Veterinarian holds dog hostage over bill---Update
Stranger pays pup's $972 bill
'Pilot' caught in dispute between vet, owner
By BEN SMITH
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 09/18/07
A puppy that seemed destined for the pound and possible death was reunited with his owner late Tuesday.
Pilot the dog had been held "hostage" at the vet's office, the dog's owner said in a lawsuit, because of a dispute over an unpaid bill. The veterinarian, Dr. Garry Innocent, released Pilot after a donor stepped forward to make good on the debt about 5 p.m. Tuesday.
"I feel better than ever," said Josh Gomez, as he petted and hugged his dog in the parking lot outside PetFIRST Animal Hospital in Duluth. "I'm just glad it's done."
Carol Diamantis of Brookhaven paid $972 in cash to free Pilot.
Diamantis, Gomez and his attorney, Ed McCrimmon, paid a surprise visit to PetFIRST Animal Hospital late Tuesday- the deadline Innocent set for Gomez to make good on his debt. If the 22-year-old dog owner didn't pay up, the vet warned, Innocent would declare Pilot "abandoned" and sell, give away or take the dog to Gwinnett County's animal shelter, where the dog could be put to sleep.
Georgia law allows veterinarians to "dispose of" a pet 10 days after demanding, in writing, that its owner pay the animal's medical bill in full.
Pilot had been held in the clinic since Aug. 26, when Gomez took Pilot to PetFIRST for treatment. Innocent diagnosed Pilot with Parvovirus, a potentially deadly condition. The dog was held for three days for treatment.
When Gomez went to pick up his dog, he paid the vet $1,152, the amount he said the clinic had quoted him. Innocent, however, said he never quoted that figure to Gomez and that the real amount Gomez owed was $1,640. That amount has increased since Aug. 29, when Gomez showed up to get Pilot, because of the boarding costs.
The cash Diamantis ponied up Tuesday afternoon settles the bill once and for all, Innocent said.
"I'm happy," the vet said. "All is well."
Just days ago, however, it was a very different story.
In a letter dated Sept. 8, Innocent informed Gomez that if he didn't pay the bill, he would "report this matter to all authorities including Gwinnett County Animal Control for pet abandonment and disposal."
Gomez then filed suit to block Innocent from sending his dog to the pound.
Diamantis said she stepped forward after reading news accounts of the pet's possible demise.
"If I was in the position, I would hope somebody would help me out," said Diamantis, who brought her two sons with her.
The surprise visit prompted some theatrics and a few testy exchanges between Innocent and McCrimmon.
The vet demanded that Pilot's bill be paid in cash. The lawyer insisted the dog be handed over to Gomez before the vet got any cash.
McCrimmon, Gomez's lawyer, even called the Duluth police - to make sure the exchange took place, he said. An officer who arrived seemed bewildered about why he was there. Innocent grumbled about the lawyer's "publicity stunt."
Finally, a vet tech handed Pilot to his owner.
The dog jumped into Gomez's arms, his tail wagging. Gomez beamed. So did everybody else.
More on ajc.com
'Pilot' caught in dispute between vet, owner
By BEN SMITH
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 09/18/07
A puppy that seemed destined for the pound and possible death was reunited with his owner late Tuesday.
Pilot the dog had been held "hostage" at the vet's office, the dog's owner said in a lawsuit, because of a dispute over an unpaid bill. The veterinarian, Dr. Garry Innocent, released Pilot after a donor stepped forward to make good on the debt about 5 p.m. Tuesday.
"I feel better than ever," said Josh Gomez, as he petted and hugged his dog in the parking lot outside PetFIRST Animal Hospital in Duluth. "I'm just glad it's done."
Carol Diamantis of Brookhaven paid $972 in cash to free Pilot.
Diamantis, Gomez and his attorney, Ed McCrimmon, paid a surprise visit to PetFIRST Animal Hospital late Tuesday- the deadline Innocent set for Gomez to make good on his debt. If the 22-year-old dog owner didn't pay up, the vet warned, Innocent would declare Pilot "abandoned" and sell, give away or take the dog to Gwinnett County's animal shelter, where the dog could be put to sleep.
