"chris French" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Grey
writes

"Christina Websell" wrote in message
...

"Bill Grey" wrote in message
...

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article ,

says...

A few days ago I decided to turn over some copost, a job I hate but
we
have
to do it.

On Saturday one of my neighbours asked me to temporarily move the
heap
so
he could have sone elbow room to point up his garage, guess what I
did.
Stabbed a hedgehog behind its front leg with my fork.

I thought it too early for hibernation in mid October.

Anyway we all panicked a bit and daughter tried ringing her vet but
its
Saturday afternoon and they are closed.

For future reference; vets don't just work their office hours.
If you telephone out of business hours your call will be transferred
to
the on-call practice vet (or, the on-call locum service).


Janet

I was referred to an out-of-hours vet organisgation when my dog was
ill.
He was being treated for epililesy and barbiturates were the medicine.
He
had been given a dose of 2 tablets and I was charged £7. I could buy
the
tablets for £5 per 100. A definite rip-off.


Did your dog live? If so, was it it a rip off for £7 out of hours?
If you thought your dog was dying and the vet could save it, how much
would you pay?
Tina

An innapropriate consideration. You seem to support emotional blackmail.
Whether or not my dog died is irrelevant. To pop two phenobarbitone
tablets
in his mouth for £7 the cost of which would have been 2/100 x £5 (i.e.
10p)
is extortionate

As for being out of hours, the establishment was set up as such and no vet
was "called out" to treat him.

But you still had to pay for the vets time.(ok ,not much time I guess, but
I don't know what a vets hourly rate would be but 40-50/hour wouldn't
surprise me esp after hours. £7 wouldn't buy much of that


Just to put things into perspective, it costs far more to insure my
labrador
that it costs to insure my Volvo V70. Emotional blackmail prevails.


Generally I consider pet insurance a waste of money. THe small amount of
time a pet is likley to need to see a vet,putting the money awayto help
self cover it makes more sense.
--
Chris French

When the insurance companies impose s uch heavy excesses as they do then
want a percentage of the remainin vet's bill, I just have to agree with you
..
Insurance for my dog has gone up to £450 per annum with an excess of £105
plus 20% per claim. That means relatively low claims of up to £100 are
effectively not covered. Only really serious illnesses or major acidents are
worth claiming for.

I wish I had saved money in a special account for any vet fees, by now I
would have been "privately" covered.

Bill

In message , chris French
writes

Generally I consider pet insurance a waste of money. THe small amount
of time a pet is likley to need to see a vet,putting the money awayto
help self cover it makes more sense.

Our vet was always made to understand that the health care cost of our
cats/dog did not come from an unlimited purse. ;-)
The cost of pet care can escalate to the maximum that the client can,
(or is willing to) afford.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

"Christina Websell" wrote in message
...

"Bill Grey" wrote in message
...

"Christina Websell" wrote in message
...

"Bill Grey" wrote in message
...

But you needed the vet and are complaining it cost £7 to put your cat
right!!


I was happy to pay to have my dog (get your animals right)

sorry about that

Accepted - an simple mistake to make.


Stop moaning about £7 for a tablet that was needed out of hours.

Just to clarify, at the espense of boring everyone, the phenobarbitone was
a standard treatment - not something the vet had diagnosed as necessary. I f
you want me to expand on the treatment I'll do it by e-mail.

I have said that I was happy pay the full bill for the treatment received,
but considereded the phenobarbitone admiistration too expensive for what
ctually itentailed.

Not moaning about it, just stating a fact.

You were lucky,

.......yes lucky that the facility existed to look after my dog in his hour
of need.

Bill

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:30:29 +0100, Bill Grey wrote:

Insurance for my dog has gone up to £450 per annum with an excess of
£105 plus 20% per claim.

£37.50.month that seems rather high(*) and more than my car insurance
and with a bigger excess (I think my car excess is £50). I don't
drive a small, cheap, car either...

