Peninsula Animal Hospital & Orthopedics

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Thank you for forwarding the message from [redacted] at Peninsula Animal HospitalI am disappointed in the response, but not surprised given that it is from a proprietor who sought to extort $1,from me for a simple, routine, and commonly inexpensive procedureThe basis of my complaint is that: 1) I received a quote to have this service performed for $over the phone 2) I indicated in writing that I wanted to be informed if the service exceeded $ 3) The business tried to charge an incomprehensible price of $1,and ended up ripping me off for an untenable amount ($405.00) The claims in the business response are completely illogicalWhy would I, a breeder with the equipment to perform the procedure, the experience performing the procedure, and a history of engaging veterinarians to do this procedure for far less than $agree drive out of the way (after having driven seven hours to the stud owner’s residence) in order to pay $1,for an optional procedure I could do myself? The business’s position is absurdDuring my visit, the receptionist was certainly aware we had been given that quote, saying, “The technician who gave you that quote wasn’t properly trained to quote the procedure.” My primary vet, [redacted] of [redacted] ***l Hospital in Mebane, NC, advised that he would have walked out without paying a penny for those services if an attempt was made to charge $1,If [redacted] dropped even the slightest hint that she would rather not perform the procedure, I would not have engaged her servicesThey weren’t needed When [redacted] and I arrived at the clinic, we had to wait minutes for [redacted] to finish with her last clientIt was during this wait that I filled out the intake formThe hospital was never kept open without clients to accommodate meAn AI procedure, when performed by a properly trained veterinarian or breeder, takes less than a minuteA video of the procedure as performed by [redacted] ***, a leading theriogenologist, can be seen here: [redacted] You can see that it takes less than one minute to performThough I don’t recommend watching it for someone not used to animal reproduction, a video of a stud dog collection can be seen here: [redacted] This procedure takes less than two minutesA collection cone, identical to the one I offered [redacted] , is modeled in the videoWith chatting, collection, cytology, and AI, the time required to perform the entire procedure is less than minutesThe equipment used cost the clinic less than $ You will also notice how few personnel the procedure requiresOutside of this experience, I have never had an AI with more than one veterinary assistantUsually, just the vet and I perform the procedureAs a case and point, I recently had an AI performed in Malvern, PA on March 9, D [redacted] of [redacted] Specialists charged $to perform a collection and side-by-side AI with this same female Leonberger and a different maleShe charged extra because she had to drive an hour and open the clinic to accommodate usThis hospital is in Malvern, PA - the same region of the country as Delmar, DE [redacted] is a nationally recognized reproductive specialist To check the business's claim that I am accustomed to really inexpensive services because of my location (the research triangle in North Carolina), I checked on a listserv of 4,breeders from across the country, asking how much they have paid recently for a side-by-side AII received responsesThere was a chorus of cries about being “ripped off”, “gouged”, and “thievery” [redacted] , shared with me that her vet, [redacted] in Easton, MD performs the procedure for her for $I asked [redacted] to check with the reproductive vets in her/ [redacted] ’s area and they concurred that the price was out of the ballpark The claim that substantial costs were incurred for her veterinary assistants is similarly inaneAccording to the Occupational Outlook Handbook, the median pay for veterinary assistants is $an hour [redacted] claims in her response that she “donated her professional time that evening”If I paid $for three individuals to watch her perform a procedure that took less than minutes, then she expects the Revdex.com to believe that my bill was used to pay in excess of $an hour for their overtime efforts! In contrast, the median pay for veterinarians is $an hourIf I paid veterinarians time and a half for a thirty minute procedure, I would only be charged $Lastly, there is a charge for her staff on the itemized bill of $75.00, making this entire claim on the part of the business farcical at best [redacted] The claim that the stud owner, [redacted] ***, previously paid for AI’s at this clinic is not trueLeonberger breeding records are recorded by the [redacted] and available to members [redacted] ’s privileged information about a previous procedure performed in September is referring to a breeding involving Bel, Good Life’s Believe in the [redacted] and another one of [redacted] ***’s stud dogsAfter inquiring, it turns out that [redacted] ***, wife of one of the owners, paid for the procedures priced ~$The stud owner paying for an AI is about as common as a groom paying for a wedding; I’ve never seen itEven if clinic paperwork shows the stud owner as the client, the person receiving the service from the stud owner swipes the credit card almost without exceptionThe clinic clearly processed me as a new client expecting me to cover the charges and