ComplaintsforSolon Animal Hospital

• Initial Complaint

  04/15/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Puppy in for routine spay – Sent home with undiagnosed broken leg. Nov 13 2023. We brought our 6 month old Golden Retriever to Solon Animal Hospital to be spayed. We received a call that Piper had bruised her leg, and we needed to postpone surgery. She could not put any weight on it. We called back after 2 days, and they said to bring her back for X-rays. They determined she had a fractured tibia. We were offered a discount on surgery and were told the vet’s office is not liable. We aren’t sure why X-rays weren’t taken before they sent her home. There was no apology and no definitive explanation of what happened. In fact, we were asked if Piper was wild at home and told that another vet witnessed her running around in her run before surgery. We felt the dog was blamed for acting like a normal puppy and thought they made a quick assumption that the dog injured itself. We received many assurances that the staff would never jeopardize the dog’s safety. I agree that no one would intentionally do so, but accidents can happen to any of us. I’m unconvinced a thorough investigation took place, even if only to ensure this will not happen again. Also, if the vet believes running around in a run can cause a bone break in a young dog, why was Piper not confined when a vet saw her running? We remained polite and calm, but dissatisfied with the answers. A regional director called 2 days later, after legal review, informing us there was no video and declined to cover expenses. The vet herself never called back. We took Piper elsewhere to have surgery, but recovery has been long and difficult. We have fully trusted this vet with our pets for over a decade, but in this case, it is my opinion they did not consistently put the animal first. We are heartbroken for the dog. And hurt. It’s not about money. We paid much more to have surgery done elsewhere. It’s that the vet didn’t accept full responsibility for the safety of our dog.

  Business response

  04/23/2024

  Mr. ******,

   

  Thank you for providing full transparency on your concerns about how Piper’s injury was handled.  We understand that it can be very difficult for an owner when their pet is injured without a known cause.  In this case, Piper was presented to the hospital for her scheduled spay.  Piper was noted to be very excitable in her kennel while awaiting her presurgical exam and sedation, but no issues were evident during her time in the kennel.  She did not appear to be in any distress during this time and when she was examined prior to sedation it was noted that she was holding up her back leg with some swelling noted at the stifle joint.  The hospital appropriately called to notify that Piper appeared to have some lameness and swelling and the decision was made to postpone surgery with anti-inflammatories and rest recommended.  The hospital did not have any indication that Piper had injured herself while in our care.

   

  When it was brought to our attention that Piper had a fractured leg, the case was reviewed for liability, and none was found.  Under the laws of Ohio, this would be considered a bailment.  A bailment is a non-ownership transfer of possession of property from the bailor (owner of the pet) to the bailee (hospital providing services).  A bailee is the “custodian entrusted with possession of goods/property by another individual known as the bailor.”  The bailee’s responsibility under a bailment is “reasonable care.”  Reasonable care being defined as “such care that a reasonably careful person would exercise under like circumstances”; therefore, liability would only be found in cases where gross negligence can be proven. 

   

  Negligence requires four criteria be met – (1) did the hospital have a duty to the patient, (2) did the hospital breach that duty, (3) did the client suffer damages, and (4) were those damages a direct result of the hospital’s breach?  Yes, the hospital had a duty to provide safe housing for patients in their care.  No, the hospital did not breach that duty.  Yes, the client suffered damages requiring surgical intervention for Piper.  No, those damages were not a result of the hospital breaching its duties to the client and patient because the hospital did not breach.

   

  Under these circumstances, Piper was handled with the same care that any reasonable veterinary hospital would have provided.  She was placed into a kennel for her own safety until such time as the veterinarian could provide a full examination.  Piper was not dropped or injured by staff while in the hospital and the kennel was not found to be damaged or in need of repair.  As there is no evidence to show gross negligence and the hospital provided reasonable care to Piper, there would not be a finding of liability in this case.

   

  While we recognize that this is little consolation to you and Piper, the hospital’s care was reasonable.  We are happy to hear that Piper is doing well and wish you all the best.

   

  Solon  Animal Hospital

   

   

  Valerie *********, DVM, JD

  Legal Counsel | MVP

  ** ************

  
  

  Customer response

  04/23/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]

  "The hospital did not have any indication that Piper had injured herself while in our care."  This statement made by the Solon Animal Hospital is untrue.  When they called for us to pick up Piper, they asked us if she had an issue prior to bringing her in, and we said no.  They absolutely knew she was injured while there.  When I said, "Respectfully, she was in your care and she was your responsibility."  The vet stated: "We are not responsible for animals that injure themselves while [here]."  I'll stand by these quotations.  They knew.  An X-ray at this time would have been the conservative approach, not sending her home with a lame leg to walk it off.  

  The response is true to the character of the practice apparently.  Defense regarding bailment and negligence.  I know legally they have to do nothing.  And nothing is what they did.  Decently, they should have done much more.  Everyone that has heard this story agrees; you can read about it.  This response further cements that they will not accept the responsibility for a pet prior to surgery. 

  I'm not mad this happened (horrified and sad, but that's not why I'm upset and writing this review), nor that you didn't pay).  I'm disappointed in your shameful response from the time the vet walked in the door without a sorry on her lips up until today.  

  What would I have done?  I would have X-Rayed the day of.  If I brought a dog in like that I wouldn't leave without an X-Ray - only a cheapskate, terrible owner would.  I would have emphatically stated that I can't believe this happened in our care and gave reassurances that we would thoroughly investigate.  I would have scheduled the surgery immediately, and not waited 2 days for legal review (with the respondent, legal counsel) while the dog suffered.  Not walked out the door saying you would have the regional director call me and never speak to me again (after many years of a close relationship with us), never to pick up the phone again.  That really hurt.  I would have conducted this investigation and assured the pet owner that video was reviewed with a fine tooth comb, every employee interviewed, and our absolute best done to determine what happened.  (The phrasing was that the camera didn't have a good view of the run, not that video didn't exist.)  I would have made changes to ensure this was less likely or unlikely to occur again.  You still haven't reassured me, or the rest of your clients, any investigation or corrective measures have taken place.  When someone is injured in our factory, we move heaven and earth to make sure that same injury can not happen again the same way - because we care maybe, but because getting sued is expensive.  Not so for vets apparently...you're presenting yourself high and untouchable even in this response.  And regardless of the fact that I would likely lose a bailment suit, everyone on earth reasonably expects that the vet will not allow their animal to be injured prior to surgery - everyone but you.  You seem okay with it and just shrug.    

  I don't want to close you down.  I have been very close to the vet for a long time.   I want you to take responsibility the next time, understanding the weight of what you do, knowing there is at least some tiny consequence for just walking away.  

  Animals are going to get injured sometimes.  I know that.  Honestly, all I'm looking for is a, "Sorry, we'll sincerely try to do better next time."  

  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. ↩