individual clinical histories into a file on most PMS, so even when a horse/pet/farm moves to a new vet practice old histories are often just attached as a file. Let alone suddenly have a big database with all history on.

Who would run the database? At what advantage would this be to veterinary businesses? Who would pay and maintain it?

Yes the under care guidelines have recently changed, but less so for the owner and more the vet. History should have always been obtained from the previous vet but this relies on the owner being honest AND giving permission. Which in the scenarios we are discussing they’d be unlikely too.

What I can get on board with is a national database for microchips. The information stored for microchips is relatively standardised and simple, bringing the half a dozen big microchip companies databases together would then encourage small companies to opt in. It’s in the Gov interest due to laws surrounding microchipping and could be achievable.

Vettings are a minefield and really only good for insurance purposes IMO. All you are proving is the horse looked like X and moved like Y in a snapshot in time. Insure it immediately as the horse in that snapshot and cross everything it stays that way. Unfortunately troubles arise like in the examples above when a vet gives the opinion that an issue is caused by Z, perhaps a more minor cause, and it later turns out not to be and is more serious, meanwhile the insurance has already excluded that body part.

ETA: in a perfect world national microchip database would require registration of current owners for all animals and vets would not be allowed to treat without checking microchip (unless emergency). You could then confidently use the microchip as identification for conflict of interest when booking a vetting.

 

[Goldenstar]

From earlier posts I am aware of which vet that Birker did use for Lari's vetting, and whilst I have never personally used them they are generally well regarded locally as an equine vet.

I don't know how Lari was passed fit on the day either, but something definitely doesn't add up somewhere. Any vet can have an off day, I suppose.

Yes they can have an off day and there’s nothing personal in suing someone who provided a service that’s fallen short .

A vetting is only valid for that day, at the time of the vetting, not five minutes past that time.

Nonsense , that’s just not so .
You can successfully sue vets who have passed horses with issues .

 

[Goldenstar]

From earlier posts I am aware of which vet that Birker did use for Lari's vetting, and whilst I have never personally used them they are generally well regarded locally as an equine vet.

I don't know how Lari was passed fit on the day either, but something definitely doesn't add up somewhere. Any vet can have an off day, I suppose.

Yes they can have an off day and there’s nothing personal in suing someone who provided a service that’s fallen short .
Birkers horse was showing issues very shortly after purchase
I think you could have had a good case for proving the horse was not suitable for the purpose he was vetted for .
But forming a case takes time money and there’s an emotional cost to be considered.
Vets are insured for stuff like this

 

[Pearlsasinger]

Sorry if you been having problems but what you are suggesting is not practical in the real world. Every vet practice in the UK would have to replace their computer systems and keep paying for upgrades. I can see how well that would go down with clients who are already moaning about veterinary costs. There are innumerable different passporting bodies who are unlikely to want to merge, especially where they are a breed society. There are various companies offering microchipping, also unlikely to want to give up their business to some combined body. Also, how may horses have the same name? it would be hopeless trying to identify a specific Neddy. At one time, there were 4 horses on the yard with the same name.

On vetting, if we have been unable to use our own vet, we have asked them for a recommendation in the area the horse is. I certainly would not accept a recommendation from the seller.

And the info belongs to the person who paid for it. GDPR won't allow the sharing of such info without the express consent of the person who paid the bill. Presumably in your case the owner would have refused.

 

[Fire sign]

Probably a question that has been asked before but were blood samples taken at the vetting and once the issues showed up did you have the time frame /opportunity to have them tested ? Am guessing that if the horse was on Bute or had recently had steroids injected then he would show no signs of pain or unsoundness on the day of the vetting ? Or should a vet be able to see beyond that ?

 

[Birker2020]

Probably a question that has been asked before but were blood samples taken at the vetting and once the issues showed up did you have the time frame /opportunity to have them tested ? Am guessing that if the horse was on Bute or had recently had steroids injected then he would show no signs of pain or unsoundness on the day of the vetting ? Or should a vet be able to see beyond that ?

