Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Joe Leg,


Thing is, I really really don't think you're bigoted, I've seen your posts on this thread and I generally agree with them and it's very obvious that you're a good, upstanding principled person who sticks up for whats right. And that's why we're able to have a proper conversation about it instead of a slanging match.


But I still think that it's unhelpful to agree with Peckhamguy in any way that his views are typical of his group. He likes being part of that group, and I feel that describing his behaviour in terms of group behaviour is not only incorrect, it gives him confidence and solidarity with 'his' group.


Second, there is an uncomfortable edge on this thread of people mocking Peckhamguy's lack of literacy, for example. We all know that we live in an area where there is growing tension between social groups and a growing gap between income brackets. Sideboys remark about lattes and nibbles was offensive to some extent because there's some truth in it. It was silly and belittling, but it referenced the real problem of house prices, gentrification and social exclusion of lower income brackets that I'm sure we're all uncomfortable about, whatever side of the divide we're on.


I really don't want this to come across as a group of posh people ganging up on a working class person and part of some kind of East Dulwich gentrification culture war. Because that is unpleasant in itself, and I think unhelpful in this specific case.

But to be fair Amy, take a look at who brought class into it. Was it those rightly calling out support for a right wing website and its contents? This whole debate is not about house prices and gentrification. It is about the inability of someone to answer to their support for the contents of that website, and worse still, deflecting from having to answer for it by arguing that class has anything to do with the valid criticism of his position.

It's true that Peckhamguy was the first to claim the argument was about class and we were posh snobs ganging up on him.


But was it wise to follow him along that avenue of thought and apparently agree with him? Or would it be more effective to emphasise to him that his class is totally irrelevant ?

Amy A Wrote:

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


> Second, there is an uncomfortable edge on this

> thread of people mocking Peckhamguy's lack of

> literacy, for example....



Amy, you really are not so much flogging a dead horse as a non-existent one here. I've taken the trouble to go back and look at every comment on this thread; one person made fun of Peckhamguy's use of English, and that was to say that he should get an earlier night and his English might be better as a consequence. Personally I took that as implying that as PG's posts were often in the early hours of the morning that he was one over the eight when posting. Be that as it may, that's the one post making fun of his English (if it is).


> I really don't want this to come across as a group

> of posh people ganging up on a working class

> person and part of some kind of East Dulwich

> gentrification culture war. Because that is

> unpleasant in itself, and I think unhelpful in

> this specific case.


I don't believe it would to anyone who views it objectively; it's a group of people who object to someone supporting a neo-nazi website, and to his replies which imply that he somehow has some "genuine" knowledge, due to his claimed class (I still can't help wondering if he is in fact an adolescent troll), which makes him right in his lack of objection to an utterly vile organisation. He was, incidentally, in his replies, quite rude to everyone else - far ruder than anyone has been to him - but you seem determined somehow to posit him as an injured party.


This thread started as a warning about neo-nazi posters, then became criticism - perfectly fair criticism - of someone who was offering tacit support for neo-nazis. The only things that have made it about a "gentrification culture war" have been your posts, which with all due respect I think have been somewhat hairtrigger in finding offence where no grounds for it exist (and before anyone else says it, I'm quite capable of doing that myself). I don't doubt your heart's in the right place, and if people had behaved in the way you seem to think they have towards PG your comments would be justified, but they haven't, and so I think to a large extent they're not.

Amy A Wrote:

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

> Joe Leg,

>

> Thing is, I really really don't think you're

> bigoted, I've seen your posts on this thread and I

> generally agree with them and it's very obvious

> that you're a good, upstanding principled person

> who sticks up for whats right. And that's why

> we're able to have a proper conversation about it

> instead of a slanging match.

>

> But I still think that it's unhelpful to agree

> with Peckhamguy in any way that his views are

> typical of his group. He likes being part of that

> group, and I feel that describing his behaviour in

> terms of group behaviour is not only incorrect, it

> gives him confidence and solidarity with 'his'

> group.


But his views *are* typical of a subset of white working class people who don?t like the idea that anyone else could have a grasp on how the world ?really is?. All too often we write people off like that by saying ?oh it?s just how they are? - I?ve done it myself for half my life, before realising that actually we need to continually challenge such views, wherever they occur, and I (and this is just my personal view) feel that if I won?t challenge them in the social/racial/whatever subset that I very much part of, then how can I look myself in the mirror?