the invoice reflects that expectation and practiceBy her own admission, [redacted] sought from me 408% of the charges given to [redacted] for identical service Further, I am appalled by the violation of Delaware Law Title regulating veterinary medicine involved in her communicating the treatment of other patientsDel.C§3316(a)(7) states, “Privileged CommunicationsVeterinarians must protect the personal privacy of patients and clients by not willfully revealing privileged communications regarding the diagnosis and treatment of an animal.” Not only should [redacted] not be discussing treatment she offered for [redacted] at her clinic, she certainly shouldn’t be sharing information about services she offered to the [redacted] ***, A [redacted] who aren’t part of this complaint As to the ineptitude of the procedure and my claim that “more harm than good” was likely done, I would point out the the SurgiLube brought out to the waiting room is in fact a spermicideTo quote from a scholarly article by [redacted] and colleagues, “Numerous studies over several decades have consistently shown a sperm toxic effect of common lubricants, even those that are spermicidal agent–free, such as Surgi-Lube “These data report significant disruptions in sperm motility and viability, which occurs within minutes of direct contact between sperm and the lubricant” “The negative effect of these products is such that sperm function and even fertility could be compromised when these products are used during natural reproduction.” [redacted] Further, that the sperm rich fraction collected on this visit was half what I was able to collect the next day leads me to believe that fluid was lost to the waiting room floorThe first collection is the most important as the more mature sperm cells are also the most potentI do fear that I have weakened the chances for conception using this clinic; I certainly did nothing to improve themNot only might I be out of the $2,I put into making this breeding possible, I might be out of a litter of puppies valued at $2,each The meat of this complaint, however, isn’t the poor quality of the AI; it is the dishonesty of not honoring a quote and a written requestThe real clue for my mistreatment can be found in [redacted] ’s response, “[ [redacted] ] obviously hadn't heard my soft spoken, gentle criticism to my technician.” I am sure that I unfortunately embarrassed [redacted] when I tried to steer her toward correct procedures that would help ensure the success of the procedure (Not using a spermicide, using a collection sleeve instead of a tiny medicine cup, and injecting air into the insemination tube in order to deliver semen to the cervix)Though I did my best to avoid embarrassing her, my criticism may not have been “soft spoken” and “gentle” enough for her tasteAt least one of her employees was brand new and having a lay person telling you how to do your job in front of your employees is probably an awful experienceThe proper response on her part, however, is not extortion I brought in my own grooming table the procedure was performed uponIf the collection procedure was done properly, there would be no mess to worry aboutAll the tools used in an AI are very cheap and disposableCleanup can be done in one or two minutesWas I supposedly billed for the care being given to other clients and the routine disinfection of the entire facility? Does [redacted] regularly abandon her surgical care patients at an hour much earlier than 8:30PM when they won’t again receive care until the morning? How long are they left without needed doses of pain medication or a chance to relieve themselves? Night services are usually performed by veterinary assistants to care for the animals and should not be the financial burden of this one client The one item we can agree upon is that I did not take [redacted] up on her offer to pay for half of the bill [redacted] is unemployed and taking care of her father who is dying of cancerIf [redacted] had even the remotest interest in her client, she would likely have known these two basic facts of her lifeOne of my primary motivations for choosing her as the stud owner was the hope that it could bring a bright spot to a difficult time in her lifeThe shenanigans of Peninsula Animal Hospital in trying to gauge her would be even worse than the reality of them taking a shot at an out-of-state client who they thought would be unlikely to have the energy to complain I am fortunate to have a witness to the quote and the circumstances surrounding thisMs [redacted] can be contacted at [redacted] I shared [redacted] ’s response to my complaint and she has decided to seek another veterinarian for services The American Veterinary Medical Association’s Principles of Veterinary Medicine state that “it is the attending veterinarians responsibility to inform the client of the expected results and costs, and the related risks of each treatment regimen.” “Ethically, the information within veterinary medical records is considered privileged and confidentialIt must not be released except as required or allowed by law, or by consent of the owner of the patient.” [redacted] , to my mind, has demonstrated a lack of regard for her responsibility and the principles of the veterinary professionTo my mind, she has abandoned the common decency found in most business owners aiming to take care of their customers in return for an honest profit Thank you for the opportunity to provide a rebuttal, [redacted]

