Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Judith Joyce — Wed, 29 Oct 2025 09:20:15 GMT

That's what I meant by privilege to dispense. (Losing the right to prescribe is a very different can of worms). What CMA seems to be proposing is the same as last time round when we had to tell clients they could get their drugs elsewhere, give free prescriptions to allow them to do so, , and have a sign in reception with our 'top ten' drugs (what a farce that was).

The other thing that CMA could do (it is done in a number of European countries) is take drug sales away from VSs altogether. We would have to issue prescriptions to be filled at pharamacies. I'm not sure why CMA hasn't looked at that when similar measures to the ones used last time round don't seem to have worked. Except of course, as you pointed out in your news item, the LVGs can set up/buy their own pharmacies. Why not give the LVGs another competitive advantage, when CMA seems to have presented evidence that their higher prices are at least some of the cause of the problem.

I haven't read the whole thing but is there an acknowledgement that LVGs already have competitive advantage because of the much bigger discounts they can negotiate and how that might be addressed? WHO would be a lot happier if strategic discounting on pharmaceuticals was stopped.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 27 Oct 2025 18:42:39 GMT

[quote userid="9179" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247890#247890"]I'm not sure I've ever read a more succinct version of where the veterinary profession is right now.[/quote]

I try!

[quote userid="13891" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247891#247891"]if we lose the privilege to dispense (commonly the case in some EU countries) small independents might not be unsinkable either. Too pessimistic?[/quote]

Judith Joyce Is losing the right to prescribe the issue here, or is that neither here nor there if you have to tell owners to go and fulfil their prescription with your competitors: https://www.vetsurgeon.org/b/veterinary-news/posts/cvs-to-move-to-main-stock-exchange-market-following-cma-decision-which-advantaged-corporates

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Clive Ansell — Fri, 24 Oct 2025 15:47:03 GMT

[quote userid="9179" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247890#247890"]

"the problem is less that pet owners don't know what they're buying and more that the veterinary profession is trying to sell caviar to people who only want or can afford a Big Mac and large fries."

I'm not sure I've ever read a more succinct version of where the veterinary profession is right now.

[/quote]

I think people want the best Caviar with the best Champagne, but only want to pay for Big mac, fries and cola

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Rob Loxley — Fri, 24 Oct 2025 12:52:31 GMT

I did also like Michael's comment that clients seem to want 'Supervet treatment at Yorkshire Vet prices'!

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Judith Joyce — Fri, 24 Oct 2025 10:06:26 GMT

Dunno, their recommendation for VSA overhaul and reform could be more like hitting the iceberg! Also, In FOP we've gone so far in moving our income streams to drug sales, if we lose the privilege to dispense (commonly the case in some EU countries) small independents might not be unsinkable either. Too pessimistic?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Chris Milligan — Thu, 23 Oct 2025 19:11:11 GMT

I read the following in your news article on this subject Arlo; "the problem is less that pet owners don't know what they're buying and more that the veterinary profession is trying to sell caviar to people who only want or can afford a Big Mac and large fries."

I'm not sure I've ever read a more succinct version of where the veterinary profession is right now.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Dinu Catilina — Thu, 23 Oct 2025 09:52:02 GMT

[quote userid="4103" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247885#247885"]

Has anyone read this

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-15213835/These-sneaky-tricks-vets-using-rip-you-exactly-you-need-beat-them.html

I don't have a subscription so I didn't, 'Sneaky tricks vets are using to rip you off'....!?

[/quote]

No, why waste your time? There is very little good journalism out there, it's mostly humans who failed at life and found something easy to do.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Clive Ansell — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 18:31:00 GMT

[quote userid="4103" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247885#247885"]

Has anyone read this

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-15213835/These-sneaky-tricks-vets-using-rip-you-exactly-you-need-beat-them.html

I don't have a subscription so I didn't, 'Sneaky tricks vets are using to rip you off'....!?

