Jump to content

Recommended Posts

slarti b Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am waiting for a telephone appointment to discuss some test results. I have twice been told

> to ring back "next week" because they have run out of slots. I have also given up once because

> phone took too long to answer.

>

> If I cant get something next week this may be the final straw and I will move after 30 years.


I rang up yesterday but the reception was closed to all but urgent calls for training. I got through today (eventually) and tried , for the third time to make an appointment to be told all slots gone and to ring back on Monday.


So, after 2 weeks, 3 calls where I got through and 5 or 6 calls where I couldn't get through (gave up after 15 mins, line engaged, surgery closed) I am still waiting to get an appointment to discuss some tests.


TIme for a change

I rang up yesterday but the reception was closed to all but urgent calls for training.


Thursday afternoons (if that was when it was) are their regular staff training slot - they are back on line by 4:30. They do need to train, clearly, and within work hours. I assume they think that Thursday afternoons are a relatively slack time otherwise.


It would be most efficient if they could switch their 'reminders' during calls waiting to be answered to notifications that all appointments are now allocated - then at least people wouldn't be holding for an hour waiting to be answered.


Does anyone know whether their on-line appointment system actually works?


And it is worth noting that they are quite good about contacting you when there is any urgency about test results - if you have been contacted and still can't arrange an appointment then that is really poor and worthy of a formal complaint.

I asked them last week if their online booking works (as whenever I try, it says this isn't available). I was told they release online bookings at 10am each day.


I've been at the practice for 52 years and I've never known it this difficult to get a non emergency appointment. I find it especially frustrating when they text to ask you to make an appointment following tests but it's impossible to actually get seen!

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Thursday afternoons (if that was when it was) are their regular staff training slot - they are back

> on line by 4:30. They do need to train, clearly and within work hours.


It was Thursday morning, the time I had been told to ring back the previous time I had called. I also disagree they need to stop working during the week to train.


Anyway, on Friday afternoon I went to another local GP and, after 10 minutes filling in forms I am now registered with them and have received the test results I had been trying for 2 weeks to get a telephone appointment to discuss with Forest Hill practise.


Once you got to see a doctor Forest Hill were OK but that is not sufficient. My own view, after 30 years with them , is they are not fit for purpose. I strongly suggest that, if patients are not happy with the service they provide, move elsewhere.

Hi Slarti b . My Doctor is at Dulwich Medical Centre. Its worst at this centre. 1st you ring at 8.00 in the morning you get a engaged single this last for half hour, then they turn the system on, after a long message telling you about the surgery it comes up with seventh in line, this goes on for 20 minutes, when answered you get told no appointments and to top it staff phoned in sick so no conversations or ring backs, told if you have problem ring 111.

I fought it was a service for the doctors to see sick people. This Medical centre has 6 rooms and no doctors and if there is one its a trainee. Most doctors surgerys if staff don't turn up they get a relive doctor or two not say that we have none today.

One more point. James Barbers comment on after he intervened to get it running right which it did maybe he needs

to see now what is going on in this surgery.

If you want a appointment its three weeks wait or if you want to take a day off line up at 7.30



HAS ANY ONE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM AT THIS SURGERY

Chaotic today but I do have a lot of time for the doctors there. It is useful to put feedback up on NHS choices. I'm registering for patient access but they have a list of providers. Anyone any experience (these are the online companies that you can register through).

Was chaotic also yesterday morning with two queues, those who had a pre-booked appointment (just me) and those that needed an appointment. This resulted in a long queue of people who were slowly being processed at the window starting at 10am. It was not long before the receptionist said their were no more appointments, come back the next morning.


The doctor said, it was primarily due to things;


Firstly it was down to budgetary constraints

Secondly the doctors are fully aware of the problems patients are having getting appointments

Thirdly, their is an insufficient number of doctors looking to work in general practice and this practice is finding it hard to fill the vacancy. It was further explained that this is a national problem.


Well if FHRGP actually provided a service to its patients and helped rather than hindered patients it wouldn't be in the mess it is in right now and patients would not be leaving to go to other practices.

And they do not appear to like it being highlighted that problems exist, but rather blame the Government for budget issues.

Well if FHRGP actually provided a service to its patients and helped rather than hindered patients it wouldn't be in the mess it is in right now and patients would not be leaving to go to other practices.

And they do not appear to like it being highlighted that problems exist, but rather blame the Government for budget issues.


The doctor said they'd had difficulty filling a vacancy. In what way is this a valid response to that? We know that those doctors who are in training are no longer as interested in joining the private world of GP practices, but prefer to stay in the tertiary National Health as hospital doctors with the opportunities of much more lucrative private practice than is offered the already privately practicing GPs. We know that GP work is increasingly stressful, and not well rewarded unless you are a practice partner. This is a training and recruitment issue, not necessarily anything to do with government budgets, neither did the doctor claim that it was.


FHRGP has difficulties offering appointments because it doesn't have enough GPs working there, although it is trying to remedy this through recruitment. In so far as it can, it does offer a service to patients, and actually not that bad a one, as regards the medical staff there. The issue is (and typically is for most practices) one of booking and resource allocation. You will find that a very small %age of patients are making a very large demand on staff time (that's true of most inner city practices). Those of us with only occasional needs feel frustrated (and not without reason) but we shouldn't necessarily extrapolate our poor personal experiences across the whole practice and all patients.

My GP surgery appears to always have GPs who work a variety of hours - many of them part time. Some times a 2 week wait to appointments. I went to make an appointment in person one day and was offered one for an hour later! Could not take it as had prior engagement so made another appointment which was around 10 days time.

Pugwash, are you complaining about a 2 week wait before you actually had the appointemnt ? Luxury!!!!


I spent 2 weeks trying to MAKE an appointment. FHGP were OK for urgent stuff but anything non-urgent or routine was a nightmare to get seen. That is why I have moved.


And rememebr that non-urgent is not the same as not important.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...