Vets market investigation: remedies working paper

Whether pet owners can find and compare prices for common procedures and treatments, whether referral arrangements, ownership or vertical structures affect competition and choice, and whether clear, comparable signals of quality and reliable online information exist to help owners choose — alongside related questions about local access, insurance/payment arrangements and any barriers facing new entrants.

Prices are often hard to compare, with wide variation in routine procedure fees and frequent unexpected add-on charges; choice is constrained in some areas and long waits reduce effective choice; respondents flagged opaque referral agreements and vertically integrated groups that can steer work within chains; insurers and billing practices can obscure true costs; and online discoverability, paid listings and patchy quality data mean many owners rely on word-of-mouth or local reputation rather than comparable information.

We analysed consultation responses and published anonymised price examples and a geographic access map to highlight local market constraints; requested contractual and supplier information from major providers and engaged directly with insurers; commissioned an exploratory review of online advertising and disclosure practices and set out a menu of potential remedies (from improved transparency measures to more targeted interventions) for further comment; and launched targeted follow-up evidence requests where gaps remained — while noting we have not yet reached a conclusion on whether remedies will be necessary or, if so, what form they should take.