I received your letter dated August 12, explaining a complaint from a customer seen in my animal hospital on Friday August 8, Thank you for sharing the client's concerns and allowing me to respond and clarify his complaints as there are two sides to every story The facts of the encounter differ considerably from the client's statement of his concernsThe complaining client claims that he called my veterinary office an hour prior to arriving at my hospital on Friday August 8, To clarify this claim, I met with my employees and asked if any of them received a phone call of that nature, and did they quote anyone $for an entire semen collection and artificial insemination procedure on an emergency basis None of my employees took such a call from anyone that day giving a quote of $ I can supply our phone records as proof of fact if necessaryWe did, however answer our phone at 5:05PM which was not our work protocol (our business hours are M-F 8AM-5PM), to take a call from the stud dog's owner, and one of my existing clients The male dog's owner (who was my existing client and NOT the complaining client) spoke with my veterinary technician on the phone and asked if she could bring in her stud dog in for fresh semen collection and then artificially inseminate an unreceptive female dog who was behaving aggressively toward her male by trying to bite himThe client said that the female dog's owner had had progesterone and brucellosis testing done at his local veterinarian's and the time to breed the dog was now based on the progesterone testing Despite using a muzzle on this female dog, she still was too fractious to permit the breeding to take place naturally according to my client My animal hospital had been very busy that particular week and day, and our employees had already incurred a substantial amount of overtime that week due to the high volume of sick patients needing treatmentI realized that it would be costly and emotionally demanding for our employees to stay and wait for these clients to drive nearly an hour to our hospital, and then stay another hour to clean up the hospital and tend to our hospitalized patients two hours later than due to the wait for this clientBecause of this situation, I sought to discourage them from engaging our services by telling my technician to explain that I would only agree to stay and wait for this unplanned elective procedure if the client was willing to pay a higher than typical fee of $1,due to the emergency nature of the request and the wait time of my staff and myself necessitating overtime fees for my staff and myself My technician spoke with the client on the phone and then came and told me that the client said she would pay whatever I charged as long as I would do itThis particular employee stayed at the hospital until 6:03PM and then left her shift just as the clients arrived for the procedure an hour following the phone call I find it peculiar that the female dog's owner has focused on this particular $service charge when he was never, in fact, quoted this amount by my staff In fact, I have performed artificial inseminations twice for the male dog's ownerThe first occasion, on September 24, during business hours resulted in a total charge of $The second occasion performed the following day of September 25, 2012, resulted in a charge of $ The owner of the male dog paid for both of these services on those prior occasions Having received a phone call from the same dog owner on August 8, 2014, I assumed that this specific client had agreed to pay the $quoted over the phone by my technician at 5:05PM Next, I would like to address the complaining client's concern that he had asked to be notified for any services performed exceeding $Our hospital routinely has new patients/clients fill out paperwork forms that include a general question asking what dollar amount they require an estimate for services be providedNow, in fact the owner of the female dog wrote that he would like to be informed if a service went above $or moreThe male dog's owner has those same papers on file and does not list any amount at which she needs to be notified for services performedSince my past experience with this client proved that she as the male dog owner paid for the service, and not the female dog's owner, our staff did not pay particular attention to this form Regardless, my technician who took the phone call had been instructed to communicate a verbal quote of $for the unplanned emergency service to be performedThis verbal quote in my mind would serve as proper notification of a service going above the $amount regardless of how the client filled out his paperwork Now, when the clients jointly were presented with the bill of $after the service was performed, they both questioned the high feeThe owner of the male dog told my receptionist that she thought my technician was kidding about the quote over the phoneThe female dog's owner became more difficult and then refused to pay for the service because he objected to the fee I was informed of this by my receptionist The male dogs owner has been a good, albeit infrequent client in the past, and I felt that something seemed wrong with her perception of the service, and with how the phone call quoting the service must have gone attempted to contact my technician who took the phone call to clarify the conversation, but was unable to reach her as she had her cell phone off while driving home from work I decided that I wanted to avoid any misconceptions in case my technician had given the client the wrong impression about the quote on the phone, and since I couldn't contact her for a fact by fact account of the phone conversation I agreed to lower the price as a gesture of good will toward the client and donate my professional time for that eveningBecause I agreed to perform that service, it became necessary to remain at the hospital until 8:PM, as did three employees receiving overtime to complete end of day closure responsibilities following the conclusion of this drawn out service I feel that the amount agreed upon in the end is more than fair and requires no further adjustment to the clientThe artificial insemination fee is $in his bill, also included is a $emergency office visit charge which is customary for emergency services in our region, a semen evaluation performed to determine if the semen was of usable quality costing $35, and a modest charge for technicians/receptionist overtime totaling $The entire amount came to $The owner of the male dog even offered to pay half of the entire bill when the female dog's owner became difficult, but the female dog's owner insisted that she not pay anything and he would handle the situation by complaining to the Revdex.com Now, all the particulars of the fee dispute aside, I take particular exception to the complaint that l"did more harm than good"The female dog's owner mentioned that I used out of the norm practices to perform the AIHe claims that I performed malpractice by intending to use a spermicidal lubricantThis is completely untrueWhat the client misinterpreted as "my intention to use a spermicidal lubricant" resulted from him seeing my technician set out supplies for me to use for the procedureThis technician set out a tube of surgilube which is admittedly a bacteriostatic, but not a spermicidal lubricantIn fact I do not use that particular lubricant for the purpose of performing artificial inseminations despite my technician selecting the incorrect lubricant which she anticipated I would require to perform the proceduream knowledgeable that surgilube contains a bacteriostatic agent which may adversely affect sperm qualityIt is actually controversial that even non spermicidal lubricants may interfere with semen quality, and Ifind that most female dogs if appropriately bred have ample natural lubricant to accept the narrow tubing used to insert the semen into their vagina When I looked at the tube of surgilube my technician set out, Isaid to her, "we can't use that", and I made an attempt to begin the procedure with the aid of the female's natural lubricationThe female dog's owner (who obviously hadn't heard my soft spoken, gentle criticism to my technician) then intervened and presented his own tube of non spermicidal lubricant and asked me to use that for the procedureI complied with his request using a small amount to coat the tubingThe diameter of the artificial insemination tubing is considerably smaller than the stud dog's penis which is not customarily lubricated prior to allowing a natural breeding to take placeThe remainder of the procedure drew complimentary comments from the female dog's owner on how "thorough we were" and how much he appreciated our help I feel it is relevant to note that the female dog's owner lives several states away to the southHe claims in his dispute that the and customary price for an artificial insemination is $75-I investigated this claim by having my technician call numerous veterinary hospitals in our regionOf the 1ocal veterinary hospitals called, only hospitals perform the procedureNeither of the two veterinary hospitals will perform the procedure on an emergency basis, and further, the total costs are in line with mine because these hospitals require examination fees, progesterone testing, and sperm evaluation in addition to the artificial insemination fees which range from $105-$exclusive of the additional itemized fees Therefore I conclude that my prices are not inflated based on this investigation It is my hope that this letter clarifies the situation and puts aside any misunderstandings the client has concerning the service and fees he encountered My staff and I wish him the best of luck with his breeding program and would welcome the opportunity to educate him at a scheduled time under non emergency conditions so that he may learn the rationale behind the differences in my services, breeding recommendations, and those he has experienced previously with other veterinarians in his region