[/quote]

Usual bilge from the Daily Mail

read the comments section for bilge plus

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Cinzia Gandini — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 11:30:50 GMT

Has anyone read this

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-15213835/These-sneaky-tricks-vets-using-rip-you-exactly-you-need-beat-them.html

I don't have a subscription so I didn't, 'Sneaky tricks vets are using to rip you off'....!?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Rob Loxley — Sun, 19 Oct 2025 10:23:54 GMT

[quote userid="11249" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247863#247863"]we will be legislated to drive business towards internet pharmacies[/quote]

owned in large part by the same evil corporates LVGs

What were the CMAs views on reducing the (ever growing) issue of prescription fraud? Plenty of practices already will only send prescriptions direct to pharmacies, but not if we're mandated to hand over the paper copy?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Davina Anderson — Fri, 17 Oct 2025 08:03:55 GMT

The CMA report is 391 pages. Has everyone read it all, or are you only looking at the summary? I have not read it all, but there is a lot in the detail that is way more interesting than just deckchairs.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

David Mills — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 21:09:18 GMT

Gosh what an absolute waste of time it all was. Then, looking at who the expert advisers were it was always going to err towards something which makes headlines but whose practical effects are minimal.

Won't make a blind bit of difference to anything whatsoever.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Sarah Keir — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 19:45:37 GMT

[quote userid="5012" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247869#247869"]It clearly is not working; I've come across many clients (100's not 10's) who were/are not aware that the practice they use has been taken over and is owned by a corporate company. [/quote]

Exactly, this change isn't going to make a blind bit of difference.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Clive Ansell — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:49:46 GMT

Also, conspicuous by its absense is any mention or reference to the provision (or not) of out of hours care.

This is a growing area of concern to many; costs and distances to travel are becoming prohibitive to many people, effectively excluding them from access to OOH care. ( A recent example: young otherwise healthy vomiting cat. NAD on c/e, £1200 OOH bill with no actual diagnosis)

I find it strange there is no proposal to look at or change this.

Other than a few (and getting fewer) independents that do their own OOH cover, almost all small animal OOH is in the hands of the corporate sector now.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Clive Ansell — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 16:59:29 GMT

[quote userid="9515" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247868#247868"]I thought one would actually be workable but actually it is just compelling the LVG to put it on their website (so small letters at the bottom, like they already do).[/quote]

It clearly is not working; I've come across many clients (100's not 10's) who were/are not aware that the practice they use has been taken over and is owned by a corporate company.

Not every one looks at websites, and not every one reads all of the small (and that is often very small and not very obvious) print.

I've also seen many that have jumped ship and moved to another practice because they don't want to give their hard earned to a "faceless money grabbing corporate company" (words of a client, not mine) , only to find the new practice they have chosen is also part of a (often the same) large corporation. Maybe using words in their name such as "independent" shouldn't be allowed?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Sarah Keir — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 15:42:49 GMT

[quote userid="5012" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247855#247855"]Make it clear if the practice is part of a group.[/quote]

I thought one would actually be workable but actually it is just compelling the LVG to put it on their website (so small letters at the bottom, like they already do).

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Dinu Catilina — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 11:20:12 GMT

[quote userid="11249" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247863#247863"]The profession has historically done a brilliant job of being most things to most people. If these proposals go ahead I cannot see how running a pharmacy remains financially viable. I can see practices stocking ONLY injectables and writing 'scripts for everything else. And a lot of disgruntled clients dealing with delays to treatment - but apparently this is what the public want...?[/quote]

For this to happen we will have to be banned from dispensing meds at all. We already ask clients if they want a prescription or the meds and it's pretty much half and half at the moment so what happens next depends on how the legislation will be worded.

If written prescriptions are mandatory then we will all put our prices up for consults and procedures. Capping the prescription fee is irrelevant, it will be just like vaccines or spays, lots of work for little money but overall we will still have to make a profit and the other fees will increase to compensate. This is the bit to which clients and CMA seem to be oblivious, profits must be made in order for a business to be able to function. Cap one side and then another will increase.

