Amaya Carramiñana Ruiz
My Frenchie has long-term allergies, and after our first visit I was told I could get a repeat of his tablets anytime without another consultation. Three months later—his symptoms exactly the same—I was suddenly told I had to pay for another appointment just to get the same medication. This feels like poor communication at best and a money-grab at worst. When a clinic gives clear instructions about repeat prescriptions, they should stand by them. The inconsistency here really makes it feel like the focus is more on charging for extra consultations than on actually supporting dogs with ongoing conditions. For a place that’s supposed to care about animals, this experience didn’t make me feel like my dog’s wellbeing was their priority. Really disappointed. My reply: Thank you for responding, but this still doesn’t address the real issue. During the original consultation I was clearly told I could request more of the medication without needing another appointment. At no point was I told this only applied if I physically collected it within three months. If that had been explained properly, I would have acted within that timeframe. On top of this, I’m not even sure how far past the three-month mark I was — but it couldn’t have been more than a few days. It’s frustrating that such a small difference resulted in a complete refusal to provide the medication when my dog’s symptoms hadn’t changed at all. A bit of understanding and flexibility would have made all the difference here. I also need to mention that when I called your practice, nobody said anything about a free consultation being available. Your admin staff told me I would have to pay for another appointment. If this was genuinely covered by the care plan, then why was I not informed at the time? This inconsistency is exactly why this whole situation feels so unnecessarily difficult. And even if a free consultation was technically available, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect clients to use their limited included appointments for something that should have been straightforward — especially when I prefer to keep those for actual emergencies, not to fix unclear instructions. The way this has been handled does not make me feel like my dog’s wellbeing or continuity of treatment was the priority. Instead, it feels like I’m being penalised for poor communication on your side, which is very disappointing from a practice meant to support pets with ongoing conditions. I hope you take this feedback seriously, because clearer information from the start would have prevented all of this