Georgia law allows veterinarians to "dispose of" a pet 10 days after demanding, in writing, that its owner pay the animal's medical bill in full.
Pilot had been held in the clinic since Aug. 26, when Gomez took Pilot to PetFIRST for treatment. Innocent diagnosed Pilot with Parvovirus, a potentially deadly condition. The dog was held for three days for treatment.
When Gomez went to pick up his dog, he paid the vet $1,152, the amount he said the clinic had quoted him. Innocent, however, said he never quoted that figure to Gomez and that the real amount Gomez owed was $1,640. That amount has increased since Aug. 29, when Gomez showed up to get Pilot, because of the boarding costs.
The cash Diamantis ponied up Tuesday afternoon settles the bill once and for all, Innocent said.
"I'm happy," the vet said. "All is well."
Just days ago, however, it was a very different story.
In a letter dated Sept. 8, Innocent informed Gomez that if he didn't pay the bill, he would "report this matter to all authorities including Gwinnett County Animal Control for pet abandonment and disposal."
Gomez then filed suit to block Innocent from sending his dog to the pound.
Diamantis said she stepped forward after reading news accounts of the pet's possible demise.
"If I was in the position, I would hope somebody would help me out," said Diamantis, who brought her two sons with her.
The surprise visit prompted some theatrics and a few testy exchanges between Innocent and McCrimmon.
The vet demanded that Pilot's bill be paid in cash. The lawyer insisted the dog be handed over to Gomez before the vet got any cash.
McCrimmon, Gomez's lawyer, even called the Duluth police - to make sure the exchange took place, he said. An officer who arrived seemed bewildered about why he was there. Innocent grumbled about the lawyer's "publicity stunt."
Finally, a vet tech handed Pilot to his owner.
The dog jumped into Gomez's arms, his tail wagging. Gomez beamed. So did everybody else.
More on ajc.com
0
-
Any doctor that would send an otherwise healthy creature, be it human or animal, to his death, does not deserve the title physician. [V][xx(] 0 -
I gotta agree. This incident will only hurt this vet's reputation, and cost him a lot of money down the road in the long run. 0 -
Someone has been doing Fuzzy Math.. He paid $1152 and then the total bill was $1640 that leaves $488 dollars due. They charged $484 dollars for boarding? 0 -
The problem I have with any profession dealing with life and health is that it seems the veil has somehow been removed between profession and business.
It would seem that if one's calling were to be a physician, then the matter of first importance would be the lives of those served. After all, a physician is bound by oath to serve. There's nothing there about making money.
In a way a veterinarian is called to an even higher standard as those he (or she) serves are unable to pay for services or define even what's wrong with them. The financial aspect, though present, must be of secondary consideration as this profession is truly about service, not profit.
When one places profit before life, it would appear that service is no longer important and that dollars are more important than life itself. Thus, the provider should be considered merely a businessman licensed to dispense drugs and use a scalpel, not a physician or veterinarian.
Much better this vet should have refused to take the animal before the matter of payment became an issue. Much better if the client had been aware that the price of life was cold cash from an even colder provider.
And, by the way... I'm not preaching that providers shouldn't be allowed to make a good living. I'm merely pointing out that there has to be a degree of compassion and understanding involved when life is at stake.0 -
He needs to change the name of his clinic to MoneyFirst animal hospital. 0 -
BS. I say a good FU to all who think that a professional should be screwed out of his fees based upon "compassion".
Medicine may be a calling, but there's years of work that went into that. There's expenses incurred in practice. Just becuase it's a profession doesn't mean its a charity.
You don't see any joe six-packs who work some job just to pay the bills ever get told "Construction is a calling - there's nothing there about making money..."
If you all don't want to pay for your services, maybe the government should be providing health care, legal care, etc.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jgreen
BS. I say a good FU to all who think that a professional should be screwed out of his fees based upon "compassion".