This letter is written to share my response to your last letter dated September 3, I personally wrote *** *** *** a letter that appears to have resolved his complaint A copy of this letter is enclosed for your reviewThank you for your role in aiding the improvement of our hospital staff and customer communications

I received your letter dated August 12, 2014 explaining a complaint from a customer seen in my animal hospital on Friday August 8, 2014. Thank you for sharing the client's concerns and allowing me to respond and clarify his complaints as there are two sides to every story.
The facts...

of the encounter differ considerably from the client's statement of his concerns. The complaining client claims that he called my veterinary office an hour prior to arriving at my hospital on Friday August 8, 2014. To clarify this claim, I met with my 6 employees and asked if any of them received a phone call of that nature, and did they quote anyone $200 for an entire semen collection and artificial insemination procedure on an emergency basis.  None of my employees took such a call from anyone that day giving a quote of $200.  I can supply our phone records as proof of fact if necessary. We did, however answer our phone at 5:05PM which was not our normal work protocol (our normal business hours are M-F 8AM-5PM), to take a call from the stud dog's owner, and one of my existing clients.
The male dog's owner (who was my existing client and NOT the complaining client) spoke with my veterinary technician on the phone and asked if she could bring in her stud dog in for fresh semen collection and then artificially inseminate an unreceptive female dog who was behaving aggressively toward her male by trying to bite him. The client said that the female dog's owner had had progesterone and brucellosis testing done at his local veterinarian's and the time to breed the dog was now based on the progesterone testing.  Despite using a muzzle on this female dog, she still was too fractious to permit the breeding to take place naturally according to my client.  My animal hospital had
been very busy that particular week and day, and our employees had already incurred a substantial amount of overtime that week due to the high volume of sick patients needing treatment. I realized that it would be costly and emotionally demanding for our employees to stay and wait for these clients to drive nearly an hour to our hospital, and then stay another hour to clean up the hospital and tend to our hospitalized patients two hours later than normal due to the wait for this client. Because of this situation, I sought to discourage them from engaging our services by telling my technician to explain that I would only agree to stay and wait for this unplanned elective procedure if the client was willing to pay a higher than typical fee of $1,000 due to the emergency nature of the request and the wait time of my staff and myself necessitating overtime fees for my staff and myself.
My technician spoke with the client on the phone and then came and told me that the client said she would pay whatever I charged as long as I would do it. This particular employee stayed at the hospital until 6:03PM and then left her shift just as the clients arrived for the procedure an hour following the phone call.
I find it peculiar that the female dog's owner has focused on this particular $200 service charge when he was never, in fact, quoted this amount by my staff.  In fact, I have performed artificial inseminations twice for the male dog's owner. The first occasion, on September 24, 2012 during normal business hours resulted in a total charge of $282.00. The second occasion performed the following day of September 25, 2012, resulted in a charge of $245.00.
The owner of the male dog paid for both of these services on those prior occasions.  Having received a phone call from the same dog owner on August 8, 2014, I assumed that this specific client had agreed to pay the $1000 quoted over the phone by my technician at 5:05PM.
Next, I would like to address the complaining client's concern that he had asked to be notified for any services performed exceeding $201. Our hospital routinely has new patients/clients fill out paperwork forms that include a general question asking what dollar amount they require an estimate for services be provided. Now, in fact the owner of the female dog wrote that he would like to be informed if a
service went above $201 or more. The male dog's owner has those same papers on file and does not list any amount at which she needs to be notified for services performed. Since my past experience with
this client proved that she as the male dog owner paid for the service, and not the female dog's owner, our staff did not pay particular attention to this form.  Regardless, my technician who took the phone call had been instructed to communicate a verbal quote of $1000 for the unplanned emergency service to be performed. This verbal quote in my mind would serve as proper notification of a service going above the $201 amount regardless of how the client filled out his paperwork.
Now, when the clients jointly were presented with the bill of $1000 after the service was performed, they both questioned the high fee. The owner of the male dog told my receptionist that she thought my technician was kidding about the quote over the phone. The female dog's owner became more difficult and then refused to pay for the service because he objected to the fee.  I was informed of this by my receptionist.  The male dogs owner has been a good, albeit infrequent client in the past, and  I felt that something seemed wrong with her perception of the service, and with how the phone call quoting the service must have gone.  1 attempted to contact my technician who took the phone call to clarify the
conversation, but was unable to reach her as she had her cell phone off while driving home from work.  I decided that I wanted to avoid any misconceptions in case my technician had given the client the wrong impression about the quote on the phone, and since I couldn't contact her for a fact by fact account of the phone conversation I agreed to lower the price as a gesture of good will toward the client and
donate my professional time for that evening. Because I agreed to perform that service, it became necessary to remain at the hospital until 8:30 PM, as did three employees receiving overtime to complete end of day closure responsibilities following the conclusion of this drawn out service.
I feel that the amount agreed upon in the end is more than fair and requires no further adjustment to the client. The artificial insemination fee is $200 in his bill, also included is a $95 emergency office visit charge which is customary for emergency services in our region, a semen evaluation performed to determine if the semen was of usable quality costing $35, and a modest charge for technicians/receptionist overtime totaling $75.00. The entire amount came to $405. The owner of the male dog even offered to pay half of the entire bill when the female dog's owner became difficult, but the female dog's owner insisted that she not pay anything and he would handle the situation by complaining to the Revdex.com.
Now, all the particulars of the fee dispute aside, I take particular exception to the complaint that l"did more harm than good". The female dog's owner mentioned that I used out of the norm practices to perform the AI. He claims that I performed malpractice by intending to use a spermicidal lubricant. This is completely untrue. What the client misinterpreted as "my intention to use a spermicidal lubricant" resulted from him seeing my technician set out supplies for me to use for the procedure. This technician set out a tube of surgilube which is admittedly a bacteriostatic, but not a spermicidal lubricant. In fact I do not use that particular lubricant for the purpose of performing artificial inseminations despite my technician selecting the incorrect lubricant which she anticipated I would require to perform the procedure. 1 am knowledgeable that surgilube contains a bacteriostatic agent which may adversely
