Banfield The Pet Hospital DO NOT TAKE YOUR PET TO BANFIELD THE PET HOSPTITAL IN COLORADO SPRINGS AT STETSON HILLS DRIVE!!!!!! colorado springs, Colorado

INTRODUCTION

 

 

Basically what they do is make up a figure, then charge you a "deposit", then keep you from knowing what is going on, try to scare the hell out of you, and then defy your instructions about the care of your pet to run the fee up to what they "estimated" as the cost.  In the end it is all double talk and smoke-and-mirrors.  And a huge bill even after you tell them to cease.

 

And fraud. As is shown later the "estimate" that was compiled was compiled by a vet who did not know anything about Ivermectin, Ivermectin poisoning, and interventions.  I know this because, as shown below, she had to look it up in front of me and read it aloud (she later referred to that as " the research we did earlier" -- WE?  I saw you trying to figure out what the compound was - I already knew). 

 

Keep in mind that this was a poisoning and the staff did not even think to tell me to bring the tube when I left the house with April.  Huh?  For this I got charged over five hundred dollars? 

 

She had NO idea what it was or how much was ingested so rather than call a vet with experience (i.e. an equine vet) she drew a circle on the page and asked "was it about this big around?".

 

Very scientific there doc.

 

As for poisoning I have a Merck's Manual at home.  Along with several other publications.  What I needed was a diuretic and a check for any other neurological damage AND NO TESTS WERE RUN FOR DAMAGE and she admitted that she knew nothing about the drug.  I had to call the feed store to get details  because she would not call a large-animal vet to even ask.  I had to write the information on my pet's intake sheet (it is still there) to give to her.  Again, I paid for what?

 

When trickery and fraud do not work then they outright hold your pet hostage until you are forced to sign a false release form stating that your pet is in "critical condition" and that you are running the risk of killing your pet if you remove it from their care.  The vet flatly stated that my dog was NOT in critical care (see below -- she is doing great and was at 5  p.m. that day) but that I could not have Aril back unless I signed the release.  A little later she was brought out, fully sighted, happy, and jumping all over -- all in front of the staff -- so much for "critical".  What liars.

 

My option was, I suppose,  to leave April there when I didn't pay. Or cause a scene and get arrested.

 

I am happy to FAX you a copy of the release form so you can see for yourself.

 

THE SEQUENCE

 

My Dalmatian, best friend of ten years, recently ingested some Ivermectin which caused her to have neurological problems a few hours later and dilation of her pupils so her visual acuity was greatly reduced.  She and I are inseparable so I was in search of a facility that could help her.  I called some local veterinarians but they were not available until an hour later (8 a.m.) so I called this place on a referral from a local vet clinic's morning staff.  Banfield (Kim speaking) would not give me any idea over the phone what it might cost nor could the technician I spoke with, but I was urged to get there "quickly".  They refused to tell me what their standard charges are, or what a visit might cost.  I should have been on notice at that point but the "fear game" had begun and they held the cards like pros at Vegas.

 

When I got there the veterinarian ("Dr." Michelle Coeful pronounced "so full" as in "so full" of trickery I think), was NOT familiar with Ivermectin or any poisoning by it and had to look it up while trying to estimate what dose might have been ingested.

 

I picked up the phone and called the feed store where I bought the Ivermectin  and Bob at the feed store (they are great and I will tell you who they are if you contact me) read the information from the label -- they sell it -- thank you Bob -- then the doc tried to do some "math" to see how much had been ingested.  That "calculation" was never completed.

 

Instead they took the dog into the back and then refused to allow me to remain or assist -- my dog is deaf and at that point temporarily BLIND so she was very confused and frightened -- and I opened the door and they had her pinned to the floor with two males on top of her.  I would like to know which one of the bastards pulled her ears so hard that she cannot even tolerate being touched on her ears.  I will gladly do the same for him or her in return.

 

I should have called someone i.e. police or Humane Society and taken the dog but with a poisoning looming I was passive which I now regret.

 

About 3/4 hours later the vet appeared with a statement showing $62.00 and she indicated that they were prepared to give my dog diuretics and watch her.  I was also given an estimate of $700 to $900 if she remained for one or two days respectively.  She also had a printout of lab results which showed that no liver damage had occurred, no blood changes had occurred, no dangerous conditions existed, red blood counts were normal, and the ONLY thing of concern was what she described as "mild dehydration".  This was not surprising since the dog had been without water since the night before.  At that point the bill was $62.00.   Since everything was normal it should have ended at that point and an honest facility would have done that.  Note the word "honest".

 

I was told to check in a few hours later to see how she (the dog not the vet) was doing and I told them THEN that I planned to take her home that day and as soon as possible.  I explained this to the staff member (Kim) and the vet.

