FIVP is urging independent practices to challenge the wording on a mandatory poster, which has been published for review as part of the CMA’s public consultation.
The poster suggests to veterinary clients that their pet’s medicines may be ‘significantly cheaper online’. These three words are highlighted in the poster’s text.
Pet owners are advised to ‘compare prices online and at other retailers’ to find out about ‘savings’ that might be made.
Throughout the CMA investigation, FIVP has vocalised its support for improved transparency for veterinary clients. This includes publishing ownership details, price lists and prescription details.
However, we consider the poster be poorly phrased, potentially inflammatory, and generally damaging to the viability of independent practices.
We argue that the poster, in its current form, could be misleading to clients. By indicating that ‘the same’ medicine could be ‘significantly cheaper’, the CMA has vastly oversimplified the pharmacy process and failed to address the negative side of online pharmacies.
Some medications may be more expensive in practice, potentially due to supply issues or difficulty with storage. Without the buying power of online pharmacies, independent practices may even be forced to raise prices just to keep essential medicine in stock.
It also does not address the risks or the administrative process of using an online pharmacy. Nor does the poster consider the impact on in-house pharmacies, which will have to reduce stock to prevent wastage and potentially increase service costs to balance the loss of sales.
With this vague, yet authoritative, wording, the CMA places the onus of explaining complicated business concepts to understandably stressed clients on their vets.
An FIVP member wrote: ‘My initial thought when I saw the poster was one of horror! Are we to spend an extra 10 minutes in every consult explaining about written prescriptions, justifying our prices and explain about consult fees etc going up if medication sales drop as the practice needs to remain viable, and sending them to our competitors (mainly corporates) to buy their medications? Will the client be happy to pay for an extended consult whilst we have these conversations?’
We believe that these in-depth discussions about sales and pricing will only exacerbate the abuse faced by veterinary professionals. It also undermines their true value in providing a professional service, immediate access to medicines and a level of care that is absent from online pharmacies.
One FIVP member told us: ‘I think that the poster is unbalanced and creates an immediate distrust in the veterinary team, thereby eroding the vet-client relationship.’
This has been a recurring theme throughout the CMA investigation, as its proposals make veterinary care increasingly transactional.
FIVP is in full support of improved transparency within the profession. However, we believe that the CMA needs to be equally transparent in its own communications and materials.
In its current communications, the CMA has failed to properly publicise how the increased buying power of online pharmacies enables them to better control costs. It has failed to account for how stock management can influence the prices of certain medicines.
Perhaps most importantly, it has failed to explain why independent practices may utilise medicine sales to cross-subsidise treatment prices and cover essential business costs.
FIVP will be responding to the CMA’s consultation to request a redraft of this poster. The poster should be rewritten so that it presents balanced, factual information about medicine purchasing. It should explain both the advantages and limitations of online pharmacies and avoids language that could be interpreted as suggesting veterinary practices routinely overcharge.
We encourage independent practices across the country to make their own responses to this public consultation.
FIVP also calls on the CMA to publish documents that better explain the prescription process, detailing the role that medicine sales play in keeping essential bricks-and-mortar veterinary practices on the UK’s high streets.
Rita Dingwall, FIVP chair, said: “Independent practices support transparency and informed choice, but information provided to pet owners must be fair, balanced and evidence based. The current wording risks damaging confidence in trusted local veterinary practices without explaining the wider context.
“Transparency should help clients make informed decisions, not encourage them to question the integrity of their veterinary team.”