I did have bloods taken and admittedly did have the opportunity to have them tested. However, I had carried out 4 months of rehab and groundwork with a view to getting the saddle fitter out for a new saddle as the horse had changed shape dramatically. During this time his SI was medicated. When he was suitable to be restarted I got a saddle fitter out inside the timeframe for drug testing and I rode him for the fitting and a pro rider got on board and started riding him to work him correctly. He went smashing for about 20 rides and I thought it was problem solved, which took us just outside the 6 month time frame for testing. Then he started reacting over another two or three sessions as more was demanded of him. Let me be clear - not an increase in duration of time riding (we are talking max 30 min sessions built up gradually) but being asked to ride a 20 m circle or to leg yield slightly or encouraged to work more from behind. It was an increased resentment that built up. The slightest deviation from riding around the outside of the track resulted in some huge reactive behaviours as did a horse walking past the menage gate or a wheelbarrow being knocked over. Reaching to do up his girth would result in resentment. Getting on him he would feel like a powder keg. Pro stopped riding him for unrelated reasons. And I started as I didn't want to waste any progress that had been made and wanted to keep up his routine. Probably rode him 10 times, each time he felt like a powder keg and then he threw me off dramatically on a lesson, literally three strides from the mounting block when I went to do up his girth. He went back to the vets where it was discovered KS/coffin joints etc. He was treated for this. I never got on him again. I'm not ashamed to say he terrified me that day. I can cope with spins, even rears or nappy behaviour but fly bucking to rid himself of a rider was too much.

He played up when on sales livery ( it was very obvious when been asked to go along at fast canter around outside of school he was fine but any collection / smaller circles resulted in stopping and planting and refusing to go forward. He was being touted as a prospective hunter with full disclosure by the sales livery guy (he found out in his former years he'd been a fab hunter for a few seasons) but then went lame with a split in his hoof with the sales livery guy so came home to me.

Rider tried to bring him back into work twice more following more treatment but he was deemed too uncomfortable to ride anymore due to all his issues so went to a retirement yard.

 

[HorsesRule2009]

Probably a question that has been asked before but were blood samples taken at the vetting and once the issues showed up did you have the time frame /opportunity to have them tested ? Am guessing that if the horse was on Bute or had recently had steroids injected then he would show no signs of pain or unsoundness on the day of the vetting ? Or should a vet be able to see beyond that ?

I have just finished reading this thread and about to ask the same question regarding vetting bloods.
Bloods should be taken and stored as standard for all vetting, they are stored for 6 months and you can request them run at any time in those 6 months.
The taking and storing of bloods is included in the vetting price.
There is an additional charge for them to be run which I believe is around £350.

OP did you ever run the vetting bloods?

 

[Patterdale]

It would be impossible. Unscrupulous people don’t use the horses real name for the vet anyway. So they will have a horse let’s say ‘Fred’ stable name registered with the vet, then ask the vet to come do a lameness work up on Fred. Vet comes out and they wheel out a grey gelding and say here he is.
Vet goes back to practice and books the work up on Fred down on the clients account under ‘Fred.’

Only the horse isn’t Fred and neither is the next horse who needs attention for anything dodgy because Fred doesn’t exist. But ask for a vet history for ‘Black Beauty’ (the grey geldings real name) and it’s clean as a whistle.

Dodgy people will always be dodgy.

 

[Birker2020]

I have just finished reading this thread and about to ask the same question regarding vetting bloods.
Bloods should be taken and stored as standard for all vetting, they are stored for 6 months and you can request them run at any time in those 6 months.
The taking and storing of bloods is included in the vetting price.
There is an additional charge for them to be run which I believe is around £350.

OP did you ever run the vetting bloods?

See reply 36. We crossed I think

 

[HorsesRule2009]

I did have bloods taken and admittedly did have the opportunity to have them tested. However, I had carried out 4 months of rehab and groundwork with a view to getting the saddle fitter out for a new saddle as the horse had changed shape dramatically. During this time his SI was medicated. When he was suitable to be restarted I got a saddle fitter out inside the timeframe for drug testing and I rode him for the fitting and a pro rider got on board and started riding him to work him correctly. He went smashing for about 20 rides and I thought it was problem solved, which took us just outside the 6 month time frame for testing. Then he started reacting over another two or three sessions as more was demanded of him. Let me be clear - not an increase in duration of time riding (we are talking max 30 min sessions built up gradually) but being asked to ride a 20 m circle or to leg yield slightly or encouraged to work more from behind. It was an increased resentment that built up. The slightest deviation from riding around the outside of the track resulted in some huge reactive behaviours as did a horse walking past the menage gate or a wheelbarrow being knocked over. Reaching to do up his girth would result in resentment. Getting on him he would feel like a powder keg. Pro stopped riding him for unrelated reasons. And I started as I didn't want to waste any progress that had been made and wanted to keep up his routine. Probably rode him 10 times, each time he felt like a powder keg and then he threw me off dramatically on a lesson, literally three strides from the mounting block when I went to do up his girth. He went back to the vets where it was discovered KS/coffin joints etc. He was treated for this. I never got on him again. I'm not ashamed to say he terrified me that day. I can cope with spins, even rears or nappy behaviour but fly bucking to rid himself of a rider was too much.

