‘Misunderstanding’ CMA would target corporates: LVGs’ reaction

There has been a “misunderstanding” about the purpose of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation into the sector, a leading clinician with one of the large veterinary groups has suggested.

The CMA’s investigation has been widely criticised for the disproportionate impacts its final orders may have on independent practices and for failing to curb increasing corporate ownership within the sector.

Speaking after CVS said it is targeting more practice acquisitions following the investigation’s conclusion, group CVO Paul Higgs said: “There was maybe a misunderstanding very early on that this was an investigation of the large veterinary groups.

“This was an investigation into the veterinary services for household pets because there was a concern that pet owners didn’t feel like they could make a choice based on price… on knowledge of ownership… and that might have resulted in not being able to receive reasonable value.

“I think, as a profession, we probably did get ourselves a little confused about that.”

‘Competitive environment’

He added: “The outcome of that, from a [CMA] perspective, should be [to] therefore maintain a competitive environment where prices remain fair and reasonable to pet owners, because we have that transparency.

“Whether or not that’s the outcome that will be achieved, that’s for the CMA to determine and time to tell.”

Mr Higgs suggested the final orders felt “more manageable” than the draft and while there will be “minor shifts” in ways of working in practice, he hoped “all practices, whether large veterinary groups or independents, will find ways to manage that”.

‘Pull together’

Mr Higgs added: “It’s a really important time for us to pull together and to look to the future and make sure that we rebuild trust, both internally in the profession and externally with pet owners.”

Mandatory posters practices must display have drawn particular ire, but that order was welcomed by Medivet and Partners. Its partner council chairperson Andrew McVey said: “Clients deserve clear information about their options, including that medicines may be cheaper elsewhere, online included. We have no objection to them being told so, and our members can often access those lower prices through our clinics.

“The CMA’s remedies bring the corporate groups into line with how our partnership already operates: transparent ownership, transparent pricing and giving owners access to great value care.”

‘Fair value’

A Linnaeus spokesperson said the group already has several measures in place and welcomes the “clear parameters and transition timelines for the sector”, adding: “Our approach to the remedies is guided by our commitment to fair value and transparent choices for our clients.”

An Inspiring Vet Care spokesperson said it welcomes the “certainty” of the orders and said it is “well advanced on implementing the requirements”.

Meanwhile, a Vets for Pets spokesperson said the conclusion of the CMA investigation “brings clarity and closure”, adding: “It has been an unsettling time for the dedicated veterinary teams who work tirelessly every day to care for the nation’s pets, and over the coming months, we will be supporting practice owners to ensure all requirements are met, so their focus can remain on providing the best quality and value pet care for the clients they serve in their local communities.”

VetPartners declined to comment when approached.