If they are recommended and not mandatory then nothing will change. Some want prescriptions and some want meds, same as now. Putting more messages in the consult room will achieve nothing, nobody reads them anyway.

[quote userid="6765" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247860#247860"] Interfering fools in government can’t envisage consequences of some actions.[/quote]

Exactly! My prediction is that overall the cost of veterinary care will increase and not decrease regardless of what the CMA will do.

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247861#247861"]The concept of an updated VSA is nice on paper, but I fear a poisoned chalice for the profession and one I really don't welcome. I hope someone comes up with a system where those big business being regulated by the RCVS pay the costs of that regulation, because when its RCVS vs CVS and their lawyers things are going to get expensive really fast, and I don't want to pay for that. [/quote]

Agree, if the RCVS will end up regulating businesses then the individual vet fees should be decreased or abolished and the businesses should be invoiced with a fee that will reflect the number of employers they have.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

ian bates — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 09:58:18 GMT

I agree with Michael. And I think this is a lot more than re-arranging some deck chairs.

It seems clear to me that we will be legislated to drive business towards internet pharmacies and away from bricks and mortar Practice. We will have to actively promote the internet option, which self evidently will have a significant impact on practice viability in it's current form.

Seriously - in what other industry does a client turn up willing to spend money, only to be actively encouraged to go somewhere else because it's cheaper ? (despite being a damn site more inconvenient). No other industry would have this forced upon them or would accept it.

My understanding is that the prescriptions are charged 'per consult'. So in the many complicated cases I see where animals may well be on 3 or 4 medications I will have to write 4 prescriptions and charge just £16 - for a legal document that it took me 7 years of my life to get to the position of being able to sign, (I include my A levels because I couldn't even start vet school without them).

In addition, I will have to provide those 4 prescriptions at the time of the consult - which are already time short.

The profession has historically done a brilliant job of being most things to most people. If these proposals go ahead I cannot see how running a pharmacy remains financially viable. I can see practices stocking ONLY injectables and writing 'scripts for everything else. And a lot of disgruntled clients dealing with delays to treatment - but apparently this is what the public want...?

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Michael Woodhouse — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 22:24:20 GMT

[quote userid="12930" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31255/has-the-cma-just-rearranged-a-few-deckchairs/247858#247858"]me for £16 [/quote]

I've been down in London today and only just got back, so I've not read the detail. Is that £16 including VAT or plus VAT? Is that per drug or per consult? You'd think setting a fixed price across the marketplace was the absolute opposite of a free market - already musing about increasing consult costs, mark up/dispensing fee on one time medicines. Raises some interesting ethical points - I see a dog with a bad ear on Thursday evening, I provide a prescription on Friday evening, exactly 24 hours later. They order the medicine and it arrives on Monday/Tuesday (or a week on Friday if you get the "Evri have your package" email), who here is causing the unnecessary suffering? Are there going to be exclusions for immediate/urgent treatment?

The profession got their knickers in a twist last time and very little changed. I loathe written prescriptions and they waste my time. I'd change my view if everyone took them and I could empty my pharmacy of expensive drugs, but that won't happen.

The concept of an updated VSA is nice on paper, but I fear a poisoned chalice for the profession and one I really don't welcome. I hope someone comes up with a system where those big business being regulated by the RCVS pay the costs of that regulation, because when its RCVS vs CVS and their lawyers things are going to get expensive really fast, and I don't want to pay for that.

I will not verbally direct people to prescriptions and the internet, without an additional 5-minute rant over how, what matters, is the overall costs of your veterinary services, you can't pick and chose, and everything else will just get more expensive.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Alistair Graham-Evans — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 21:30:10 GMT

Big bag of hot air really.

Although in Australia, we already do all this except actively encourage owners to shop elsewhere!

Quick calculation indicates that if we sold no medicines or over the counter preventatives then our service fees would increase about 15-20% to compensate. So the poorer clients who want essential services would often actually end up paying more. Interfering fools in government can’t envisage consequences of some actions.

