Would you accept this case?

Re: Would you accept this case?

Clive Ansell — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:26:10 GMT

One of my regular practices, which I am not going to name.

Re: Would you accept this case?

J G Wray — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:09:54 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]Yes.[/quote]

Who are you working for currently?

JGW

Re: Would you accept this case?

Clive Ansell — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 07:49:59 GMT

Yes.

Re: Would you accept this case?

J G Wray — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 07:37:48 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]I'm just a locum, the practice owner may decide to go ahead, but that is his call. [/quote]

Have you, as a practice employee, albeit temporary, but still a trusted practice employee discussed, with your current employer, the use of this website to solicit opinion on a current issue at the practice?

JGW

Re: Would you accept this case?

Clive Ansell — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 06:50:31 GMT

So far the new owners have refused to register at a practice in their home town, so I have declined the case on the basis that adequate 24/7 OOH care cannot be provided given they would be > 60 miles from our OOH provider. If and when they register, and we have discussed with their new practice and they are happy, we will carry out the op.

I'm just a locum, the practice owner may decide to go ahead, but that is his call.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Alasdair Mathieson — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:56:50 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

I have a bitch spey booked for next week. She was rehomed by a local charity to a new home about 50 miles away, but is coming to us as there is an arrangement for cheap neutering with this charity. The bitch will be admitted, have op, and discharged the same day with post op checks at 2 and 10-12 days.

There is no overnight care on site, and the OOH provider is 10 miles in the other direction, therefore in the very unlikely event of a post op emergency OOH care is going to be 60 or so miles and 1 -2 hours away. I have discussed it with the owners and they accept the risk and responsibility.

Is this acceptable and should the new owners find a closer practice? if I take the case could I possibly be in breach of the RCVS GtoPC?

[/quote]

What did you do?

Re: Would you accept this case?

Alasdair Mathieson — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 22:35:38 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]One of the reasons for this, and there are probably many, is that we have no guidance in the form of fee lists/scales from BVA or RCVS. Contrast this with BMA,Law Society , and other professional bodies who all seem advise their members re fees.[/quote]

I would support the idea if there was a list of minimum charges.

Think someone said that in one of the European countries that was the case (Germany? Mark?)

[/quote]

In my view, an agreed and comprehensive list of minimum charges, is exactly what we need. A lot of practices only seem to be able to compete by being cheaper, often to the point of being demeaning.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 21:14:13 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]Sorry, I'm not German! [/quote]

Sorry! Dagmar?

Re: Would you accept this case?

Mark Hedberg — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 21:08:42 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

(Germany? Mark?)

[/quote]

Sorry, I'm not German!

Re: Would you accept this case?

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:22:19 GMT

I would support the idea if there was a list of minimum charges.

Think someone said that in one of the European countries that was the case (Germany? Mark?)

Re: Would you accept this case?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 18:25:12 GMT

Mark

Exactly

Wynne

Re: Would you accept this case?

Mark Hedberg — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 18:12:55 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

£66 would have been regarded as a very fair (to both practice and owner ) price for a bitch spay 25 years ago-that's a quarter of a century

Wynne

[/quote]

25 years ago £66 was a hell of a lot more money! :)

Re: Would you accept this case?

Bob Russell — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:58:21 GMT

'We' may do all right as you say but how are the next generation(s) going to do if the profession continues to cut and cut prices in order to 'compete'?

I left university with a small debt (it felt pretty big at the time!) that was gone within a year. New grads now have much larger debts, not least the tuition fees to pay back.

This is a profession that is hell bent on getting poorer and poorer.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:33:35 GMT

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"] in the form of fee lists/scales from BVA or RCVS[/quote]

And quite right too. It's none of their business.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:20:14 GMT

£66 would have been regarded as a very fair (to both practice and owner ) price for a bitch spay 25 years ago-that's a quarter of a century

Wynne

Re: Would you accept this case?

Mark Hedberg — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:46:12 GMT

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]

[quote user="robloxley"]

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]they will almost certainly find they are making a substantial loss[/quote]

which if the clients aren't going to register for the long term given the distance, they're not going to make up from the client in future work

[/quote] As a profession, we seem to me to often have an inbuilt determination to undercharge. One of the reasons for this, and there are probably many, is that we have no guidance in the form of fee lists/scales from BVA or RCVS. Contrast this with BMA,Law Society , and other professional bodies who all seem advise their members re fees. The only justification for such a tiny fee as this, would be to regard it as a loss leader, which as you point out, doesn't apply.

[/quote]

Pardon my ignorance, but are they allowed to recommend prices? I have faint memories of that being 'anticompetitive' or something.

