23 Oct 2025
Regulators’ claims that their plans are the ‘least onerous’ on the sector have been dismissed by critics who fear some practices could be forced out of business by them.
Allister Webb
Job Title
Image: © YakobchukOlena/Fotolia.
“Independent veterinary practice, and competition within the sector, is at risk from the CMA, not improved by it.”
That is the blunt message from an open letter issued by a prominent business group amid growing unease about current proposals to reform the sale of veterinary medicines.
The CMA has insisted present structures are unsustainable and its proposals are “no more onerous than necessary” to implement change.
But the letter, released by the Federation of Independent Veterinary Practices (FIVP), described the authority’s approach as “ridiculous” and warned its plans could have major consequences if they are implemented.
It said: “I will still need to balance the books (or go out of business) and so the lost revenue from sales of medications will have to be met somewhere.
“It will cost more to see a vet. It will cost more to remove that lump or neuter your pet or take a blood test or we will reduce our generous 20 minute consults to a more standard 15 minutes.
“Or we will have less staff resulting in a less efficient service. Or we will go out of business.”
The identity of the letter’s author has not been disclosed, although the federation said they are a practice owner it has known for many years.
But its content reflects broader concern about measures that the CMA’s critics believe would see smaller providers lose out to the large veterinary groups (LVGs) if they are enforced.
Four of the authority’s proposed remedies relate specifically to medicines, including moves intended to help raise awareness of – and reduce barriers to – online purchase options.
Its full provisional decision report, which has now been published, highlighted the findings of a pet owner survey showing 38% of participants did not know they could request a written prescription to be obtained elsewhere.
It argued many owners could make “substantial financial savings”, potentially running into hundreds of pounds, when buying commonly prescribed medicines online and claimed its analysis showed online pharmacies run by three LVGs were charging between 50 and 60% less for medicines than their first opinion practices.
The document added: “Ultimately, a business model which is based on pet owners not being aware that they are paying significantly more than they need to for products such as medicines, and in which those prices are insulated from competitive pressure, is incompatible with a well-functioning market.”
Representatives of two of the LVGs whose online medicine charges are referenced in the report – the CVS Group and IVC Evidensia – have already voiced their concerns about the rationale for and impact of the proposed remedies.
The latter has also sought to stress its concern for smaller operators, which the CMA insists will be given more time to respond to the final changes than bigger groups.
But the FIVP, which is running an online survey on the issue until next Friday (31 October), had already raised the possibility of practice closures even before the letter was issued.
Vet Amy Revill, who led a recent petition criticising the CMA’s handling of the investigation, also argued its present approach would “disproportionally disadvantage the small businesses and give an advantage to those LVGs who own the online pharmacies”.
The British Veterinary Union has also called for more to be done to raise public awareness of the links between practices and online pharmacies owned by LVGs.
But while it conceded there would be costs to its proposals, the CMA report insisted it had not identified any issues that meant they would be ineffective.
A consultation exercise on the remedy proposals is due to continue until 12 November.