affect sperm quality. It is actually controversial that even non spermicidal lubricants may interfere with semen quality, and Ifind that most female dogs if appropriately bred have ample natural lubricant to accept the narrow tubing used to insert the semen into their vagina.  When I looked at the tube of surgilube my technician set out, Isaid to her, "we can't use that", and I made an attempt to begin the procedure with the aid of the female's natural lubrication. The female dog's owner (who obviously hadn't heard my soft spoken, gentle criticism to my technician) then intervened and presented his own tube of non spermicidal lubricant and asked me to use that for the procedure. I complied with his request using a small amount to coat the tubing. The diameter of the artificial insemination tubing is considerably smaller than the stud dog's penis which is not customarily lubricated prior to allowing a natural breeding to take place. The remainder of the procedure drew complimentary comments from the female dog's owner on how "thorough we were" and how much he appreciated our help.
I feel it is relevant to note that the female dog's owner lives several states away to the south. He claims in his dispute that the normal and customary price for an artificial insemination is $75-125. I investigated this claim by having my technician call numerous veterinary hospitals in our region. Of the 16 1ocal veterinary hospitals called, only 2 hospitals perform the procedure. Neither of the two
veterinary hospitals will perform the procedure on an emergency basis, and further, the total costs are
in line with mine because these hospitals require examination fees, progesterone testing, and sperm evaluation in addition to the artificial insemination fees which range from $105-$180 exclusive of the additional itemized fees.   Therefore I conclude that my prices are not inflated based on this investigation.
It is my hope that this letter clarifies the situation and puts aside any misunderstandings the client has concerning the service and fees he encountered.  My staff and I wish him the best of luck with his breeding program and would welcome the opportunity to educate him at a scheduled time under non emergency conditions so that he may learn the rationale behind the differences in my services, breeding recommendations, and those he has experienced previously with other veterinarians in his region.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Thank you for forwarding the message from [redacted] at Peninsula Animal Hospital. I am disappointed in the response, but not surprised given that it is from a proprietor who sought to extort $1,000.00 from me for a simple, routine, and commonly inexpensive procedure. The basis of my complaint is that:
1) I received a quote to have this service performed for $200.00 over the phone
2) I indicated in writing that I wanted to be informed if the service exceeded $201.00
3) The business tried to charge an incomprehensible price of $1,000.00 and ended up ripping me off for an untenable amount ($405.00)
The claims in the business response are completely illogical. Why would I, a breeder with the equipment to perform the procedure, the experience performing the procedure, and a history of engaging veterinarians to do this procedure for far less than $200.00 agree drive out of the way (after having driven seven hours to the stud owner’s residence) in order to pay $1,000.00 for an optional procedure I could do myself? The business’s position is absurd. During my visit, the receptionist was certainly aware we had been given that quote, saying, “The technician who gave you that quote wasn’t properly trained to quote the procedure.” My primary vet, [redacted] of [redacted]l Hospital in Mebane, NC, advised that he would have walked out without paying a penny for those services if an attempt was made to charge $1,000.00. If [redacted] dropped even the slightest hint that she would rather not perform the procedure, I would not have engaged her services. They weren’t needed.
When [redacted] and I arrived at the clinic, we had to wait 20 minutes for [redacted] to finish with her last client. It was during this wait that I filled out the intake form. The hospital was never kept open without clients to accommodate me. An AI procedure, when performed by a properly trained veterinarian or breeder, takes less than a minute. A video of the procedure as performed by [redacted], a leading theriogenologist, can be seen here: [redacted] You can see that it takes less than one minute to perform. Though I don’t recommend watching it for someone not used to animal reproduction, a video of a stud dog collection can be seen here: [redacted]  This procedure takes less than two minutes. A collection cone, identical to the one I offered [redacted], is modeled in the video. With chatting, collection, cytology, and AI, the normal time required to perform the entire procedure is less than 20 minutes. The equipment used cost the clinic less than $5.00.
You will also notice how few personnel the procedure requires. Outside of this experience, I have never had an AI with more than one veterinary assistant. Usually, just the vet and I perform the procedure. As a case and point, I recently had an AI performed in Malvern, PA on March 9, 2014. D[redacted] of [redacted] Specialists charged $150.00 to perform a collection and side-by-side AI with this same female Leonberger and a different male. She charged extra because she had to drive an hour and open the clinic to accommodate us. This hospital is in Malvern, PA - the same region of the country as Delmar, DE. [redacted] is a nationally recognized reproductive specialist.
To check the business's claim that I am accustomed to really inexpensive services because of my location (the research triangle in North Carolina), I checked on a listserv of 4,000 breeders from across the country, asking how much they have paid recently for a side-by-side AI. I received 30 responses. There was a chorus of cries about being “ripped off”, “gouged”, and “thievery”. [redacted], shared with me that her vet, [redacted] in Easton, MD performs the procedure for her for $65.00. I asked [redacted] to check with the reproductive vets in her/[redacted]’s area and they concurred that the price was out of the ballpark.
The claim that substantial costs were incurred for her veterinary assistants is similarly inane. According to the Occupational Outlook Handbook, the median pay for veterinary assistants is $11.22 an hour. [redacted] claims in her response that she “donated her professional time that evening”. If I paid $400 for three individuals to watch her perform a procedure that took less than 30 minutes, then she expects the Revdex.com to believe that my bill was used to pay in excess of $260.00 an hour for their overtime efforts! In contrast, the median pay for veterinarians is $40.61 an hour. If I paid 4 veterinarians time and a half for a thirty minute procedure, I would only be charged $240.00. Lastly, there is a charge for her staff on the itemized bill of $75.00, making this entire claim on the part of the business farcical at best. [redacted]
The claim that the stud owner, [redacted], previously paid for AI’s at this clinic is not true. Leonberger breeding records are recorded by the [redacted] and available to members. [redacted]’s privileged information about a previous procedure performed in September 2012 is referring to a breeding involving Bel, Good Life’s Believe in the [redacted] and another one of [redacted]’s stud dogs. After inquiring, it turns out that [redacted], wife of one of the owners, paid for the procedures priced ~$245.00. The stud owner paying for an AI is about as common as a groom paying for a wedding; I’ve never seen it. Even if clinic paperwork shows the stud owner as the client, the person receiving the service from the stud owner swipes the credit card almost without exception. The clinic clearly processed me as a new client expecting me to cover the charges and the invoice reflects that expectation and practice. By her own admission, [redacted] sought from me 408% of the charges given to [redacted] for identical service.
Further, I am appalled by the violation of Delaware Law Title 24 regulating veterinary medicine involved in her communicating the treatment of other patients. 24 Del.C. §3316(a)(7) states, “3.1 Privileged Communications. Veterinarians must protect the personal privacy of patients and clients by not willfully revealing privileged communications regarding the diagnosis and treatment of an animal.” Not only should [redacted] not be discussing treatment she offered for [redacted] at her clinic, she certainly shouldn’t be sharing information about services she offered to the [redacted], A[redacted] who aren’t part of this complaint.
  