Many clients do get drugs online already and we already write many prescriptions especially for compounded medication as we don’t have a cascade which makes prescribing in the UK artificially expensive! We have already discussed the stupidity of this.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Beats — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:40:46 GMT

"inform pet owners that they can get written prescriptions and that medicines may be cheaper online " (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/understanding-the-cmas-provisional-decision-in-its-vets-market-investigation)

"In our proposed remedy, all pet owners with animals with an on-going need for medication must be given a written prescription to enable them to buy the medicine (usually at a much lower cost) online unless they have actively chosen to receive their repeat medications from the FOP. We are also proposing that pet owners must be explicitly informed at certain moments (such as when booking an appointment or when a vet prescribes a medicine) that they can obtain a written prescription and that medicines are usually cheaper online." (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68ee3de1e7b6794c076bbe09/Summary.pdf)

"A requirement for veterinary businesses operating FOPs (a) to make pet owners aware they can get a written prescription and buy medicines online more cheaply, including through the provision of standardised literature at specified times and on emails and text messages and invoices / receipts, as well as notices in waiting rooms, and (b) to ensure that vets working in those FOPs inform pet owners of their ability to request a written prescription during each consultation in which medicine is prescribed."

"A requirement for all veterinary businesses operating FOPs to give pet owners written prescriptions by the end of a consultation (in hard copy) or the end of the day (a digital copy)."

"A requirement for all veterinary businesses operating FOPs to give pet owners a chance to choose whether their default preference for repeat prescriptions is a written prescription or medication dispensed in-clinic. They would need to contact pet owners at specified times to ask for their default preference and inform them that it is often significantly more expensive to buy repeat medication from a FOP. Pet owners who do not make a choice would have their default preference set to receiving written prescriptions."

"Requirements that veterinary businesses operating FOPs charge no more than £16 for providing a written prescription and put in place policies and procedures on the duration of prescriptions and to ensure that only a single prescription fee is charged per consultation."

all from (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68ee48882adc28a81b4ad064/Notice_of_PDR.pdf)

Putting up a sign in the waiting room is one thing. Making a statement in each and every consult I do that a written prescription can be requested would be a colossal waste of my time - ultimately the clients are paying for my time, so that is inflationary. In addition, I would in effect be promoting that they buy a piece of paper off me for £16 that will almost certainly be worthless to them once they discover that English internet pharmacies won't deliver to Northern Ireland due to a separate piece of regulatory bureaucracy when Brexit looks set to bite vet meds on 1st January.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 15:56:19 GMT

Just spotted interesting titbit which supports one of my arguments:

Apparently corp vets charge 16% more than indies: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c201r14z6r3o

Which would tend to suggest corporatisation is inflationary but not the biggest contributory factor by a long way.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Dinu Catilina — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 11:42:39 GMT

No difference. No change. Let's not ask too much or we might be negatively surprised by what we will get.

RE: Has the CMA just rearranged a few deckchairs?

Clive Ansell — Wed, 15 Oct 2025 11:42:07 GMT

The words square root, FA, diddy, and squat sping to mind.

To correct these issues, the CMA has proposed that veterinary practices should be compelled to:

provide price lists for specific services
provide itemised bills
provide written estimates for treatments over £500
tell owners they can get their medicines elsewhere

Where I am currently working, we already do these. Estimates (not quotations) are created for all work.

cap the prescription fee

How could that be done fairly? the cost of running a veterinary business can vary greatly between locations (Central London vs Yorkshire). In any event folk would just move any lost revenue elsewhere, increased consultation fees etc?

provide info for the RCVS 'Find a Vet' page
have a complaints process that meets certain criteria
confirm every year to the RCVS that it is doing these things

Pointless box ticking exercises, how would they be enforced or policed and what difference would they actually make? RCVS PSS for example.

Make it clear if the practice is part of a group.

This one I do agree with. I have come across many clients who did not know that their practice was or had been taken over by a corporate group. The more savvy independents highlight the fact they are in their advertising.