thevds.co.uk Omdömen 15

Waste of time dealing with them. Time to move to lawyers. Probably barrister on direct access scheme. They did well for me before, mand got all costs from other side. I tried a without prejudice offer, but now go for everything including costs.

Echoing all the other reviews - this 'service' is terrible and only cares about protecting vet practices at all costs. They dismissed all evidence I provided, kept asking for further evidence, and were rude while at it. It was like talking to a brick wall. Jane Oliver in particular, as well as their head of complaints Nichola Saunders. Honestly just awful people. Claim to be animal lovers but zero compassion, no investigations into malpractice, and total pig-headedness about being right. Awful. I'm sorry if you're here and have had the misfortune of having to deal with them.

Beware. These are an INSURANCE company not a LEGAL company. High handed, bullying culture towards pet owners. They are there to serve interests of Vets, that is their only point of reference. They do not care about Pet owners or animals. Negligence case against 2 companies both proven by 2 Expert Witness Reports.

I was directed to VDS by my vets here my pet died under an anesthetic. VDS were so unprofessional
rude , unhelpful. The defiantly do their job they protect their clients the vets at any cost .

I was referred to the Veterinary Defence Society following a complaint I made last year regarding Village Vets, who misdiagnosed my dog. As a result of this misdiagnosis, he nearly died. My case was handled extremely poorly by Mark Maltman, one of their consultants. All correspondence I received from him was rude and condescending. As someone who had nearly lost their dog of nine years due to veterinary negligence, I would have expected at least a basic level of empathy.
Initially, they quoted the law—despite making it clear they are not lawyers—and stated that they operate under a three-month protocol. Once that three-month deadline passed, they clarified that they are not lawyers and that the timeframe had effectively been used to delay providing a response. This was particularly distressing and unacceptable given that my dog had been given only six months to live. It felt as though they were simply hoping he would die in the interim.
When I eventually received a response, I was told they would only be willing to engage with me if I could produce an independent medical report. The suggestion that I obtain such a report—potentially requiring invasive testing—is neither practical nor appropriate. I also note their confirmation that their client prioritises procedural or financial considerations over the welfare of the animal.
Furthermore, they provided an extensive list of requirements for this report. In effect, this amounted to saying that unless I could produce a highly detailed and costly report—sufficient to demonstrate I could take them to court—they would not engage with me at all. If I could not, they would simply refuse to listen or take responsibility

My cat had to have her eye removed due to negligence - failure to properly treat an ulcer, herpesvirus and refer to an ophthalmologist- by a Cat Clinic in London. After an unsatisfactory complaints process, we asked them to engage in mediation under VCMS. They said the VDS had advised them not to but referred us to the VDS. Whilst my expectations were low, I am truly shocked at the lack of a proper investigation after over three months, ignoring all my evidence but worse still actually making up evidence to protect the vets who should learn from this experience and take responsibility so the same thing should never happen to another cat. I am now raising a concern with the RVC as there is no process in place to raise a complaint with VDS. I believe this is bringing the profession into disrepute.

There is no duty of candour in veterinary medicine, changes need to be made to protect our pets. Insurers have a duty to investigate claims fully and in good faith. I am concerned after reading reviews this does not seem to be happening and the VDS does not appear to have engaged with the CMA investigation?

Don’t expect any impartial investigation or even basic common courtesies from this shambolic set up. They act as a law unto themselves. They exist solely to protect and defend vets from any redress against the latters wrong doing, even if that means putting forward illogical, non-sensical arguments that go against scientific fact!
If you want any hope of compensation/justice from a vet for malpractice or negligence then the only way forward is to pay out for a solicitor, (which the VDS are well aware is often beyond the financial remit of many people).
The VDS operate only in their members’ interests, nothing more. The facts of the case and concomitant evidence presented, (no matter how compelling), equitable principles, logic and even basic common courtesies will not be acknowledged by these ‘people’ when they deign to reply to you as the mere layperson /claimant.

The VDS behave as if they have some legal authority, they do not. They mis-lead people, they suggest they act for you and the vet, they don't, they are the vets insurance company. They assure you of an investigation, the only investigation that, they will do, is into what information you have that could damage their insured. This organisation is more than an insurance company, it is a bully, it lies, albeit carefully, it intimidates, it uses fear tactics. If your vet has harmed, murdered your pet, be very careful around this shady insurance company, they are disgusting with the tactics they use on grieving, bereft people, they take avantage of that, assuming that you, do not know, what you are doing.