As to the ineptitude of the procedure and my claim that “more harm than good” was likely done, I would point out the the SurgiLube brought out to the waiting room is in fact a spermicide. To quote from a 2008 scholarly article by [redacted] and colleagues, “Numerous studies over several decades have consistently shown a sperm toxic effect of common lubricants, even those that are spermicidal agent–free, such as … Surgi-Lube ... “These data report significant disruptions in sperm motility and viability, which occurs within minutes of direct contact between sperm and the lubricant”.  “The negative effect of these products is such that sperm function and even fertility could be compromised when these products are used during natural reproduction.”  [redacted]  
Further, that the sperm rich fraction collected on this visit was half what I was able to collect the next day leads me to believe that fluid was lost to the waiting room floor. The first collection is the most important as the more mature sperm cells are also the most potent. I do fear that I have weakened the chances for conception using this clinic; I certainly did nothing to improve them. Not only might I be out of the $2,500.00 I put into making this breeding possible, I might be out of a litter of puppies valued at $2,800.00 each.
The meat of this complaint, however, isn’t the poor quality of the AI; it is the dishonesty of not honoring a quote and a written request. The real clue for my mistreatment can be found in [redacted]’s response, “[[redacted]] obviously hadn't heard my soft spoken, gentle criticism to my technician.” I am sure that I unfortunately embarrassed [redacted] when I tried to steer her toward correct procedures that would help ensure the success of the procedure (Not using a spermicide, using a collection sleeve instead of a tiny medicine cup, and injecting air into the insemination tube in order to deliver semen to the cervix). Though I did my best to avoid embarrassing her, my criticism may not have been “soft spoken” and “gentle” enough for her taste. At least one of her employees was brand new and having a lay person telling you how to do your job in front of your employees is probably an awful experience. The proper response on her part, however, is not extortion.   
I brought in my own grooming table the procedure was performed upon. If the collection procedure was done properly, there would be no mess to worry about. All the tools used in an AI are very cheap and disposable. Cleanup can be done in one or two minutes. Was I supposedly billed for the care being given to other clients and the routine disinfection of the entire facility? Does [redacted] regularly abandon her surgical care patients at an hour much earlier than 8:30PM when they won’t again receive care until the morning? How long are they left without needed doses of pain medication or a chance to relieve themselves? Night services are usually performed by veterinary assistants to care for the animals and should not be the financial burden of this one client.
The one item we can agree upon is that I did not take [redacted] up on her offer to pay for half of the bill. [redacted] is unemployed and taking care of her father who is dying of cancer. If [redacted] had even the remotest interest in her client, she would likely have known these two basic facts of her life. One of my primary motivations for choosing her as the stud owner was the hope that it could bring a bright spot to a difficult time in her life. The shenanigans of Peninsula Animal Hospital in trying to gauge her would be even worse than the reality of them taking a shot at an out-of-state client who they thought would be unlikely to have the energy to complain.
I am fortunate to have a witness to the quote and the circumstances surrounding this. Ms. [redacted] can be contacted at [redacted] I shared [redacted]’s response to my complaint and she has decided to seek another veterinarian for services.   
The American Veterinary Medical Association’s Principles of Veterinary Medicine state that “it is the attending veterinarians responsibility to inform the client of the expected results and costs, and the related risks of each treatment regimen.” “Ethically, the information within veterinary medical records is considered privileged and confidential. It must not be released except as required or allowed by law, or by consent of the owner of the patient.” [redacted], to my mind, has demonstrated a lack of regard for her responsibility and the principles of the veterinary profession. To my mind, she has abandoned the common decency found in most business owners aiming to take care of their customers in return for an honest profit.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a rebuttal,
[redacted]

