Mansfield Animal Hospital

Client called to schedule a neuter for her year old dog with a *** ** *** Certificate, it was explained to the client that this is the hospital's policy to see the patient for an exam prior to scheduling the neuter as we have no doctor/patient relationship with the petClient scheduled
exam for Friday March 4thClient called March 4th and cancelled appointed for that day and rescheduled for Monday march 7thOn March 7th client called and said she was unable to keep her appointment and asked if the Doctor would be able to do the exam the morning of the neuterit was explained this is not routine, due to there being potential Health concerns with an older patient that would need to be addressed prior to surgery, but we would ask the Drif he would make an exceptionThe Doctor agreed to do the exam the morning of surgerySurgery was scheduled for Wednesday March 9thReminder call was made Tuesday march 8th for the patient to be at the Hospital between 7:to 7:am, to not feed the dog after midnight, bring a copy of the dogs vaccine certificate and the original *** ** *** certificateThe owner was not who answered the phone, the receptionist relayed information and asked the owner to call if she had any questions or concerns about the next day appointmentOwner called back as she was under the assumption she had scheduled a neuter and dental at the same time and wanted an estimate for dentalIt was explained to her that there was only a neuter scheduled and that we would not be able to give an estimate where we had not seen the patient and we did not know the extent of the dental diseaseThe owner then decided to schedule a dental for Tuesday March 15thThe Drand technicians were made aware of this scheduling and they explained to the receptionist that they wanted her to call the client back and reschedule the neuter and dental for the same day as no one was comfortable putting a year old dog under anesthesia twice in a day time period that would be more cost effective for the client to everything at onceOwner explained she had the neuter and dental scheduled differently as she was going on vacation and didn't want the patient recovering from surgery when she was leaving on vacationClient then proceeded to explain that she was working on limited funds and the Doctor told her he would waive the exam fee as well as additional charges for anesthesiaThe Doctor told the receptionist that he never agreed to that, one of the technicians explained that the client would be responsible for the exam fee, any vaccines that would need to be administered and any additional charges for anesthesia or extractions done the day of the dentalThe client ended the phone call and then called back about minutes later complaining about the cost of these procedures and that she didn't want to pay for an exam of her dogIt was explained that this is hospital policy and that we do not put any patient under anesthesia without a current doctor/patient/client relationshipThe client was very upset and said she would not pay for the exam when the dog came in to be neutered, she then ended the conversation and hung up the phoneThe receptionist told the Doctor what was said , the Doctor then decided not to see the patient or perform the surgery on the patient and asked the receptionist to call the client and explain the situationThe *** ** *** certificate states on the back that they will reimburse the client the cost of the certificate minus for service feeThey will also reissue a certificate to another hospital minus service feeAttached is a copy of the *** ** *** certificate with their policy on the back

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # [redacted]. Please add your rejection comments below. 
["...was under the assumption she had scheduled a neuter and dental at the same time and wanted an estimate for dental. It was explained to her that there was only a neuter scheduled..."It was not an assumption. The exam was scheduled for both procedures, and they knew from the beginning that was my original intention. [redacted] told me that MAH staff made an error pertaining to my appointment. It was not a "misunderstanding.""Client then proceeded to explain that she was working on limited funds and the Doctor told her he would waive the exam fee as well as additional charges for anesthesia..."This is not true - I did NOT make such a claim. [redacted] placed me on hold when I called back, and SHE told me that she checked, and he said he would waive the exam fee, and addt'l anesthesia costs. As stated (and conveniently ignored) by the business, I did not think that this was unusual, as he has done this for me in the past, as he knew I took in rescues, and brought in new clients to his practice. I DID ask [redacted] several times during that conversation if she was certain, and she said yes, and that I did NOT have to pay for those two expenses on the day of procedure."...one of the technicians explained that the client would be responsible for the exam fee..." "...complaining about the cost of these procedures and that she didn't want to pay for an exam of her dog."Again, this is false information. I was NOT calling back to "complain" about the costs - I was calling back to express my limitations, and try to resolve the confusion that Dr. [redacted]'s disjointed office and medical staff's communication methods had created for his very long-term, loyal client. "It was explained that this is hospital policy and that we do not put any patient under anesthesia without a current doctor/patient/client relationship."Irrelevant comment - I am aware of this, and was never contesting that.  "The client was very upset and said she would not pay for the exam when the dog came in to be neutered, she then ended the conversation and hung up the phone."Again, false information. I NEVER said I would not pay for services rendered - I simply said I had a limitation, so if the exam and extra anesthesia fees would need to be charged, I would simply need to wait on the dental until the following month. I repeated this to both [redacted] and [redacted]. It's quite obvious that someone has fabricated my claims of being unwilling to pay in order to detract attention from herself, for having provided me with inaccurate information.  am I stated that I was confused, and [redacted] assured me that she'd get to the bottom of it and call me back. I do have a witness who heard the conversation. "The receptionist told the Doctor what was said..."Which receptonist? Be specific. Additionally, I have no reason to believe that this anonymous staff member provided the doctor with factual data pertaining to what I actually said. "...the Doctor then decided not to see the patient or perform the surgery on the patient..."...That he previously had agreed to do, which led to the client's money spent on the [redacted] certificate to have been wasted. It's very curious and disturbing to me why a professional relationship, which was free of any significant issues for over two decades, and included consistent, immediate payment, as well as multiple new client referrals, was abruptly ended, based solely on the claims of this one staff member. I, too, am beginning to feel that things "aren't adding up" here..."The [redacted] certificate states on the back that they will reimburse the client the cost of the certificate minus 20.00 for service fee."Why should I lose $20 for a certificate that I purchased in good faith that this provider would perform a service for my pet? I wasn't a new client. I had no reason to believe that he would make such a rash decision to dismiss me from the practice, without even bothering to speak with me first."They will also reissue a certificate to another hospital minus 10.00 service fee. "One hospital is unreachable, one cannot operate on a nine year old dog, and one has very limited availability, and will be difficult for me to access - AND I would still lose ten dollars, had to reschedule my trip, and my dog's medical care has been delayed - all due to the foolishness going on among Dr. [redacted]'s administrative and medical staff. Outrageous. I find it interesting how this responding staff member managed to avoid commenting on any of the specific wording I quoted, as well as [redacted]'s and Dr. [redacted]'s inappropriate behavior toward their client. Response rejected.
Regards,
[redacted]