Dreadful experience.

This outfit provide insurance for most vets in the UK. If you ever have cause to complain about your vet it will be passed to this outfit.

Based upon our experience and what I've since been told by others, you will be told that you cannnot contact your vet, or their parent organization. The organizations complaints procedure is closed off to you.

They will tell you that they will investigate the case objectively. This might sound a good thing at first, but remember - they provide indemnity insurance for the vet. You will soon discover that there's nothing 'objective' about their review.

They asked us to give permission for them to contact the emergency vet that had to euthanize our pup. They told us that until we gave that permission we were not entitled to know what happened to our dog whist in our vets care.

It seems to me that they know you have a legal case and they're using this pretence at a review to gather information to make their case for the defense of their vet.

I did some research into them as huge alarm bells were ringing. They are notorious. Their treatment of bereaved pet owners is shocking and disgusting. They are a large, powerful company with very expensive legal teams. They will bully people into giving up their claim. Anyone that does have the means and strength to fight them and win is only likely to get peanuts in compensation as whilst our dogs might be loved every big as much as children, to the courts they are just objects of little worth. Do your own research - have your eyes wide open before engaging in any communications with this outfit.

Take advice before doing anything if you have a problem with a vet. I'm only just scratching the surface at discoverying how unregulated the veterinary profession is. They can literally get away with murdering our pets - largely thanks to the VDS (from what I've read).

I was shocked at how badly our seemingly nice vets treated us. Yet I'm told they have no choice. If they don't treat pet owners in this way they will be unable to get indemnity insurance and without said insurance they can't practice as vets. So don't think too badly of the vets - it seems it is this outfit that are responsible.

Awful to have to deal with!

I’ve spoken with the VDS regarding an issue I had with a vets due to negligence and their correspondence with me has been rude, arrogant, unprofessional and undermining.

I asked for information from my vet which they originally refused to provide me as I didn’t have access to it and they eventually did but were rude with there correspondence and took ages to provide information the vets should have readily a available. I even had to ring in the end to then later receive an email to say “in relation to your phone call to our office on Wednesday, we have a zero tolerance to abusive impolite callers, so please do not make contact with our office by such means again” I can 100% confirm I was not abusive in the slightest and in fact as I mentioned on the phone was trying to get to the bottom of where the information was failing to reach me before I seek advice if it wasn’t provided. I have since requested the call and have had this provided and have now asked how i make a formal complaint as the recording is evidence that what I have been accused of is completely false. It feels very much like a bullying antic from the VDS. I have since heard from the head of claims who didn’t even address my concerns around being treated the way I have and just tip toed round it. When I went back addressing my concerns and thag I would like an apology for being accused of being aggressive I received “we have nothing to add to our previous correspondence” just completely ignorant.

i responded asking for the call and mentioned I would be organising a “pre action order” as the vets hadn’t provided the information (this is what the VDS informed me) and suddenly information was in my inbox within the hour now whether it was the vet and obstructing or the VDS directly I can’t say.

They have also told me that a vet passing on information about my animal and the treatment plan is not a breach of confidentiality in there opinion- I’ve received legal advice and been advised that vets have a duty to confidentiality and this is a breach.

I have also provided the VDS with multiple pieces of information/evidence including a vet report from my new vet outlining what they found on a second opinion yet they claim I’ve provided no information on our last correspondence or evidence to back up my received.

I’ve found the VDS awful to deal with so wanted to make a formal complaint (before I was provided the voice recording and now have another contact to try to sort this) and was told I can’t make a formal complaint “ As for our complaints procedure, we repeat that you are not entitled to such as we are not providing you with any service against which you can raise a formal complaint.”

But have said they have logged the incident themselves about the correspondence they had with me this does not feel like a fair complaints process when you have to log your own complaints against yourself. In the last email they have said it’s “been logged, however not upheld” which of course I do feel it wouldn’t be as who would make a complaint about themselves and if they have the VDS clearly find it appropriate for there employees to speak to people the way they do.