Re: Would you accept this case?

David Mills — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:40:00 GMT

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]

[quote user="robloxley"]

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]they will almost certainly find they are making a substantial loss[/quote]

which if the clients aren't going to register for the long term given the distance, they're not going to make up from the client in future work

[/quote]

As a profession, we seem to me to often have an inbuilt determination to undercharge. One of the reasons for this, and there are probably many, is that we have no guidance in the form of fee lists/scales from BVA or RCVS. Contrast this with BMA,Law Society , and other professional bodies who all seem advise their members re fees. The only justification for such a tiny fee as this, would be to regard it as a loss leader, which as you point out, doesn't apply.

[/quote]

I do wonder about this. Do we undercharge or do others overcharge? Lawyers are generally pretty rich and most people go into it knowing its a lucrative career. Like bankers. Work long hours, awful job but the payback is retirement early and wonga galore. Generally they detest the working day (I was at Cambridge and 80% of general graduates work in such jobs in London - to a man, everyone I've met doesn't find their work interesting; bearable is enough (bearability proportional to money earned generally))

Vets, and doctors to some extent (GPs? Hmmm), I imagine don't go into veterinary medicine wanting to be rich. They do it because of the golden measure of helping something to get better. Some become rich in the process; most don't. How much we charge is dictated by what the market will bear. I think we do alright, and I think this constant comparison to other professionals is a bad argument, and not particularly useful.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Alasdair Mathieson — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:58:18 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]they will almost certainly find they are making a substantial loss[/quote]

which if the clients aren't going to register for the long term given the distance, they're not going to make up from the client in future work

[/quote]

Re: Would you accept this case?

Rob Loxley — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 23:51:02 GMT

[quote user="Alasdair Mathieson"]they will almost certainly find they are making a substantial loss[/quote]

which if the clients aren't going to register for the long term given the distance, they're not going to make up from the client in future work

Re: Would you accept this case?

Alasdair Mathieson — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 19:20:22 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

The dog has only just been rehomed, so what I think I will do is ask the new owners to register with a practice where they live, and then discuss with them to see if they are happy to provide OOH cover if we spey the bitch or alternatively they can spey her. If not then I will decline the case

This is all about money, the charity are getting bitch speys for a flat £66.

[/quote]

If that is a total, all-inclusive, charge, including VAT, someone needs to sit down and do their sums. If they do, they will almost certainly find they are making a substantial loss. For this reason, I would say, refuse the case.

Re: Would you accept this case?

Mark Hedberg — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:25:38 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

No, it is a local charity, nothing to do with the dogs trust. it's not a very good one either, they rehome aggressive dogs - large dog, 1.0ml Domitor, packet vicryl, take off VAT - ain't much left from £66! then one has to provide 24/7 cover too. idiotic nonsense.

It now looks like it will not go ahead anyway. New owners are not really happy to register at a vets local to them, and they don't want to pay if they need to be seen OOH - they just want to be able to wonder in to any practice, in any town, at any time and have any fees billed directly to the charity. If I cannot have in place adequate OOH back up in their home town, then I shall be refusing the case.

[/quote]of course, because they're 'entitled'!

Re: Would you accept this case?

Rob Loxley — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 19:05:34 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]No, it is a local charity, nothing to do with the dogs trust[/quote]

Re-read, my error.

[quote user="Clive Ansell"] ain't much left from £66! then one has to provide 24/7 cover too. idiotic nonsense[/quote]

yup!

Re: Would you accept this case?

Clive Ansell — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 17:02:02 GMT

Re: Would you accept this case?

Utlendigur — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:11:54 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]the charity are getting bitch speys for a flat £66. [/quote]

Is that a different scheme to the vouchers? Voucher scheme is about £68 to Dogs Trust and £30 to client, so £98 total.

Edit - reread post and saw that it was a local charity not DT (sorry)

Re: Would you accept this case?

Rob Loxley — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:11:56 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]what I think I will do is ask the new owners to register with a practice where they live, and then discuss with them to see if they are happy to provide OOH cover if we spey the bitch or alternatively they can spey her[/quote]

sounds like a sensible decision

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]the charity are getting bitch speys for a flat £66[/quote]

Yikes I really can't see that being profitable (and it's interesting how different parts of DT seem to feel vastly different spay fees to pay vets are fair...); now I see why some practice managers are vetoing pain relief to save costs
I know we've been there before, but why can't you charge the charity a fair rate for a good job? If we are so overpriced, maybe they'd like to figure how much it would cost them to set up a small clinic and employ some part time staff to do their own surgery!