Of course he isn?t representative of the entire white working class, but people like him *are* out there, and they *do* believe that they havecfar more support than really exists, and we *must* take every opportunity to remind them that the silent majority in which they place so much faith actually thinks they are pillocks.



>

> Second, there is an uncomfortable edge on this

> thread of people mocking Peckhamguy's lack of

> literacy, for example.


None of that came from me.



We all know that we live in

> an area where there is growing tension between

> social groups and a growing gap between income

> brackets.


Well, yes, and it?s a problem. A mahoosive problem. Not denying that. Also not saying it?s a reason to assume people with more money than me somehow don?t understand social issues. I?m sure you agree.



Sideboys remark about lattes and nibbles

> was offensive to some extent because there's some

> truth in it. It was silly and belittling, but it

> referenced the real problem of house prices,

> gentrification and social exclusion of lower

> income brackets that I'm sure we're all

> uncomfortable about, whatever side of the divide

> we're on.


Again, yes, your basic point is accurate. But that little dig about coffee and nibbles goes to show that the prejudice runs both ways. I agree that the working class has long been and still is given crap by some sections of society with more money than sense, but that doesn?t mean sinking to their level. It?s thay kind of thing that demonstrates there are those on both sides of the debate who could do with having a word with themselves.



>

> I really don't want this to come across as a group

> of posh people ganging up on a working class

> person and part of some kind of East Dulwich

> gentrification culture war. Because that is

> unpleasant in itself, and I think unhelpful in

> this specific case.


And I don?t think it is. For starters I?m hardly posh, and I?ve made that clear. Also even if I was, does that mean I?m not allowed to call Peckhamguy out? And moreover, isn?t that kind of stuff the sort of thing that gives rise to the idea that we?re giving people a pass?

I can?t shake the idea that somehow we?ve settled, as a society, into a weird kind of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand we all *know* that white working class people are no more or less likely to be bigots or indeed voluntary workers than anyone else, while on the other we often act unsurprised when one of them turns out to actually be a bigot, as if in the back of our mind we really assumed it all along. And then - and this is when it gets bad - we just shrug our shoulders and say ?well, that?s just how they are, they don?t mean any harm, it?s how they were raised?.


So yes, I think society assumes things about the white working class (just like it assumes things about pretty much every group, and that?s another thread entirely), and that doesn?t make it right, but that also doesn?t excuse it when actual bigotry raises its head.


And I know you agree with all this and o know I?m preaching to the choir, but I guess I?m just trying to explain myself. It?s something I feel very strongly about, I?ve come to realise.

Amy A Wrote:

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

> It's true that Peckhamguy was the first to claim

> the argument was about class and we were posh

> snobs ganging up on him.

>

> But was it wise to follow him along that avenue of

> thought and apparently agree with him? Or would it

> be more effective to emphasise to him that his

> class is totally irrelevant ?



Yeah, maybe, you might have a point there; he dangled it and I took a bite.


But as I say, I?ve realised I feel strongly about this issue. There are many problems facing us as a society in this world, but I personally have had enough of hearing from people like myself that others just don?t understand the world we live in. This isn?t East Baltimore, it?s not South Africa, not Venezuela. This is London in the 21st century, and everyone gets an education and the right to be whoever they want to be. The ?class struggle? isn?t gone yet, but it?s a lot less than it was and frankly it?s nothing compared to the levels of racism and sexism that still wash around us.


So yes, it makes me angry when people still run that line, because frankly I think they?re just making excuses, In this case for being a racist but there?s others available.


Anyway, sorry for ranting.

Just back from Cornwall (visiting my working class farming roots, thankfully they go back past the Holocaust so always nice to see that side of the family ), to be honest I've skimmed through this thread since it descended into the usual BS, so wont pass comment any further.


If any more posters have been seen, please keep posting on here so I can keep the police informed.

Amy A Wrote:

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


>Sideboys remark about lattes and nibbles

> was offensive to some extent because there's some

> truth in it. It was silly and belittling, but it

> referenced the real problem of house prices,

> gentrification and social exclusion of lower

> income brackets that I'm sure we're all

> uncomfortable about, whatever side of the divide

> we're on.


