In the standard model, designed by RSA, the penalty was the key driver in dissuading pet owners and Primary Care Vets from seeking the expertise of vets outside the RSA network.
But it is understood that the leading retailer John Lewis, while it has adopted the model, will not levy the £200 ‘fine’.
A spokesman for Vets for Choice, which has campaigned against the RSA’s establishment of the network, said: “While we are still opposed to the idea of the network as an unnecessarily restrictive measure in general, John Lewis’ stance is clearly a positive step in restoring customer choice.
“Those with John Lewis pet insurance who wish to use a vet outside of the RSA model will never be hit with unfair and unexpected penalties at the point of referral.
“Customers and First Opinion Vets should always be able to use the vet they feel offers the most appropriate care for their animal without fear of financial penalty.
“How easy it is to choose non-Preferred practitioners under the John Lewis claims process remains to be seen and we will continue to watch this closely.”
Brands which do charge the £200 are MoreThan, Tesco, and Argos.
Clive Elwood, of Vets for Choice, said: “The big question to ask now is if John Lewis can opt out of the fines why can’t Tesco and Argos?
“John Lewis clearly does not agree with springing extra charges on their customers at the point of need and this seems to be in line with their reputation for better customer service.
“MoreThan, Tesco and Argos customers should rightly ask why they are being treated differently to John Lewis customers.”
One retailer which partners with RSA – Marks & Spencer – has still not signed up to the network.
Dr Elwood said: “We have been in contact with M&S – as we were with John Lewis - over the issue and they assure us they have no plans to move to bring in the restrictive model.
“There are so many problems with the preferred referral network that we believe that M&S would be letting their customers down if they adopted the change now.”
Vets for Choice had previously launched a highly publicised campaign against the RSA’s decision to create a referral network of ‘approved’ centres where pet owners with RSA policies have to take their sick pets to avoid paying the extra fee.
The Vets for Choice campaign has resulted in just under 2,000 people signing a petition calling for the RSA, Tesco and MoreThan to rethink their policies. Politicians also engaged, with 13 MPs backing a parliamentary motion calling for the RSA policy to be scrapped.
On July 13 the RSA announced it was extending its then 29-practice strong referral network by 24. On August 4 it revealed its interim results and announced its group operating profit was up 20% to £312 million.
The RSA also argued that from over 10,000 claims that went through its network during phase one of the referral programme, “just 59 customers have chosen to use a non-Network partner for their non-emergency referral”, adding it “demonstrates the strength and appeal of the Network."
A Vets for Choice spokesman said: “The RSA’s spin on its own numbers is interesting. What it could also demonstrate is that pet owners have been funnelled into using the network by the threat of a £200 penalty. This is anti-choice and goes against the very nature of getting the best possible care for your pet.
Of course the RSA will not have statistics for those who wished to go outside the network but chose not to in order to avoid the fine.”
|