I don't understand that "plus 20% per claim". I read it to mean you
have to pay 20% of any claim plus the excess. So for a £200 claim you
pay £145.

200 * 20% = 40 + 105 = 145. Leaving the insurance co to cough up just
£55 £20 less than two months premiums...

I wish I had saved money in a special account for any vet fees, by now I
would have been "privately" covered.

You can always start now... also you should be able to get another
£10 at least added to what ever you save.

(*) But maybe you have a "high risk" dog or have cover "high risk"
activities.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
receives such attention while a another thread asking for advice on a
gardening question goes un-noticed?

Maybe it didn't appear, or nobody knew the answer. This is a
discussion group, not an advice bureau.

This is a true statement according to the grop's charter however where does
askin for advice and a discussion on the subect start and finish. Just to
make my point on the question of this being a discussion group not an advice
bureau , consider the number of questions that have been asked and
"duscussed" since the beining of this mont.

I list six - and there are more,........all questions!

"Opening Kilner jars"
"Potatoes"
"Fishtail" Camelia"
"Aristea"
"Carrots"
"Gay" feather"

Before you and one other tries to patronise me further just just get off
your high horse before you fall off.

It did appear

The fact it appeared on YOUR screen does not guarantee, it propagated
round all our servers to all our newsreaders. Posts very often get lost
; which is why we suggest that if there's no response, the sender should
repost it.

I'm sure more that I use IE for bowser. The question to which I referred
was responded to but without a semblance of an answer., thefore it did
appear.

For the record - if I have information that I consider helpful to someone, I
dont hesitate to offer any
assistance I can.

Bill

"Pete" wrote in
:


I cannot however accept your apology on behalf of Bill.

Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com


I don't recall asking you to accept my appology on behalf of Bill.
Does Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 have a killfile?
If it does do us both a favour and plonk me as I have just done you.
You won't have to put up with my bad spelling and endless appologies that
way, and I will see one less spammer.

Baz

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:30:29 +0100, Bill Grey wrote:

Insurance for my dog has gone up to £450 per annum with an excess of
£105 plus 20% per claim.

£37.50.month that seems rather high(*) and more than my car insurance
and with a bigger excess (I think my car excess is £50). I don't
drive a small, cheap, car either...

I don't understand that "plus 20% per claim". I read it to mean you
have to pay 20% of any claim plus the excess. So for a £200 claim you
pay £145.

Consider a claim for £205. The excess takes up £105 leaving £100 of wihch
they take a further 20% i..£20
I would then receive £205 minus £125 equalling £80


You can always start now... also you should be able to get another
£10 at least added to what ever you save.

The very route I have taken.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-10-15 00:47:20 +0100, chris French
said:
Hmmmm not sure about the insurance being a waste of money. We cancelled
the insurance on ours and one ran out in front of a car and required
nearly £1k worth of treatment!

Accidents such as you've quoted are very upsetting as well as expensive,
however quite rare.
Over the eleven years I've been paying insurance, I shudder to think how
much I've coughed up!
Now I'm saving in separate a acount the amount the Insurance company wanted
me to pay.

Bill



--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

On 15/10/2010 10:14, Bill Grey wrote:
wrote in message
...
In ,
says...

wrote in message
...
In ,
says...
receives such attention while a another thread asking for advice on a
gardening question goes un-noticed?

Maybe it didn't appear, or nobody knew the answer. This is a
discussion group, not an advice bureau.

This is a true statement according to the grop's charter however where does
askin for advice and a discussion on the subect start and finish. Just to
make my point on the question of this being a discussion group not an advice
bureau , consider the number of questions that have been asked and
"duscussed" since the beining of this mont.

I list six - and there are more,........all questions!

"Opening Kilner jars"
"Potatoes"
"Fishtail" Camelia"
"Aristea"
"Carrots"
"Gay" feather"

And your point is what exactly?