Well, sidebirds' first EDF post asked for recommendations for cocktail bars in ED. He later said -


sidebirds Wrote:

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

> I live just off Lordship Lane so it's a

> shame it seems there are no actual cocktail bars

> on LL (or even in ED).


Sounds like he'd quite like a bit more "gentrification".

JoeLeg Wrote:

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

> Amy A Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's true that Peckhamguy was the first to

> claim

> > the argument was about class and we were posh

> > snobs ganging up on him.

> >

> > But was it wise to follow him along that avenue

> of

> > thought and apparently agree with him? Or would

> it

> > be more effective to emphasise to him that his

> > class is totally irrelevant ?

>

>

> Yeah, maybe, you might have a point there; he

> dangled it and I took a bite.

>

> But as I say, I?ve realised I feel strongly about

> this issue. There are many problems facing us as a

> society in this world, but I personally have had

> enough of hearing from people like myself that

> others just don?t understand the world we live in.

> This isn?t East Baltimore, it?s not South Africa,

> not Venezuela. This is London in the 21st century,

> and everyone gets an education and the right to be

> whoever they want to be. The ?class struggle?

> isn?t gone yet, but it?s a lot less than it was

> and frankly it?s nothing compared to the levels of

> racism and sexism that still wash around us.

>

> So yes, it makes me angry when people still run

> that line, because frankly I think they?re just

> making excuses, In this case for being a racist

> but there?s others available.

>

> Anyway, sorry for ranting.


The whole time we remain a ?constitutional monarchy? - the reality of class exclusion continues. Regardless of what changes are made to encourage a more inclusive society. Our head of state and her family are in a position of power by right of birth and not by right of ballot. That in my opinion, sums up why we as a nation are unable to make the major advances forward most major democracies seem to have made. It all starts at the top.


Louisa.

But then how do you explain power inequality and wealth inepquality in Republican democracies Louisa? If the Monarchy were abolished, it would make no difference to issues around wealth, class and privilege. Just look at America for an example!

I absolutely agree Blah Blah. Becoming a republic doesn?t guarantee anything, but it goes a long way in laying the foundation stone for a equal society. If you live in a country where you cannot aspire to get the top job, then a class based structure will endure. This country has thrived on a class structure for generations, it needs overhauling at the top. This is a big topic, and I could talk for hours about hereditary piers and lords and ladies.


Louisa.

But Louisa. That is not what happens in America is it? It is myth that Monarchy is the dynamic force here. It is not. Money is the dynamic force and the power that comes with it. We could easily end hereditary peerages. It would not stop the House of Lords being stuffed with privileged and wealthy people though would it? There is just no evidence that Republics are more equal than Monarchies, none whatsoever (you can go all the way back to Rome on that). Only by taking away the choices that financial privilege affords, over things like education, housing, and opportunity, can you address inequality. It is actually an argument against free market capitalism versus socialism that is the root behind class - not some single Royal Family that have no real power to do anything anyway.

"Only by taking away the choices that financial privilege affords, over things like education, housing, and opportunity, can you address inequality."


I find it interesting that you argue that taking away freedom is the 'only' way to address inequality, and that "It is actually an argument against free market capitalism versus socialism". The developed countries that generally top the tables for the lowest levels of inequality (Scandinavian countries most often cited) don't have socialist economies and don't operate by 'taking away choices'. What they do is redistribute income both directly (through higher taxes and benefits) and indirectly (through high level of state supplied/subsidised services). The idea that inequality is driven by the level of social mobility has been largely debunked by looking at actual data, and also the contrast between income inequality and wealth inequality - by the latter measure, the Scandinavian countries don't look much different to the UK, for example.


There is an interesting debate to be had about the relationship between class, income and inequality in the UK but your essential proposition is not supported by the evidence.


NB I realise I am continuing the "usual BS" so for completeness, on topic, I would have thought two things at least were obvious - the first is that the content on the website linked to is proper, poisonous white supremacist racist stuff, and the second is that every word of this is shit:


"Haha cheers some, and most of you on here are very funny people in this thread 😂 very hypercritical it?s unreal

All of your hateful comments have made my day my week even

Thumbs up to private education hey 👋😂

You mostly know nothing about the issue, study it check it out properly then come back

All so worried about my English that u r sadly blinded by the real life

Have a beautiful day

Snobbery is a big thing on here but gladly there are some straight headed people on here what knows what the real world is all about, the true working class who has never had nothing handed to them on a plate the ones who actually see the real world.

