I strongly advise against trusting this clinic with any major surgery. I brought my rescue cat here…read morefor treatment of nose cancer, which they had already diagnosed as being present throughout his entire nose. Despite this, they completely ignored one side of his nose during treatment and committed multiple acts of severe professional negligence.
1. Failure to Follow Agreed Treatment Plan:
I paid for and consulted on an aggressive, complete nose removal. The consulting veterinarian explicitly stated that the surgery "would be a waste" unless the entire nose was removed because leaving any cancer behind would cause it to return aggressively. Instead, a general practice surgeon--whom I was never permitted to speak with--made a unilateral mid-surgery decision to perform a minimal "scrape," leaving 2/3 of the tumor and visible cancerous bulbs intact.
2. Complete Violation of Informed Consent:
If the surgeon did not feel capable or comfortable performing the agreed-upon nose removal once my cat was sedated, they had a strict medical and ethical obligation to call me from the operating room. By failing to contact me, they denied me my legal right to decline a substandard procedure, wake my cat up, and immediately transfer him to a qualified veterinary oncologist or specialist who could perform the surgery correctly.
3. Total Lack of Post-Operative Communication:
When I picked up my cat after major surgery, the clinic provided absolutely zero communication or discharge instructions. I had to discover via text message that they failed to complete the agreed-upon service. They then falsely claimed the cancer was only on one side, directly contradicting their own previous diagnosis and what was clearly visible.
Because of their failure to remove the tumor as promised, the cancer returned with extreme aggression. I had to euthanize my cat because this clinic robbed him of his only opportunity to receive a proper, complete surgery from a qualified professional.
I have the full text message logs, emails, and images confirming this timeline. A formal complaint regarding this professional negligence and failure to obtain informed consent is being filed directly with the State Veterinary Board. Do not trust them with your animal's life.
Response to owner : There is a fundamental difference between a "medically complex" adjustment and a complete change in surgical scope without owner consent.
The explicit, documented purpose of Tom Tom's consultation was a complete nose removal. I was explicitly told by your staff that a partial removal or "minimal scrape" would not be effective given the aggressive nature of his cancer. Yet, while he was sedated, Dr. Eileen made the unilateral decision to pivot to a minimal scrape, leaving active cancerous bulbs behind, without ever calling me to get my informed consent.
By failing to call me from the operating room, you denied me my legal right as a client to decline a sub-standard procedure. Had I been contacted, I would have immediately instructed the clinic to wake him up so I could transfer him to a qualified veterinary oncologist or specialist who was capable of performing the agreed-upon surgery.
Furthermore, your clinic attempted to retain 100% of the funds for a complete nose removal until I forced accountability through a series of extensive emails. Your own text message records confirm that the surgeon only focused on one side of the nose, directly contradicting the agreed-upon treatment plan.
This is a clear issue of professional negligence and a failure to obtain informed consent, not a misunderstanding of "expectations." I will not be having further private discussions with management to help cover up this clinic's lack of informed consent. The time for discussion was when Tom Tom was on the operating table. All further correspondence from me will be handled directly through the formal complaint I am filing with the State Veterinary Board.