A vet has been struck off the RCVS register after he falsified records, was rude to clients, refused referral and placed patients at risk.

A vet has been struck off the RCVS register after he falsified records, was rude to clients, refused referral and placed patients at risk.

On May 24, 2013, the college’s disciplinary committee (DC) struck off Ian Beveridge, of the Daryl Veterinary Centre, Heswall, Wirral after finding him guilty of “reprehensible” conduct in regard to two separate cases.

In March 2010, Blu the cat was presented to Beveridge in a collapsed state. The cat was then placed on a heat pad and no diagnosis or other treatment was discussed.

Wirral vet struck off by DCAfter being unable to contact Beneridge overnight, Blu’s owner Mrs Simpson went to the practice the following day, intending to discharge the cat and take it elsewhere. However, the cat had died overnight, and when Mr Beveridge returned it to Mrs Simpson he blocked her exit from the consulting room and then blamed the animal’s death on her poor care.

In addition, the DC found that records of fluids given and a blood sample taken from Blu the previous evening were falsified by Mr Beveridge, to make it appear his case management was of a better standard.

In February 2011, Holly the dog was admitted to the practice in a collapsed state with a swollen abdomen. The DC attested a proper assessment should have led Beveridge to carry out an abdominocentesis and then refer Holly on.

However, the vet simply left Holly on a heatpad, something the DC found “no reasonably competent veterinary surgeon in general practice would have done”.

Beveridge also repeatedly refused owner Mrs Flanagan the right to referral, which the DC said amounted to failing to treat her with courtesy and respect. The committee also found the records of Holly’s admission to be completely inadequate.       

Ultimately, Holly was referred elsewhere and survived, the DC heard.

While the DC made allowances for Mr Beveridge’s situation in having to run a first opinion practice with basic facilities, it found him guilty of a very serious failure of care to both patients, which gave rise to serious risks to their safety and welfare.

Summing up, DC chairman Peter Lees said: “On each occasion, [Beveridge] treated the owners with a lack of courtesy and respect and made the difficult and distressing circumstances in which they found themselves much worse than they need have been.”

He added: “The committee takes a very serious view of his attempt to prevent Ms Simpson leaving the consulting room with Blu, and of the unjust and upsetting way in which he sought to blame her for the animal’s death. He showed her no consideration at all. Likewise, his refusal to contemplate referral for Holly until compelled by Mrs Flanagan to do so, and his persistent refusal to engage with her about this at all, was, in the committee’s view, reprehensible.”

View your activity >

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

Notify of