Protesting things that u don?t know harm u is a thing what loads of people are doing, because know one knows the true depths of things

Anyways I?m sure a lot of u have met up and had some meetings in your nearest Starbucks and had a long good chat about the matter ,hopefully things went rite for the latte liberals"

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> I agree with JoeLeg on everything. It is only a

> certain kind of person that displays the inverse

> snobbery that PeckhamGuy and Sidebirds have. It's

> the kind of inverse snobbery that becomes the

> excuse for hate, ignornance and a lazy outlook on

> the world. He has no intention of answering to his

> view that there is 'nothing wrong' with that neo

> nazi website. Fortunately, his kind don't

> represent the working class either.


"nverse snobbery"? I attended a private girls' school and now study at the Royal College of Music! But (OBV!) I wear my working-class credentials on my sleeve... MATE.

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rendelharris Wrote:

> >

> -

> Peckhamguy's absurd statement that "the true

> working class who has never had nothing handed to

> them on a plate the ones who actually see the real

> world"


Nothing wrong with the quoted statement. The working-classes get it in the neck first and millions of them are righteously p*ssed off after having their wishes flouted by several decades of elected politicians.

BJL Wrote:

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

> Amy A Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >Sideboys remark about lattes and nibbles

> > was offensive to some extent because there's

> some

> > truth in it. It was silly and belittling, but

> it

> > referenced the real problem of house prices,

> > gentrification and social exclusion of lower

> > income brackets that I'm sure we're all

> > uncomfortable about, whatever side of the

> divide

> > we're on.

>

> Well, sidebirds' first EDF post asked for

> recommendations for cocktail bars in ED. He later

> said -

>

> sidebirds Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I live just off Lordship Lane so it's a

> > shame it seems there are no actual cocktail

> bars

> > on LL (or even in ED).

>

> Sounds like he'd quite like a bit more

> "gentrification".



I'm a girl. You actually - like - MISGENDERED me. Possible "hate crime"?


PS No time to engage in arguments with strangers here. But enjoy the bickering while I'm gone.

sidebirds Wrote:

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

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > rendelharris Wrote:

> > >

> > -

> > Peckhamguy's absurd statement that "the true

> > working class who has never had nothing handed

> to

> > them on a plate the ones who actually see the

> real

> > world"

>

> Nothing wrong with the quoted statement. The

> working-classes get it in the neck first and

> millions of them are righteously p*ssed off after

> having their wishes flouted by several decades of

> elected politicians.


Nothing wrong with the quoted statement? You are aware that the context of the quoted statement was the claim that the working classes who've never had anything handed to them etc etc would agree with Peckhamguy that there was nothing wrong with a neo-nazi website?


You're getting rather silly in your desperate attempts to seem righteous now.


ETA The full sentence of which you've quoted part was: Just objecting to Peckhamguy's absurd statement that "the true working class who has never had nothing handed to them on a plate the ones who actually see the real world" would agree with him - plenty of my mates fit that description and don't think neo-nazis are OK.


Nice bit of selective quotation.

sidebirds Wrote:

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

> Blah Blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I agree with JoeLeg on everything. It is only a

> > certain kind of person that displays the

> inverse

> > snobbery that PeckhamGuy and Sidebirds have.

> It's

> > the kind of inverse snobbery that becomes the

> > excuse for hate, ignornance and a lazy outlook

> on

> > the world. He has no intention of answering to

> his

> > view that there is 'nothing wrong' with that

> neo

> > nazi website. Fortunately, his kind don't

> > represent the working class either.

>

> "nverse snobbery"? I attended a private girls'

> school and now study at the Royal College of

> Music! But (OBV!) I wear my working-class

> credentials on my sleeve... MATE.


Like I give a crap what school you go to when you spout such rubbish about people who you perceive as being different to you.

Want some salt (Pink Himalayan, natch) for that massive chip on your shoulder?


Despite all your proclamations about how ?real? you are, and how much you seem to feel the need to point out to us that you?re still ?from the streets?, you can?t help missong the fact that you display exactly the same prejudice that you accuse others of. You have an inability to realise you?re just perpetuating the circle.


"The working-classes get it in the neck first and millions of them are righteously p*ssed off after having their wishes flouted by several decades of elected politicians."