Review: FRAUDULENT. [redacted] was called on August 8th to inquire about her availability and pricing for a side-by-side fresh AI. The staff at her clinic quoted an inclusive price of $200.00. The routine and usual price for this service is $75-$125, but I agreed to the inflated price.At the clinic, I clearly indicated in writing on the intake form that I wanted to be informed if the services exceeded $201.00. I have been a breeder for 15 years and have had many AI's performed at a variety of veterinary clinics. I was aghast at the out-of-the norm practices used in performing this AI (too many to include herein). The greatest malpractice was likely the intention of the veterinarian to use a spermicide (surgilube) to lubricate the insemination tube. Killing the sperm defeats the purpose of an insemination.When the procedure was over, I went to pay the bill and the receptionist asked me to pay $1,000 for the 20 minute, non-eventful, non-surgical procedure that was quoted just an hour before as a $200 procedure. I was in shock! When it became clear that I was not going to pay 10 times the ordinary cost of the procedure, the veterinarian said that $405 was as low as she could possibly go. With my credit now on the line, I paid the bill, but informed the receptionist that I would be complaining to the Revdex.com. Never in my fifteen years as a breeder-hobbyist have I ever had a veterinarian try to pull a stunt like this. Buyer Beware.Desired Settlement: Given that the AI probably did more harm than good, I would prefer a full refund. However, I would feel this matter resolved if I was refunded $205.00 and the original quote was honored. Thank you.

Business

Response:

I received your letter dated August 12, 2014 explaining a complaint from a customer seen in my animal hospital on Friday August 8, 2014. Thank you for sharing the client's concerns and allowing me to respond and clarify his complaints as there are two sides to every story.

The facts of the encounter differ considerably from the client's statement of his concerns. The complaining client claims that he called my veterinary office an hour prior to arriving at my hospital on Friday August 8, 2014. To clarify this claim, I met with my 6 employees and asked if any of them received a phone call of that nature, and did they quote anyone $200 for an entire semen collection and artificial insemination procedure on an emergency basis. None of my employees took such a call from anyone that day giving a quote of $200. I can supply our phone records as proof of fact if necessary. We did, however answer our phone at 5:05PM which was not our normal work protocol (our normal business hours are M-F 8AM-5PM), to take a call from the stud dog's owner, and one of my existing clients.

The male dog's owner (who was my existing client and NOT the complaining client) spoke with my veterinary technician on the phone and asked if she could bring in her stud dog in for fresh semen collection and then artificially inseminate an unreceptive female dog who was behaving aggressively toward her male by trying to bite him. The client said that the female dog's owner had had progesterone and brucellosis testing done at his local veterinarian's and the time to breed the dog was now based on the progesterone testing. Despite using a muzzle on this female dog, she still was too fractious to permit the breeding to take place naturally according to my client. My animal hospital had

been very busy that particular week and day, and our employees had already incurred a substantial amount of overtime that week due to the high volume of sick patients needing treatment. I realized that it would be costly and emotionally demanding for our employees to stay and wait for these clients to drive nearly an hour to our hospital, and then stay another hour to clean up the hospital and tend to our hospitalized patients two hours later than normal due to the wait for this client. Because of this situation, I sought to discourage them from engaging our services by telling my technician to explain that I would only agree to stay and wait for this unplanned elective procedure if the client was willing to pay a higher than typical fee of $1,000 due to the emergency nature of the request and the wait time of my staff and myself necessitating overtime fees for my staff and myself.

My technician spoke with the client on the phone and then came and told me that the client said she would pay whatever I charged as long as I would do it. This particular employee stayed at the hospital until 6:03PM and then left her shift just as the clients arrived for the procedure an hour following the phone call.

I find it peculiar that the female dog's owner has focused on this particular $200 service charge when he was never, in fact, quoted this amount by my staff. In fact, I have performed artificial inseminations twice for the male dog's owner. The first occasion, on September 24, 2012 during normal business hours resulted in a total charge of $282.00. The second occasion performed the following day of September 25, 2012, resulted in a charge of $245.00.

