MENU
It has been a busy year for the Veterinary Client Mediation Service (VCMS). We have been contributing to the ongoing Competition and Markets Authority investigation into the veterinary industry and responding to the latest Which? report about how complaints are resolved in the sector. More on those stories below, along with a summary of our latest data for cases handled in 2025 plus a case study of a recent mediation.
Vet Industry Complaints in the Spotlight
Competitions & Markets Authority (CMA)
The veterinary industry has been in the news a lot this year as the CMA investigation into how complaints are handled continues. We have provided contributions, including data about our work, to the investigation. We are continuing to proactively engage with stakeholders and the CMA following the publication of the Working Papers in May 2025.
VCMS is in a unique position to share insights from the past eight years about the nature of complaints between veterinary professionals and pet owners, and how they can be resolved through mediation. By sharing this data with CMA, we can ensure that our real-world experience informs the process, improving industry standards in client care, complaint resolution, and ultimately, the relationship between veterinary professionals and animal owners.
Which?
In June, consumer action group Which? published its report on the veterinary industry and how complaints are handled. Using a survey of opinions and qualitative interviews with pet owners, it shared its findings with the media earlier this month. Overall, the research did not accurately reflect the vast majority of pet owners’ experiences with using the VCMS, and our Head of Service, Jennie Jones, had this to say to reassure service users that they are in good hands.
“We appreciate that comments on individual complaints may cause pet owners to worry that escalating their complaint to the VCMS may not be productive”, said Jennie, “but we know that 88% of pet owners who used the service this year would recommend the VCMS to other pet owners.”
Recent feedback from pet owners illustrates the benefits of using the service:
“I highly recommend going through the VCMS for help and support to navigate what is a painful and stressful situation.”
“Very helpful…calm, understanding and balanced and I greatly appreciated their efforts to help resolve an upsetting situation.”
Jennie adds: “The VCMS process is easy to navigate, and the team provide impartial and compassionate mediation support to help the pet owner and practice resolve complaints and often distressing issues.”
You can find our full response to Which? report here
Your Mediations – in Numbers
It’s been a slightly quieter start for the 2nd quarter of 2025, but a more productive start to the year for the VCMS.
- Incoming enquiry volumes were slightly lower in Q2 2024-25 (861) compared to Q2 in 2023-24 (896)
- 215 mediations were concluded in Q2 2025-25, compared to 193 in Q2 2023-24, and 155 in Q2 2022-23
- The mediation resolution rate for Q2 (78%) is comparable with the annual resolution rate in 2023-24(81%)
- Referrals from Citizen Advice Bureau accounts for 9% of all enquiries. Just 7% come via practice staff, 7% are referred by RCVS and a further 6% come via the RCVS website.
- Practice engagement (77%) has seen a slight drop, compared to Q2 last year (80%)
- Cost-related complaints for Q2 (95) were lower than Q2 last year (125).
- Complaints about standards of care (63%) are the most common
- 88% of customers and 100% of veterinary professionals involved in mediation in Q2 would recommend the service to others.
Mediation in Action – Case Study
A one year one year-old long haired tortoiseshell alley cat, who was hit by a car. The cat was very seriously injured in the accident, having suffered life changing damage to her jaw and skull. Teasel’s owners took her to an out of hours vets service, where they trusted the recommendations of the on-duty vet, despite feeling that the chances of a full recovery were unrealistic. Euthanasia and alternative treatments were not discussed, and they were subsequently charged £1,500 without, they felt, a clear rationale of what they had paid for.
The pet’s owner made a formal complaint to the practice, saying that the vet had taken advantage of the situation when they were in shock, and had not discussed their wishes or alternative options with them. Instead, they claimed the practice prioritised making money over the health and welfare of their cat by offering only the most expensive treatment. The matter further escalated when the owners did not receive a response to their initial complaint, as the customer then felt that the vet had breached the veterinary code of practice by failing to maintain the principles of honesty, integrity, and professional accountability.
The VCMS facilitated communication between the two parties. The owners felt they should have been offered euthanasia as an option, and refunded the difference between the cost of euthanasia verses the fee they paid for the more expensive treatment. The practice said they responded to the complaint when it was first received but the customer didn’t receive it.
The vet practice acknowledged the cat owner’s feelings and apologised for the incident, but did not offer a goodwill gesture.
Key takeaway – this case study highlights the importance of clearly explaining the treatment options available to pet owners and being realistic about outcomes so they can make an informed choice. It is also a reminder about responding promptly to complaints, because not doing so can inflame an already emotive situation.
Training
Don’t forget that the VCMS team delivers a number of courses covering all aspects of the complaints process. Please feel free to contact Sue Clark for an informal chat at sclark@nockolds.co.uk.