Moving past the point made by Rendell that you've clumsily selectively quoted to try and make an argument, why does this excuse the idea that someone is ok supporting a neo-nazi website, and also how does this back up the idea that a working class person inherently has a better grip on how the world works?

The interesting point I would make about your education - which you seem so keen for us to know - is that it demonstrates social mobility does indeed exist, even if it is nowhere near the levels it should. From your background you've been privately educated and gotten into an excellent College; 100 years ago that would not have happened, probably even 50 years ago. Change comes too fast for those that resist it, and too slow for those that crave it - but it does come.

I also feel the need to repeat my point that there are sections of society still suffering far worse prejudice than the group we're discussing; that does not excuse the fact that the working class is still at the bottom of some piles, but there are opportunities open to them that were not there within living memory, and so long as we continue to educate ourselves and slowly, too slow unfortunately but still better than nothing, break down barriers then we are on the right path. Telling the middle class that they're a bunch of latte-loving know-nothings just makes you look like a fool. Like I say, this is not East Baltimore.


ETA - Sidebirds, the thing is you?re, what, 19 years old I think you said? So I reckon you?ve gone straight from your private school to your Royal College, and bluntly you know very little about the world. Here?s a tip - take a gap year, drop out for a while, something, anything, and go and travel. Or anything else that exposes you to stuff you?ve never seen, people you never thought you?d meet. Get out of your comfort zone, go and hang around people you?ve got nothing on common with, expand your horizons. You?re young and you think you know everything, so I can forgive this in you. Peclhamguy is older and should know better, but you don?t know anything expect what you?ve seen, and it isn?t as much as you think it is; trust me on this. It was true for me at your age, and I?ll bet the same for every other poster on the EDF.


For me it was the Army, but that?s not for everyone. And when I say ?gap year? I don?t mean something organised and safe, actually go and experience the world. Expand your horizons. Then come back and argue with me.

Hi DaveR


I am not arguing for or against it. I was just pointing out that the notion that removing a Monarchy leads to greater equality is a myth. If we accept that money gives privilege then only doing something about that afforded privilege will address the inequality perceived to be represented by a Monarchy. Of course it is not the only way that inequality can be tackled. I'm neither Republican nor Monarchist. It just strikes me as odd that anyone would think that the Monarchy is somehow the glue that holds privilege together. I think we went past that place some time ago.


I actualy completely agree with you in fact. I often argue, within political debate, that mixed economies (like Scandinavia) have the best social outcomes and that it is finding the right balance between state and free market that is the key. I would call myself a socilaist democrat because of that.

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> But Louisa. That is not what happens in America is

> it? It is myth that Monarchy is the dynamic force

> here. It is not. Money is the dynamic force and

> the power that comes with it. We could easily end

> hereditary peerages. It would not stop the House

> of Lords being stuffed with privileged and wealthy

> people though would it? There is just no evidence

> that Republics are more equal than Monarchies,

> none whatsoever (you can go all the way back to

> Rome on that). Only by taking away the choices

> that financial privilege affords, over things like

> education, housing, and opportunity, can you

> address inequality. It is actually an argument

> against free market capitalism versus socialism

> that is the root behind class - not some single

> Royal Family that have no real power to do

> anything anyway.


I think you miss my point Blah Blah. I am well aware that privilege in the 21st century isn?t purely about class, I also fully support your conclusion that many republics around the world are just as, if not more, unequal than the UK.


My point rather is that a wealthy family of unelected toffs, shoved down our throats daily by a state sponsored broadcaster (as well as others), get to be given the titles of Queen, King, Prince, Duke, Earl etc when not a single ballot was caste to give those people that position. And yet, we somehow are under the illusion that we can be a fully fledged 21st century democracy, supposedly a equal playing field too. It?s laughable. They must think the people are morons.


Our present monarch may not hold the keys to political power, but allowing such a outdated and frankly undemocratic system to flourish is not sending out the best message to people. People using food banks, people struggling to pay the bills, meanwhile every time they switch the TV on we are lead to believe that some royal wedding in a few months time will make everything better. It?s just wrong on so many levels, and solving all those economic and monetary inequalities when such a symbolic institution of wealth and birth privilege are allowed to flourish, seems ludicrous to me in the 21st century.


Louisa.

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...