I have done and it and everything turned out fine. It was actually a “sight-unseen” purchase also, so I was probably crazy.
However, the vet practice that did the PPE for me was so pleasant, professional, and organized, they made my home vet seem rather…inadequate.
The whole experience made me look for a new vet & I found one I ADORE, so it actually worked out doubly-well!
No, I think there is too much conflict of interest and it can put the vet in an uncomfortable spot. I wouldn’t let buyers use my vet for PPEs when I was selling horses either (not that she wanted to), and guided them to the local multi-doctor referral clinic if they wanted a PPE (these were folks from out of the area without a local vet).
I would not because it puts the vet in a conflict of interest and here we have a choice of many marvellous vets.
A buyer from afar was interested in one of my horses and did use my vet for an initial inspection and I said my vet could release my horse’s history.
She just asked for flexions that that stage.
[QUOTE=CrowneDragon;7865967]
No, I think there is too much conflict of interest and it can put the vet in an uncomfortable spot. I wouldn’t let buyers use my vet for PPEs when I was selling horses either (not that she wanted to), and guided them to the local multi-doctor referral clinic if they wanted a PPE (these were folks from out of the area without a local vet).[/QUOTE]
I don’t agree. My vet would never, ever jeopardize his license to shade a PPE so that I could make a sale. If I stopped being his client he would still have a roof over his head, food on the table, and a thriving business.
He and his partner call it as they see it and yes, he has done at least one PPE on a sales horses where the buyer did not purchase based on his findings. I am okay with that, too. I want an honest vet.
I take a number of consignments, many of which have never been treated by my vet, so the horse is completely new to him. I know he has the lowest trip fees around as well as a very reasonable PPE charge. I also release ALL vet records to any buyers, so that information is readily available from me or the consignor. If for some reason one partner has seen a horse and the other has not, I suggest using the partner who has not.
And of course the buyer can use any vet they want. I hold for free if it is on the farm; otherwise there is time and travel to go to a vet clinic. I don’t care.
When I buy a horse, I’ll typically use the seller’s vet. Mostly I am checking for breeding soundness or the horse is a baby, so it’s not like I am looking for a competitive performance horse.
In fact, if I couldn’t trust my vet to do an honest PPE for a buyer, I wouldn’t want him for my vet.
I agree 100% with Ironwood farm
It only BECOMES a “conflict of interest” if you ask or allude to a request for your vet to do something that he or she shouldn’t be doing
If all hands are on the table, if it is understood right from the get-go that the vet is going to divulge everything he or she sees and uncovers - warts and all - I cannot even remotely fathom where and how there should ever be a conflict. If the seller is naïve enough to believe that because they are a current client of the PPE vet, that should give them a “Get out of Jail Free” card, then they have a lot to learn about life in general
In cases like this, even if the vet has not treated or seen my horse in the past, I will absolutely tell him that the horse in question had a mild colic episode a few weeks ago and a shot of Banamine set her right, or it appears she whacked a hind leg on the hay feeder a few weeks ago and a bump appeared, and she was never lame on it, but this is the treatment I undertook with her. Anything and everything I know about that horse. I have too much respect for my vet as a person and as my vet to ever put him in a situation where he could look incompetent, look inadequate or be hung out to dry for any reason. All hands are on the table 100% of the time in 100% of the transactions
When you choose to operate in this manner, then you never have to worry about a perceived or real “conflict of interest”.
Ever
I disagree with the above. I have seen owners/farms drop a vet because the vet’s report nixed a sale. Especially when there are observations during the exam that aren’t black-and-white and the vet has to make a call on suitability for a particular discipline or the likelihood of future issues, there can be hurt feelings when a vet that they thought was “on their side” ends up having to report negative findings that result in a lost sale. This is not fair to the vet, and can be a real conflict of interest. If that hock arthritis may be a problem or maybe not, do you want to emphasize the glass half full or half empty? Some sellers don’t have qualms with vets acknowledging the worst case scenario (which the buyer should be made aware of), and some will brand that vet as an alarmist and complain about the lost sale.
I’m not saying that vets are unethical (though some are), but you can put them in a really uncomfortable spot by representing both parties.
[QUOTE=CrowneDragon;7866423]
I disagree with the above. I have seen owners/farms drop a vet because the vet’s report nixed a sale.[/QUOTE]
Then clearly that was not a client worth having …
If that hock arthritis may be a problem or maybe not, do you want to emphasize the glass half full or half empty?
