ComplaintsforNeighborhood Veterinary Associates

• Initial Complaint

  06/06/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  (1) We have three pet rabbits - one female and two male. They have lived in separate cages. I had hoped to "house" the three rabbits together, as rabbits are social animals and prefer not to be isolated. My plan, after consultation with the vets at Neighborhood Veterinary Associates, was to have the two male rabbits neutered so I could house the three rabbits together and not have litters of baby rabbits. (2) On 23 March 2023, we took our two male three rabbits to the Neighborhood Veterinary Associates clinic for neutering operations. We paid a total of $825 ($200 for dental work for one of the rabbits and $625 total for the two neutering operations - this included fees paid for a pre-operation evaluation.). (3) After the operations we carefully followed the post-operation instructions given to us by the vet clinic. We then put the three rabbits together in a large "house" (cage). The two male rabbits seemed to recover well and the three rabbits seemed happy and healthy. (4) On 29 April 2023, we found out that our female rabbit gave birth to a litter of 5 baby rabbits. (5) I decided to contact the vet for two things: (1) a refund of the costs associated with the neutering - $625, and (2) medical information concerning the two male rabbits - to determine if the surgeries were effective and and care recommendations moving forward. (6) I contacted the vet clinic. Dr. ******* who performed the surgery was volatile, defensive, and attacking on the phone. He wouldn't let me speak and hung up on me after 3-4 minutes. Dr. ******* spoke to me civilly and he was informative. However, his information conflicted about how to proceed with the rabbits and he sent me a long and litigious email explaining that the clinic would offer me no refund and I would not be allowed to bring my pets back for any further care.

  Business response

  06/06/2023

  Attached is the email sent to the complaintant on 4 May 2023, which should adequately address our response. Feel free to post with names redacted, though certainly our names have been included and maligned. That said, we will provide some further information.
  
  Per the complaintant's claim that a (minor) witness was present on 8 March 2023, the complaintant is lying about mentioning that a female rabbit was present in the home. Said female rabbit was not a patient in our system, and the client mentioned on a recorded call with Dr. ******, which we would be happy to furnish at your request, that she never told Dr. ******* about the presence of a female rabbit. She only stated that she told a male veterinary technician, who she could not name or describe, that there was a female rabbit in the house. The only male technician who was there that day was categorically not told about a female rabbit and would have instructed that males (of many species) can retain viable sperm for 30-45 days. Again, per the timeline, the client reintroduced the animals before their 10-day surgical recovery period was completed, much less 30-45 days. Client also mentioned, on the recorded call, that this had happened once before where she reintroduced a female rabbit a week or so after surgery and she became pregnant, yet she did not learn from her own mistake by 1) notifying veterinary staff of the comingling of sexes and 2) not repeating her own mistake. Client then contacted our colleague at another hospital to ask if it was possible that the surgeries were not performed properly or at all. He echoed that this was a ludicrous assumption, but the complaintant could easily have had the rabbits examined and tested (ultrasound, testosterone levels, etc.) to determine that these rabbits were indeed neutered.
  
  We have the evidence that she reintroduced the animals within the 10-day surgical recovery period (23 March surgery date, late April delivery date, 28-32-day gestation period), as well as the telephonic recording that the owner most definitely did not have an amicable discussion with Dr. ******, as she was also hostile with Dr. *******. The recording demonstrates client not only threatening to damage our reputation with various groups and organizations if she didn't get her refund for what she thought was an outrageous charge, thought less than going rates for these procedures and preapproved by client, but blatant lies to garner sympathy about being financially destitute as a single mother. Dr. ******* and another partner are also single parents and the primary parents for their respective children. Client has a PhD in systems engineering and is a professor in that field as a DoD civilian. We have many single parents, as well as active-duty enlisted military making far less who do not complain about their bill and attempt to get something for nothing, while smearing the reputation of a small business. Dr. ******* had every right to be defensive about his business and hostile attacks against it, his surgical skills, or his ethics. This was an argument with a brick wall after a half dozen calls that morning, not just a simple 3-4 minute call.
  
  It is not the purview of the Better Business Bureau to exact refunds, and we will not be refunding anything for services rendered. We also retain the legal right to fire clients whose pets are not currently in our medical care for an active situation or illness. These are two healthy rabbits who recovered well from their surgical procedures, per the owner's admission. Enumeration of bulletized points do not facts make. We will not be intimidated by baseless cancel culture, and we will also be taking further legal action for libel and slander, as promised in the email to the former client.

  Customer response

  06/08/2023

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
  
   Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because: the business (Neighborhood Veterinarian Associates) charged me $825 for work that they did not perform.  I have asked for a refund and they refuse to provide it.  Instead they have been rude, hostile, dishonest, and threatening.  
  
  Regards,
  ***************************
  

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