Medicine may be a calling, but there's years of work that went into that. There's expenses incurred in practice. Just becuase it's a profession doesn't mean its a charity.
You don't see any joe six-packs who work some job just to pay the bills ever get told "Construction is a calling - there's nothing there about making money..."
If you all don't want to pay for your services, maybe the government should be providing health care, legal care, etc.
By the same token, the "professional" should stick to the price quoted, not hold the pet hostage whild adding boarding fees.
I bet you would change your tune if the pet owner were a young black kid, and the vet a well off white man.0 -
I'll bet not. I don't know about what the prices were, etc. What I do know is that my father was a veterinarian. We never had a pet that wasn't one that was abandoned at the clinic.
That's not to say that we wouldn't cut people breaks. I do it in my practice today. The difference is that I decide who gets a break, not the client. Mrs. X is a longtime client, going back to the late 1960's. Typical little old lady, comes to the clinic with cookies, etc. Her dog is too ill, and we put it down. Not only does she not get charged, but my father went to her house, with the dog, and buried it for her in the back yard. Some Jacka$$ who doesn't pay? And then runs to the media? Hell no.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jgreen
I'll bet not. I don't know about what the prices were, etc. What I do know is that my father was a veterinarian. We never had a pet that wasn't one that was abandoned at the clinic.
That's not to say that we wouldn't cut people breaks. I do it in my practice today. The difference is that I decide who gets a break, not the client. Mrs. X is a longtime client, going back to the late 1960's. Typical little old lady, comes to the clinic with cookies, etc. Her dog is too ill, and we put it down. Not only does she not get charged, but my father went to her house, with the dog, and buried it for her in the back yard. Some Jacka$$ who doesn't pay? And then runs to the media? Hell no.
J,
Read the story, he did pay what he was quoted! Instead of working out any arrangement with the pet owner for the overage, (up here there is IIRC "pet pay" to finance vet bills) he held the dog, all the while adding boarding fees! the vet deserves all the bad press he is getting!
Don0 -
I did read the story. The guy says he paid what was quoted, and the vet said that's not what was quoted.
There's $488.00 due on the bill.
22 days of boarding @ $22.00 per day. Sounds reasonable to me.
Maybe I'm a bit sensative on this issue, but I can't tell you how many people tried to screw me or my old man with that "you're a professional", "it's a calling", "you are a (insert professional title here), you've got plenty of money" jazz.0 -
Very poor public relations and business practice on the part of the veterinarian. He certainly deserves to get paid, but threatening to put down a animal to get back at the owner? Just reading the story in the paper would loose him my business for all time. 0 -
Sounds like the vet better tighten up his "quotes."
What did the vet do? Heart surgery?0 -
Firdt of all, in the vet defense, he's running a business. He can't break even or loose money out of comapsion or he'll go broke. The bill was owed, it should be paid.
In the mans defense, he was trying to do the right thing and get his dog treated.
Where they both went wrong, the vet should have been clear that the expected price may not be the final price, and he should have given an estimated top figure. The man should have asked after given the quote if there was any chance it would go over.
After the above discussion, they should have made an arrangement for payments if it went over or waited on the surgery until the man was sure he had the money to pay.
Both were wrong to some degree, and I wonder how the man got his lawyer if he didn't have the money to finish paying the bill? My experience is, doctors and lawyers have the hardest time colllecting all of their money. It is basically a non-secured loan, and people just aren't as honest as they once were.
Either way, I would have found the dog a new home before I sent it to the pound. At the same time, the guy doesn't desrve to have the dog if he's will to welch on the vet bill.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dheffley
My experience is, doctors and lawyers have the hardest time collecting all of their money. It is basically a non-secured loan, and people just aren't as honest as they once were.
AMEN, BROTHER HEFF!!
I get my money up front in most cases or I am not hiring on. I still get burned from time to time, but it's bad bidness to sue a client!!0 -
Question for those who know: What is the procedure for treating Parvovirus? Is this the normal fee for this procedure? 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
15 comments