But that’s just it. The vet reports that this is what he/she found in that hock, here are the x rays. They DO NOT say the horse is or isn’t suitable for any intended purpose - they merely report on what they see in front of them on that given day. Then its up to the purchaser to refer it to THEIR vet, with the x rays taken and ask THEIR vet if they feel this horse will stand up to the intended use of XXX
No PPE vet should be stating whether a horse is suitable for any given discipline. That’s not what they are being asked to do. And they sure as heck cant give an accurate assessment anyhow based on the hour or so they spend with that horse …
There are shady vets out there, if you stay in the business long enough, you’ll run into one. You, know, the ones the sellers demand you use yet don’t release complete medical records to you-vet honestly can say suitable for intended purpose TODAY. Some of them also deal in the substance du jour guaranteed not to test.
We probably overdo the use your own vet advice on here, especially when own vet is hundreds of miles away and there are few or no others at all available in the sellers area. However I think it best to continue to advise those less experienced in evaluating and buying to choose the PPE vet themselves when dealing with sellers of unknown reputation and record.
I’d use Ironwoods vet in a heartbeat if I bought from or thru her. Been in business quite awhile and built a good reputation. But if a seller is not well known to me, I wouldn’t.
[QUOTE=TrueColours;7866491]
But that’s just it. The vet reports that this is what he/she found in that hock, here are the x rays. They DO NOT say the horse is or isn’t suitable for any intended purpose - they merely report on what they see in front of them on that given day. Then its up to the purchaser to refer it to THEIR vet, with the x rays taken and ask THEIR vet if they feel this horse will stand up to the intended use of XXX
No PPE vet should be stating whether a horse is suitable for any given discipline. That’s not what they are being asked to do. And they sure as heck cant give an accurate assessment anyhow based on the hour or so they spend with that horse …[/QUOTE]
Identifying suitability for intended use is one of the most important functions for a PPE veterinarian, and often the first question asked the buyer. “What do you want to use this horse for?” Obviously a PPE and the evaluation from the vet will be different if the horse is being purchased as a GP jumper vs an x-rails packer. The buyer may not even have another vet to consult with. The PPE vet is supposed to offer their expertise for that exam fee. A vet can’t “pass” or “fail” a horse, but they should explain their findings and how that may impact the horse, and allow the buyer to make decisions from there.
This article from the AAEP gives a good outline of what should and shouldn’t be expected from a vet during a PPE, modalities available during the PPE, and how to select a good vet. http://www.aaep.org/info/horse-health?publication=892
We, as veterinarians, are simply advisors as to the physical abilities and disadvantages of a particular animal and how these problems may relate now and in the future to your intended use of this horse.
[QUOTE=trubandloki;7866471]
Then clearly that was not a client worth having …[/QUOTE]
Fair enough, but if it’s a big barn (and one was), that loss can hurt.
Unless there is no alternative, I’m totally with Crowne Dragon. We have any
number of good vets here so I would not put my vet in that position.
In the real world, people have multiple relationships which may create a real or perceived conflict of interest. The way to mitigate conflicts is to DISCLOSE the relationship and let the third party decide. I always release vet records to a prospective buyer. Like TrueColours, I tell everything I know about a sales horse. I don’t care who does the PPE. If they want to use my vet (which will save them $50 - $100 on the trip fee,) then fine. If they don’t, fine. My point is that disclosure mitigates COI issues. There are plenty of disreputable seller out there and I am sure some of them will find a crooked vet. It’s up to the buyer to choose and I don’t think that there is a pat answer on which vet to use. I also don’t think using the seller’s vet is a slam dunk COI.
This “is the vet honest or not” question is one that has me wondering if the information collect by the attending vet that is transferred to the purchaser’s vet in another state with the intent to deceive … the mailing or email exposes the transaction to Federal Laws … which go back to the 1860s. Those laws were enacted to protect the purchaser after the advent of the telegraph were contacts were commonly executed sight unseen.
This is the vet honest or not question is one that has me wondering if the information collected by the attending vet that is transferred to the purchaser’s vet in another state with the intent to deceive … the mailing or email exposes the transaction to Federal Laws … which go back to the 1860s. Those laws were enacted to protect the purchaser after the advent of the telegraph were contacts were commonly executed sight unseen.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