 

My primary concern was her sight since the literature stated that death was not common and there had been only some 660 poisonings in the US that year and that blindness usually occurred in high overdoses which this was not, so I tried to check on her sight and got evasive answers -- this was at approximately one in the afternoon.  I was told that she "has really improved and is doing nicely" which implied that her sight was improving.  In fact, I was told that she was doing "really well" and that they were "really pleased", "surprised" with the change (really?) so I informed them that I would pick my dog up in an hour.  They were told not to continue any more treatment since I would have her at home.

 

The vet tried to talk me out of it and asked for "three or four more hours" for "observation".  I told them that the treatment should stop since she was improving and I was concerned about the length of the stay and continued treatments before I got there.  I was NOT told that they planned to initiate additional treatment without my consent so that they could try to force me to leave the poor dog there for several additional hours or even overnight. 

 

What they were doing is running up the costs to match the deposit I had placed, which they did within $50.00 which they "refunded" to me at 5 p.m.

 

Three hours later I called them to tell that I was on my way and I was told by "Kim" that I could not pick up my own dog until after 8 p.m. at the earliest.  I told her that this was not acceptable, that I left instructions for my dog's care, and that I would be there before 5 (in about 30 minutes) to pick her up.

 

Jumping ahead -- when I finally got April released as I will describe following -- she was happy, acting normally, and ready to go.  No tremors, no eye sensitivity, and was GUESS WHAT thirsty for water.  She drank a quart (measured) when she got home and immediately peed (poor thing) so why did she have an IV after IV all day and a catheter?  But I digress.

 

One thing that concerns me is the fact that this dog is ACTIVE compared to there dogs her age and the idea of her staying still that long without sedation (none show on the bill) is incredible so one concern is that I was charged for IV's which were not proved, especially in light of her drinking a quart or water when we got home (ten miles away).  The whole claim, since she was over the problems and they had to have one to keep my pet hostage, was "dehydration" and the need to use IV's to solve that.  Instead I gave her a free drink from the tap in a bowl in the kitchen.  Also, why did she have to endure a catheter which did no good as evidenced by the fact that she did not produce any urine from the IV which was supposed to avoid dehydration but peed when she drank a quart of water from a bowl?  The answer is that the treatments were unnecessary and a waste of time, money, and simply put the poor dog through unnecessary suffering to pad their pockets.

 

And she ate a normal meal at home.  Soaked in water of course.

 

April had fecal contamination on her, urine on her fur, and her face and muzzle were black with the charcoal that she was dosed with -- so for over five hundred dollars she didn't even get cleaned up or wiped off.

 

She has been resting comfortably since she got out of there.  None of the nonsense that I was threatened with or intimidated with occurred ("seizures, convulsions, and death, oh my!!"  -- apologies to the Cowardly Lion)

 

I was not even shown or told what her urinary output was even though I was charged an arm and a leg for the "catheter" even though anatomically she showed no sign of having been catheterized, and I was given no discharge summary for FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.

 

I was given no instructions and was only told "you know she might have seizures after you get her home so you are really taking a big risk by taking her home".  It was at that time that I was told to either sign the false release form making me look like a danger to my own pet and a bad person or else she would "not be released".  The veterinarian herself told me that, not a minion.

 

The dog was NOT in crisis, was NOT critical, and the whole episode at that point was shameful and should be stopped.  I am contacting the State on that issue alone.  To force a pet owner to sign a false statement in which the pet owner is made to look like a ghoul or monster is unspeakable and unacceptable.  I am taking steps to end that to include requesting that all de-briefings be taped to prevent such business fraud and intimidation from occurring.

 

Funny thing is she was fully sighted ( their confession) by a little after one in the afternoon -- a mere hour and a half or so after she was admitted.  Instead of telling me that at that time when I asked they lied -- yes the "L" word -- and kept her improved condition couched in general terms making it appear that more intervention was needed.

 

Again remember that they had over $570.00 in "deposit" and had to work theatrics to make that sum disappear.  They came within $50.00 even though I told them to cease and desist.  Pretty Vegas act in some ways.  David Copperfield would be impressed.

 

Remember that even with debit cards ( used here to avoid being thrown out or arrested for challenging the bill) have a challenge procedure and that is being invoked here.  I have informed my bank to deny the charge and leave the settlement to me.

 

SUMMARY

 

The final message is DO NOT USE THIS FACILITY OR THAT VETERINARIAN.  It is a systematic scheme of theft and manipulation based your love for your pet and their preying upon that to pay their mortgages.  I am eating Raman noodles and dollar burgers while they charge me a week's pay for lying and preying upon my instincts to protect my best friend.

 

Shame on them and everyone like them and I am not finished yet.

 

There is more but the point for now is made.

 

Please contact me. Thank you.