He played up when on sales livery and then went lame with a split in his hoof so came home.

Rider tried to bring him back into work twice more following more treatment but he was deemed too uncomfortable to ride anymore so went to a retirement yard.

We cross posted.
Just for future reference for people I believe you can ask for the bloods to be kept longer but you do need to phone and request this - unsure if there's an additional charge for this.
But maybe helpful info for someone going forward.

 

[Fire sign]

I did have bloods taken and admittedly did have the opportunity to have them tested. However, I had carried out 4 months of rehab and groundwork with a view to getting the saddle fitter out for a new saddle as the horse had changed shape dramatically. During this time his SI was medicated. When he was suitable to be restarted I got a saddle fitter out inside the timeframe for drug testing and I rode him for the fitting and a pro rider got on board and started riding him to work him correctly. He went smashing for about 20 rides and I thought it was problem solved, which took us just outside the 6 month time frame for testing. Then he started reacting over another two or three sessions as more was demanded of him. Let me be clear - not an increase in duration of time riding (we are talking max 30 min sessions built up gradually) but being asked to ride a 20 m circle or to leg yield slightly or encouraged to work more from behind. It was an increased resentment that built up. The slightest deviation from riding around the outside of the track resulted in some huge reactive behaviours as did a horse walking past the menage gate or a wheelbarrow being knocked over. Reaching to do up his girth would result in resentment. Getting on him he would feel like a powder keg. Pro stopped riding him for unrelated reasons. And I started as I didn't want to waste any progress that had been made and wanted to keep up his routine. Probably rode him 10 times, each time he felt like a powder keg and then he threw me off dramatically on a lesson, literally three strides from the mounting block when I went to do up his girth. He went back to the vets where it was discovered KS/coffin joints etc. He was treated for this. I never got on him again. I'm not ashamed to say he terrified me that day. I can cope with spins, even rears or nappy behaviour but fly bucking to rid himself of a rider was too much.

He played up when on sales livery and then went lame with a split in his hoof so came home.

Rider tried to bring him back into work twice more following more treatment but he was deemed too uncomfortable to ride anymore so went to a retirement yard.

What bad luck Birker, sometimes it just doesn’t work out and it’s hard to act when you are still hopeful it’s all going to be OK

 

[Birker2020]

What bad luck Birker, sometimes it just doesn’t work out and it’s hard to act when you are still hopeful it’s all going to be OK

I know. Fate transpired against me and it's just a shame how the timing worked out from the time it took after injury to the vet treating to the groundwork to the saddle fit, to the rider and then tick, tock, tick, tock out of time.

Mind you he would have only gone back to the seller over my dead body. It wasn't an option for me.

 

[JCbruce]

This is what I feared.

My vets caused a pressure sore and bone damage from bad bandaging even tho I asked 4 times if the bandge was too tight and the surgeon just slapped my horse on the arse and said you just need to bring him back in to the room. My vets and the equine hospital tried blaming each other but was impossible to sue the vets I looked into it and was told not to bother.

 

[Smogul]

Sorry if you been having problems but what you are suggesting is not practical in the real world. Every vet practice in the UK would have to replace their computer systems and keep paying for upgrades. I can see how well that would go down with clients who are already moaning about veterinary costs. There are innumerable different passporting bodies who are unlikely to want to merge, especially where they are a breed society. There are various companies offering microchipping, also unlikely to want to give up their business to some combined body. Also, how may horses have the same name? it would be hopeless trying to identify a specific Neddy. At one time, there were 4 horses on the yard with the same name.

On vetting, if we have been unable to use our own vet, we have asked them for a recommendation in the area the horse is. I certainly would not accept a recommendation from the seller.