All correspondence feels like they are very much trying to put you off from pursuing the matter further. If you have an issue I recommend not reaching out the VDS there horrendous to deal with

Absolutely disgraceful company. A vet from vets now couldnt even remember what happened to our cat, there story differs to that of the day vet dramatically, and that's okay!! You make all vets look untrustworthy you should be ashamed to stand for vets that are happy to make such big mistakes! How can a cat who's buster collar and sutures remain in place, whom stated very clearly the catheter was faulty get away with it when it obviously wasn't the case. Not about the animals all about the money and your just plain ignorant. I have had to deal with this company through both companies looking after our 4 year old cat, 3 operations in under a week, twice we were told the catheter had failed, they didn't actually report this because apparently it didn't fail although I have in writing it did not just once but twice. The vds just deem this is a recollection issue and is common! I'm sorry but if a doctor can't remember what happened to a patient leading up to there death that is negligence, not a recollection issue, how often do these catheters fail, it can't be all that common so to not be able to remember it is just an excuse! This industry needs much more regulating, a solicitor isn't allowed to defend more than one individual in a lawsuit because of conflict of interest and yet this company defended both vets who were arguing that it was each others fault, honestly it was just a giant joke, I don't know how any of you sleep at night, they knew that 2 members of the family suffered with ptsd and anxiety and yet they still couldn't get there stories straight one day to the next. We will never know what the truth is.. they have taken that from us.

The Veterinary Defence Society helps for-profit veterinary businesses like Medivet avoid liability for unethical, unprofessional, and incompetent service.

Medivet subjected us to a number of issues, including but not limited to:

1) A pattern of poor communication and incompetent service for our 2 registered pet cats (one of whom we euthanised in August 2021, following her diagnosis of terminal cancer).

2) Failing to process the insurance claim (for our living cat) correctly in the first instance and keep us updated on the claim’s progress.

3) Failing to include all of our living cat's recent investigations under the submitted insurance claim, or, at the very least, inform us if one or more investigations would be excluded.

4) Sending inappropriate appointment and general care reminders about our deceased cat.

5) Failing to update and manage our deceased cat's records, following her death in August 2021.

---

The veterinary industry lacks the regulations and authoritative bodies that other industries have.

This means that veterinary businesses like Medivet can subject you to awful service, causing undue distress and emotional injury, with no regulated pathway for the client to seek appropriate remediations for such failures.

Additionally, there are no considerations given to a disability like autism (at least, in my case). This is likely due to a lack of proper standards and regulations.

The Veterinary Defence Society must be good for its clients. But for everyone else, it's another manifestation of a broken and unfair society.

No doubt Vet Defence Society defend their vets regardless. But when presented with clear evidence of extreme suffering for the animal, backed up with the second opinion of 2 vets....like those lawyers who defend the most vile of criminals.....you do wonder how they sleep at night.

Absolutely unhappy with their offer ex gratiathis company should be investigated
Too much power on this people
Absolutely no recommended

This organisation represents Vets Now from a legal standpoint. Sadly my 5-year-old healthy dog died in the hands of Vets Now on 20th December 2020. I was naturally upset, to say the least about this. I thought the emergency number on my phone was for my own vet and was horrified at the ongoing stories I've read about how many dogs have died in the hands of Vets Now since my dog has died. My case went to VCMS, then this organisation, The VDS. In my response which I had to explain yet again even though it was on record so this was very distressing. I expressed my concern that every time I saw a Vets Now Vet they kept saying "we don't know" what was wrong with my dog. However, in the VDS report, they said it was Sepsis. I simply said I don't recall seeing this and went on to explain yet again how Vets Now left my dog Boris on the floor with blood coming from his mouth and urinating on the floor. I have a video and pictures of this if anyone would like to see it as proof. However VDS totally ignored my upset but had the pleasure in just saying this in their response to get one over on me - "We are therefore perplexed by your comment about you not having seen the word ‘sepsis’ since 20 December. Not only does it appear on six occasions within our Members’ clinical records, but also three times within the VCMS’ correspondence to you dated 6 April, including a brief description of the condition itself." (I ran a search and could not find this but that was all they were concerned about, not my key points that he died, was left on the floor, and was healthy after being in the care of my own vet during the day) It's all about power and not feel for the customer and sympathy for losing a 5-year-old dog. I expressed that if I was to get back part of the money I paid, I wanted to donate it to Boris's brothers as sisters as a memory of him to buy gifts. I don't want their blood money, Just a gesture of goodwill. However, like any legal or Veterinary organisation, it's just about money and oneupmanship, not feelings for how hurt I am about my lovely, healthy Boris. RIP my beautiful boy. (if you check my reviews on Trustpilot they are all generally positive apart from Vets Now and now this company. So I'm not a negative person. I've been a successful businesswoman all my life but Vets Now and now this organisation are the worse I have ever come across.