Cat & Vets, please help!

[wiggal]

Hey all,

Was talking to one of my best mates and she was explaining that a few weeks ago, her dad unfortunately ran over her sisters cat.
The cat had been in the vets, and today she was saying to me, that earlier this week, had to have its leg amputated, as when the vet had done up the bandage, it was too tight and cut off the circulation.
They didnt have a choice but to let the vet do the op obviously, but have now been asked to pay for it!
Her sister has, imo rightly refused to pay the bill for it, as it was down to the vet.

The vets are not at all happy about this, and no longer want to be treating the cat, but they have phoned round, and no other vets will take out the stitches or go near the cat!

Firstly, any ideas on how they can go about getting the cat cared for and the stitches removed?
And secondly, could they say, pay the amount and then take it to some kind of small claims court? or not pay and take it to small claims?

Any help would be really appreciated!

many thanks
Wiggal xxx

[Twenty20]

You mean to say that this vet has somehow contacted every other vet in the country and now no vet will treat the cat? Sounds unlikely doesnt it?

As In A Pickle says, perhaps the father should pay up.

[gouldc]

It's a very strange state of affairs here.

I'd have to throw my $0.02 in here and agree with In A Pickle.

Say for example the vet did cause the leg to need to be amputated, in these days of pointless litigation, is he really going to say ''Sorry love, my fault that Miss Kitty Fantastic is about to lose her leg - here's the bill for me having to rectify this sorry situation''.

The vet knows full well that he'd end up in court faster than you can say ''I tripped over a paving slab, how much can I claim?''.

In regards to ringing around the other vets in the area, I think this is once again highly unprofessional and hardly likely to happen - that's like a doctor ringing around other hospitals and telling his colleagues not to treat someone!

Your mate should pay the bill - end of.

[wiggal]

Firstly, I didnt say the vets had phoned round other vets, although it may of read that way.
My friends family phoned round the other vets in the area, and they do not want to carry on with the treatment of a cat that had previously treated by another vet!

She has no problem paying for the work done previously, which was due to the accident (which happened a good few weeks ago). Why would the leg now need to be taken off so long after the accident if the injury was caused by being run over?

She is not trying to wriggle out of paying, like I said, she is more then happy to pay for all the treatment that happened before the operation, and any after that is not fpr the leg, just not wanting to have to pay for the leg to be amputated.

[gouldc]

A cat is the same as a person in the way that an operation can have complications that may set in after an unspecified time.

The problem you have with animals is that you can't tell them to rest a limb or keep their weight off it.

Could well be that the cat has caused itself further injury hwich has meant that the initial treatment has failed, resulting in amputation.

[chezdean]

Hi my cat was run over a few years ago and after a couple of weeks of treatment the vets decided that he had to have his leg amputated. They did their best to save it but after these two weeks they realised it was not viable and would definately need to be amputated to save his life. So my point is there can be a delay in an accident and having to have a leg amputated. Oh and they were so good they did a castration for free while he was under! Vets have a duty of care and i can't believe for one minute they would be responsible for your cat losing their leg! Your sister should be relieved her cat is alive as was i and my cat is very happy and losing a leg has made no impact on his life he even still opens the doors! It was worth the cost and i would pay it again and again if i had to!