It is also slightly naive to assume that all horses are microchipped and passported. Definitely still not the case. It may well be the law but it isn't enforced. Friend just bought an 8 year old which was neither. Breeder didn't do it commercially so hadn't bothered. Previous owner didn't compete so had never got round to it.

 

[lme]

I think linking vet records would be hard (impossible) to enforce.

TBF I always assume that any horse I view will have more than one vet. Mine use a GP vet, a different vet for lameness or performance related issues and other specialist vets as needed.

If buying, I usually get X rays and (if I wanted to go ahead despite a finding on the 5 stage) would get scans of anything questionable before proceeding to X- ray. I don’t sell so have not had to consider what I would do re releasing vet records to a potential purchaser.

 

[piglet2001]

As the above. I use several vet practices and would assume a seller probably would to. I don’t see the GP for every problem, they refer you on or if you have private medical insurance or the money you can go else where to. I use my local vets for routine work and emergency’s. Orthopaedic stuff I self refer to a large referral hospital (I don’t even bother going locally) and have also taken horses to dental/ophthalmic specialists. When buying I get the orthopaedic vet to vet it or get it taken in to the hospital, it does not have to be perfect but I just want to know if/what the problems are, the risk and the best way to manage them, I then insure for six months to a year in case something nasty is lurking.

 

[tyner]

Sorry if you been having problems but what you are suggesting is not practical in the real world. Every vet practice in the UK would have to replace their computer systems and keep paying for upgrades. I can see how well that would go down with clients who are already moaning about veterinary costs. There are innumerable different passporting bodies who are unlikely to want to merge, especially where they are a breed society. There are various companies offering microchipping, also unlikely to want to give up their business to some combined body. Also, how may horses have the same name? it would be hopeless trying to identify a specific Neddy. At one time, there were 4 horses on the yard with the same name.

On vetting, if we have been unable to use our own vet, we have asked them for a recommendation in the area the horse is. I certainly would not accept a recommendation from the seller.

Just because it's not practical it doesn't mean its not right.

It is a welfare issue. Having more information sharing is not about trying to lay blame on anyone but trying to give these animals a better life. It would prevent a lot more suffering from poor misold horses and maybe would improve the situation for insurance companies too.

At the end of the day you are left holding the lead rope with few answers after going down countless avenues when you could have got there much quicker and ruled things out.

That being said...
I don't see it happening because of the vets and everyone else who benefits from the current disarray has no incentive to change it.

And who bears the cost most of all?

Owners yes, but most hurt by this disarray is the horse.

And vets and dealers and those who benefits from the system is ok with that.

That's what's most sad.

I think if someone put all of the vet histories together, overall it would paint a very unfortunate picture of what it's like to be a horse today. Not every case, but many of them.

 

[Landcruiser]

Just because it's not practical it doesn't mean its not right.

It is a welfare issue. Having more information sharing is not about trying to lay blame on anyone but trying to give these animals a better life. It would prevent a lot more suffering from poor misold horses and maybe would improve the situation for insurance companies too.

At the end of the day you are left holding the lead rope with few answers after going down countless avenues when you could have got there much quicker and ruled things out.

That being said...
I don't see it happening because of the vets and everyone else who benefits from the current disarray has no incentive to change it.

And who bears the cost most of all?

Owners yes, but most hurt by this disarray is the horse.

And vets and dealers and those who benefits from the system is ok with that.

That's what's most sad.

I think if someone put all of the vet histories together, overall it would paint a very unfortunate picture of what it's like to be a horse today. Not every case, but many of them.

As several people have said, Data Protection forbids the sharing of vet histories without the express permission of the registered owner. Vets don't "benefit" from this, nor are they in a position to change it. Vets try to obtain previous histories when new clients or pets are registered - but they have no right to them, and if the owner doesn't disclose being registered elsewhere or give the other vet permission to disclose, there's nothing to be done. It's ALWAYS better when history IS passed on, so as not to repeat investigations etc which no vet wants to do un-necessarily. I don't know who you think would benefit, apart from the seller when moving on an animal with dodgy past history.

 

[Highmileagecob]

Apart from repeating investigations, there is always the risk of administering potentially dangerous prescription combinations, if previous history is unknown to the treating vet.