Dark Mode
More forecasts: Johannesburg 14 days weather
  • Monday, 02 February 2026

Vets under increasing pressure to make money for corporate owners, BBC told

Vets

Vets have told BBC Panorama that they feel pressured to put profits ahead of animal welfare by the large companies that now own many UK practices. Over the last decade, the number of vet clinics owned by big corporations has jumped from 10% to 60%. This shift has led to concerns that pet owners are being overcharged for tests and treatments they might not actually need.

One vet, who wanted to stay anonymous, shared internal documents from a major company called IVC Evidensia. These papers showed a traffic-light system used to monitor how much money each clinic makes. Staff are tracked on how many X-rays, blood tests, and ultrasounds they perform. If a clinic is in the "red" zone for not doing enough tests, managers may step in to ask why. The vet worried this encourages "upselling," such as charging £700 for X-rays to diagnose arthritis when an experienced vet could often identify the problem just by a physical exam.

Pet owners have also shared stories of spiralling costs. One owner was presented with a £13,000 bill after their pet spent 18 hours in a hospital, yet they still didn't know what was wrong with the animal. Another owner was quoted £5,000 for surgery, only to be told on the morning of the operation that the price had jumped to £12,000. Many people admitted they felt trapped because they would pay anything to save their pets but felt the pricing was unfair and confusing.

The UK's competition regulator is currently investigating the industry to see if pet owners are getting a fair deal. They estimate that pet owners may have been overcharged by as much as £900 million over four years. While the big vet companies deny this and say they provide high-quality care, the regulator is considering new rules. These could force clinics to be more honest about who owns them and to display their prices clearly so owners can shop around.

Comment / Reply From