University of Minnesota Veterinary Medical Center

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/02/24) */
Our client has been coming with her pet to our Veterinary Medical Center since at least 2010. Her pet has been using the same 3 eye medications throughout this 6 year period. When I look at this clients invoices from the last years of 2014 and...

2015 I see the cost of these 3 medications have been slightly different but pretty consistent. Medication #1 an eye lubricant the client was charged $5.93 on some occasions and $6.38 at the top range on other occasions. Medication #2 Hyaluronan the client was charged $31.76, $34.33 and $28.33 for refills of this drug. The 3rd medication: Neo/Poly/Dex was charged at $19.99, $20.99, $24.91, $26.16, $25.76 and the last refill was $44.35. The client in this 2 year period had 10 separate refill requests and did order more than one in quantity of a drug on several occasions. Some of these drug refills were filled at the end of a recheck visit and some were orders that were filled and the client up directly from the pharmacy.
On Friday, December 11th the client was scheduled for a recheck exam with our Ophthalmology service. It was determined at the end of this visit the client and her pet did not need to return to our Medical Center for another 3-6 months as a result the client requested a quantity of 6 tubes of the Hyaluronan which was charged at $31.76 each for a total of $190.58 and 6 tubes of the Neo/Poly/Dex at $44.35 each for a total of $266.11. She also ordered 5 tubes of the ointment at $6.38 each for a total of $31.90 and with her office visit fee the total of her bill was $617.42 with tax. The order was filled at her request and the client paid the bill in full, was presented with an itemized invoice and left the building without protest. On Monday morning she called the Ophthalmology service and asked for a refund of the Neo/Poly/Dex medication as she had found it online for $13.00 a tube. The client asked if she could come in and discuss the issue and she was told Yes. The client arrived several hours later and was told by the ophthalmology tech we could not refund the medications that had left the building per rules of the MN State Pharmacy Board. It was this time I went to meet the client as the Patient/Client Advocate. Client was very angry and was raising her voice in the lobby. I asked if she would please come with me to a private room for discussion but she refused. Unfortunately, it was difficult to discuss any resolution with the client at this point however, I did offer to credit her account for the $20.00 extra per tube that she had paid for the Neo/Poly/Dex as the cost had doubled since she order the prescription last 5 months earlier. Client told me this was not acceptable, she had her attorney on the phone and he was advising her that this medication could be returned. She than tossed the medication bag at me which contained all 3 of her medications, requested I write a receipt that states they were in my possession and the client left the building. I encouraged the client several times to reconsider and take the medications with her as she had paid for them. I than took the medications to the pharmacy where the pharmacy director has them stored for her. The client than contacted the Hospital Director by email. She stated she felt I was not being honest with her in regards to our medication policy. We replied to this client with a copy of the manufacturers drug information sheet that states this drug is by Rx only. The drug is required to be sterile for application in the eye. We also included in our reply a copy of the pharmacy directive that is posted and taped to the small pharmacy pick up counter on an 8x11 inch poster board. In addition, the pharmacist provided us a copy of a notice from the manufacturer of the our source for Neo/Poly/Dex stating they were stopping production until at least the end of the year. This drug is also used for human medicine which made its availability at a premium and more expensive for us to order for our patients. It is difficult for our medical center to notify all clients that may use this drug therefore I felt it was a good customer gesture and a reasonable resolution to credit the clients account for $20. x 6 tubes for a total of $120.00. I'm sorry our efforts have been unsuccessful to resolve this issue with our client. If the client would have questioned the cost at the time she paid for the prescriptions before she left the building we would have happily refunded her for the full amount of any of the drugs she requested that day. Unfortunately, we cannot restock these items and they are still available for her to pick up and use for her pet. She only needs to call the pharmacy and we can mail them to her.
I am happy to provide any of the documents mentioned in this response to the Revdex.com if requested. I'm sorry for this clients frustration. I hope she continues to have her pet seen here at our ophthalmology service.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/03/01) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I have sent the office a picture of a reciept from Vet Direct, Showing there is no shortage of the Neomycin /Polymyxin dex. as the U of M responsesays. I am Showing the price I paid for 6 at $13.49. There was no shortage and the price was cheaper than the 45.00 a tube the U of M charged me. So in the statement saying this is a limited amount is a lie. Also Vet Direct have a return policy.
It is obvious the U of M has no intention or accountability in there response. There is nothing on my reciept, stating the meds are non-returnable. in the 6 years I have patroned the small animal clinic, I was never informed of that policy.
As I stated , Melissa from the U of M, asked me to bring the meds back and gave me an appt at 11:30.
It was the supervisor Deb [redacted] whom called me a liar, said she would not refund my credit card . I simply stated that having a credit to My dog account was not an option,. because the dog might die, and I feel they should credit my credit card. I was never informed of the increase and it was not stated on the check out slip. They are robbing me and I would never bring my business to the U of M again. Its obvious they don't care how they cheat people.
The receptionist wanted to get another supervisor, and help with the situation, she could see no reason why they shouldn't adjust the fee and take the meeds back. I did have somebody on the phone that heard the entire conversation.My credit card representative. I have pictures of Deb [redacted] accepting the meeds back at the front desk.