Before you and one other tries to patronise me further just just get off
your high horse before you fall off.

It did appear

The fact it appeared on YOUR screen does not guarantee, it propagated
round all our servers to all our newsreaders. Posts very often get lost
; which is why we suggest that if there's no response, the sender should
repost it.

I'm sure more that I use IE for bowser. The question to which I referred
was responded to but without a semblance of an answer., thefore it did
appear.

If you post the message ID of the missing/ignored post then it can be
checked. There are no guarantees that Usenet message propogates OK, and
network timing at different servers can result in two or more people
making essentially the same reply being unaware of the other.

For the record - if I have information that I consider helpful to someone, I
dont hesitate to offer any
assistance I can.

Fair enough, but if no-one has seen this mythical post of yours then it
stands no chance of being answered.

Regards,
Martin Brown

"Sacha" wrote in message
...

Martin owns a boat and sails it regularly!

Peter knows that. :-)

Ah - just muddying the waters, then. ;-)

--
Very murky in his case (:-(

Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com

"Baz" wrote in message
...

I don't recall asking you to accept my appology on behalf of Bill.
Does Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 have a killfile?
If it does do us both a favour and plonk me as I have just done you.
You won't have to put up with my bad spelling and endless appologies that
way, and I will see one less spammer.

Baz

I do not know the answer to your question, apologies.
At least you seem to be able to cope with the spelling of spammer.
I just wonder if you know what it means !

Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com

In message , Bill Grey
writes

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-10-15 00:47:20 +0100, chris French
said:
Hmmmm not sure about the insurance being a waste of money. We cancelled
the insurance on ours and one ran out in front of a car and required
nearly £1k worth of treatment!

Accidents such as you've quoted are very upsetting as well as expensive,
however quite rare.
Over the eleven years I've been paying insurance, I shudder to think how
much I've coughed up!
Now I'm saving in separate a acount the amount the Insurance company wanted
me to pay.

Bill

Many years ago my mate's dog (big daft retriever) ran into the road and
caused a van to swerve to avoid it and finish on its roof.
The cost of any injury to the dog was the least of his worries, and he
was lucky not to be sued for injury/damage to the van driver.

After that the dog was kept under close control.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

"Martin" wrote in message
...

using a large wooden spoon.

Incidentally British Wildlife Fund has the highest overheads that I have
found
so far.


I have only heard of the WWF -along those lines, which I am sure will not be
high on your list.

Some of the smaller charities, I agree, can be verging on the fraudulent
with little benefit accruing to the
published beneficiaries.


Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com

On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:10:11 +0100, Gordon H
wrote:

In message , Bill Grey
writes

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-10-15 00:47:20 +0100, chris French
said:
Hmmmm not sure about the insurance being a waste of money. We cancelled
the insurance on ours and one ran out in front of a car and required
nearly £1k worth of treatment!

Accidents such as you've quoted are very upsetting as well as expensive,
however quite rare.
Over the eleven years I've been paying insurance, I shudder to think how
much I've coughed up!
Now I'm saving in separate a acount the amount the Insurance company wanted
me to pay.

Bill

Many years ago my mate's dog (big daft retriever) ran into the road and
caused a van to swerve to avoid it and finish on its roof.
The cost of any injury to the dog was the least of his worries, and he
was lucky not to be sued for injury/damage to the van driver.

After that the dog was kept under close control.

A lot of home insurance policies now seem to cover liability for
accidents caused by a dog - both my current and last insurers said
that taking that clause out of the policy wouldn't reduce my premium.

How much actually went to what peoepl thought they were giving for? £6.92
million?
--

Martin


Sorry, Martin - just too many figures for my tiny brain to cope with !
Headlines indeed (:-(

In my way of simplification there would be three headline figures for each
charity.

P.A. Total Income( eg ) 100% £1,000 -- Total Expenditure 10%
£100 --- Total Charitable outgoings 90 % £900

Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com