The owner of the male dog paid for both of these services on those prior occasions. Having received a phone call from the same dog owner on August 8, 2014, I assumed that this specific client had agreed to pay the $1000 quoted over the phone by my technician at 5:05PM.

Next, I would like to address the complaining client's concern that he had asked to be notified for any services performed exceeding $201. Our hospital routinely has new patients/clients fill out paperwork forms that include a general question asking what dollar amount they require an estimate for services be provided. Now, in fact the owner of the female dog wrote that he would like to be informed if a

service went above $201 or more. The male dog's owner has those same papers on file and does not list any amount at which she needs to be notified for services performed. Since my past experience with

this client proved that she as the male dog owner paid for the service, and not the female dog's owner, our staff did not pay particular attention to this form. Regardless, my technician who took the phone call had been instructed to communicate a verbal quote of $1000 for the unplanned emergency service to be performed. This verbal quote in my mind would serve as proper notification of a service going above the $201 amount regardless of how the client filled out his paperwork.

Now, when the clients jointly were presented with the bill of $1000 after the service was performed, they both questioned the high fee. The owner of the male dog told my receptionist that she thought my technician was kidding about the quote over the phone. The female dog's owner became more difficult and then refused to pay for the service because he objected to the fee. I was informed of this by my receptionist. The male dogs owner has been a good, albeit infrequent client in the past, and I felt that something seemed wrong with her perception of the service, and with how the phone call quoting the service must have gone. 1 attempted to contact my technician who took the phone call to clarify the

conversation, but was unable to reach her as she had her cell phone off while driving home from work. I decided that I wanted to avoid any misconceptions in case my technician had given the client the wrong impression about the quote on the phone, and since I couldn't contact her for a fact by fact account of the phone conversation I agreed to lower the price as a gesture of good will toward the client and

donate my professional time for that evening. Because I agreed to perform that service, it became necessary to remain at the hospital until 8:30 PM, as did three employees receiving overtime to complete end of day closure responsibilities following the conclusion of this drawn out service.

I feel that the amount agreed upon in the end is more than fair and requires no further adjustment to the client. The artificial insemination fee is $200 in his bill, also included is a $95 emergency office visit charge which is customary for emergency services in our region, a semen evaluation performed to determine if the semen was of usable quality costing $35, and a modest charge for technicians/receptionist overtime totaling $75.00. The entire amount came to $405. The owner of the male dog even offered to pay half of the entire bill when the female dog's owner became difficult, but the female dog's owner insisted that she not pay anything and he would handle the situation by complaining to the Revdex.com.

Now, all the particulars of the fee dispute aside, I take particular exception to the complaint that l"did more harm than good". The female dog's owner mentioned that I used out of the norm practices to perform the AI. He claims that I performed malpractice by intending to use a spermicidal lubricant. This is completely untrue. What the client misinterpreted as "my intention to use a spermicidal lubricant" resulted from him seeing my technician set out supplies for me to use for the procedure. This technician set out a tube of surgilube which is admittedly a bacteriostatic, but not a spermicidal lubricant. In fact I do not use that particular lubricant for the purpose of performing artificial inseminations despite my technician selecting the incorrect lubricant which she anticipated I would require to perform the procedure. 1 am knowledgeable that surgilube contains a bacteriostatic agent which may adversely

affect sperm quality. It is actually controversial that even non spermicidal lubricants may interfere with semen quality, and Ifind that most female dogs if appropriately bred have ample natural lubricant to accept the narrow tubing used to insert the semen into their vagina. When I looked at the tube of surgilube my technician set out, Isaid to her, "we can't use that", and I made an attempt to begin the procedure with the aid of the female's natural lubrication. The female dog's owner (who obviously hadn't heard my soft spoken, gentle criticism to my technician) then intervened and presented his own tube of non spermicidal lubricant and asked me to use that for the procedure. I complied with his request using a small amount to coat the tubing. The diameter of the artificial insemination tubing is considerably smaller than the stud dog's penis which is not customarily lubricated prior to allowing a natural breeding to take place. The remainder of the procedure drew complimentary comments from the female dog's owner on how "thorough we were" and how much he appreciated our help.

I feel it is relevant to note that the female dog's owner lives several states away to the south. He claims in his dispute that the normal and customary price for an artificial insemination is $75-125. I investigated this claim by having my technician call numerous veterinary hospitals in our region. Of the 16 1ocal veterinary hospitals called, only 2 hospitals perform the procedure. Neither of the two

veterinary hospitals will perform the procedure on an emergency basis, and further, the total costs are

in line with mine because these hospitals require examination fees, progesterone testing, and sperm evaluation in addition to the artificial insemination fees which range from $105-$180 exclusive of the additional itemized fees. Therefore I conclude that my prices are not inflated based on this investigation.

It is my hope that this letter clarifies the situation and puts aside any misunderstandings the client has concerning the service and fees he encountered. My staff and I wish him the best of luck with his breeding program and would welcome the opportunity to educate him at a scheduled time under non emergency conditions so that he may learn the rationale behind the differences in my services, breeding recommendations, and those he has experienced previously with other veterinarians in his region.

Consumer

Response: