Regulator to investigate the vet market
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has confirmed it will launch a formal investigation into the vet market after finding multiple issues which impact consumers’ ability to make informed decisions.
The CMA launched a review last September amid concerns that vet practices are anti-competitive, with businesses owning more than one practice in an area. This has led to prices that lack transparency and unclear information about services and treatments.
Last year, Which? looked into whether pet owners were getting a fair deal as the regulator launched its review into veterinary practices. We surveyed pet owners and looked at the websites of large-chain veterinary practices and found a number of issues around pricing and treatment information.
Below, we outline what the CMA discovered and what happens next.
CMA launches full investigation into vet market
The CMA received 56,000 responses to its initial call for information, including 11,000 responses from those in the vet industry.
In March, the regulator outlined its concerns and began a four-week consultation period inviting views from the sector.
It has now confirmed it will begin a formal investigation.
What has the regulator found so far?
The CMA is concerned that consumers aren’t being given enough information to make the best decision for their pets, including selecting the right veterinary practice or treatment.
It found:
- Many vet practices don’t display prices on their website – of the practices it checked, more than eight in 10 had no pricing information online, even for the most basic services.
- Pet owners tend not to shop around between vet practices and assume prices will be similar.
- People aren't always informed of the cost of treatment before agreeing to it – around one in five respondents to the CMA’s initial review said that they were not provided with any cost information before agreeing to tests, around one in 10 said they were not provided with cost information before their pet had surgery, and around half said they were not informed about costs before agreeing to out of hours treatment.
- A company can own multiple vet practices in a local area without making that clear – only four out of six of the largest groups don’t change the name or branding when they take over an independently owned vet practice.
- In 2013, around one in 10 vet practices belonged to large groups, but that share is now almost six in 10, and many of the large groups have expressed an intention to continue expanding their business through the acquisition of independently owned practices.
- Large corporate groups may have incentives to act in ways which reduce choice and weaken competition.
- Pet owners might be overpaying for medicines or prescriptions.
The regulator also found that the regulatory framework is outdated and may no longer be fit for purpose. The main regulation in the industry dates back to 1966 before non-vets were able to own vet practices.
Find out more: your rights if you're unhappy with your vet
What might change after the investigation?
The CMA says its investigation could lead to a series of potential changes to the market.
These could include making it mandatory to provide certain information to consumers, imposing maximum prescription fees, ordering businesses or assets to be sold or disposed of, and making recommendations to the government regarding the regulatory framework.
In the meantime, the CMA says pet owners should shop around for a better price and ask about alternative treatment options if they’re not sure about a treatment or are worried about the cost. It also says owners may be able to find non-urgent medication cheaper elsewhere, such as online.
Which? research uncovers pricing issues
Our research revealed similar themes of high prices and lack of transparency.
We found that many consumers don’t compare prices. Only a quarter of pet owners do so when choosing their practice, a third of these said that they don’t think there’s much variation in price, and three in 10 said it is difficult to compare prices.
We discovered that around a third of pet owners said they are usually only informed of the price after the appointment at reception and just over a quarter had at some point doubted whether a treatment recommended by their vet was really necessary.
Which? also found that one in 10 pet owners said they don't know if their vet is part of a chain or independent, and a third of those who go to a chain vet mistakenly think their vet is independent.
'My regular prescription increased twice in a year’
When Thomas decided to order his dogs’ regular flea and tick tablets online to save money, he realised that he’d need a prescription from his vet.
He was charged £15 per prescription which lasted six months. He did ask for a 12-month prescription, but this was refused without reason.
Five months later, the prescription had increased to £20 and three months later, it went up to £25. The vet simply said this was to fall in line with what other places were charging for prescriptions.
To avoid further increases, Thomas again requested to be issued a 12-month prescription, which was initially refused before the vet agreed to issue a prescription for 12 tablets.
Thomas was still confused as to why he needed a prescription and wasn’t given this information by his vet.
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) states that a physical examination of a pet has to be performed every time any antibiotics, antifungals, antivirals and parasiticides are prescribed, which includes prescription flea and tick products.
However, Thomas’ dogs have yearly checkups, which should have covered a 12-month prescription.
