untitled

Please use your browser to return to the Main/Navigation Page.

Warning:  Due to the nature of this page, while you have it on your screen it is supposed to automatically play the music, "Yakity-Yak" as the most appropriate title choice for this page  - feel free to turn your speakers off at any time you've "over-dosed" as I haven't figured out how to control it [yet]!  Thank you for your understanding.

Part#1

The Better Business Bureau serving Oregon and Western Washington

Complaint System - ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

BBB CASE#: 22016444 (Page #1)

Filed by Ginger Sanchez on 8/26/04 against Williams,DVM/Burien Veterinary Hospital; Hammond/Meyer/Baty/Five Corners Veterinary Hospital; and, Murnane/Jewett/Phoenix Central Laboratories

NOTE: ONLY Five Corners apparently used to be a member of BBB and apparently the other individuals/entities are not and therefore therefore totally immune from this action.  The following is a true copy of the complaint and desired resolution:

Consumer's Complaint:   On 4/24/04 I rushed my very sick dog to the Five Corners Veterinary Hospital due to a different veterinarian having prescribed/dispensed what turned out to be a deadly canine FDA/CVM approved drug for a touch of arthritis. I provided Dr. Hammond of that facility detailed information/instructions as to who/how to contact the drug manufacturer, Pfizer, at their 1-800 number to obtain verifications of my dog's symptoms and medical treatment information. They, instead, mis-diagnosed her condition and then told me that instead of giving my dog more time to try to recover on her own, gave me a choice of EITHER doing CPR or euthanasia (the early morning of 4/25/04, about 12 hours after the dog's admittance to their facility). When I asked what doing CPR would accomplish, they told me 'nothing'. My dog was euthanized and I requested that they make arrangements for a necropsy to be performed in order to determine the cause of my dog's death. The veterinarian on duty at that time (the morning of 4/25/04) told me that the cost to me would be a 'ball park figure' of approximately $500.00 and I agreed to it. After my dog was euthanized, the office person (name unknown) told me that before she would make a call to the laboratory to arrange for a necropsy, they required payment on the spot and in full of $1100.00. When I asked why the figure was more than twice what I had been told to expect, I was told that they did not have adequate refrigeration facilities to hold my dog in until the necropsy laboratory could pick up her body on the morning of 4/26/04 (24+ hours after death) and the additional charge was for a whole lot of ice in order for my dog's remains to be sufficiently preserved for a proper necropsy to be done. I agreed to pay the sum and did so by credit card (receiving a 10% discount as a senior citizen, total amount paid for the necropsy now being $990.00). The necropsy report was supposed to be available about 4/29 or 4/30/04 and I was finally able to obtain a copy of the report about 5/3/04. When I did not understand the 'findings', I called and was finally able to speak to Dr. Hammond who verbally summed up her opinion that my dog suffered from too many multiple conditions and didn't survive due to her 'age'. When I was not satisfied with that explanation, I contacted the necropsy laboratory, Phoenix Central Laboratories, Everett, Washington (who does not appear on any of the BBB searches) to speak directly to the veterinarian/pathologist who allegedly did the necropsy, Dr. Robert Murnane, DVM, Ph.D., Diplomate, A.C.V.P. on 5/10/04 and was informed by the office personnel there that no one would give me any information because the Five-Corners/Vet Hammond was the client and hung up on me after informing me that Dr. Hammond was the only person to contact. On 5/24/04 I sent a demand letter by fax to Dr. Hammond/Five Corners demanding that they voluntarily provide written authorization to Dr. Murnane to speak to me and to order/authorize Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Lab to 'preserve' my dog's 'bits and pieces' for a second necropsy and DNA testing until I located and made arrangements at another facility for same and for Hammond/Five Corners to provide me with an itemized billing of the $990.00 necropsy charges. When I called Five-Corners to determine that had received my faxed demand letter, the office person (Margaret Baty)acknowledged receipt of the faxed demand letter and informed me that Dr. Hammond had 'opted' to NOT provide any written release/authorization but had provided the release/authorization to Dr. Murnane by a telephone call. When I went to pick up the records and itemized necropsy billing, there was no itemized necropsy billing. I faxed a demand letter to Murnane/Phoenix Lab stating I would call their 1/800-347-0043 on 6/1/04, and when I did so, I was only allowed to speak to a person who identified herself as Linda Jewett and stated that she was the 'marketing person in charge of everything at the laboratory'. Ms. Jewett acknowledged receipt of the complete fax addressed to Dr. Murnane and stated that Dr. Murnane would NOT speak to me, that I could NOT have his e-mail address; that my dog's 'bits and pieces' WOULD have been preserved and kept in appropriate condition for a second necropsy and DNA testing 'as a matter of routine procedure' and provided me with HER e-mail address so that I could confirm that after she had a chance to verify that as the person in charge of that had already left for the evening. When I e-mailed Ms. Jewett several times and requested confirmation of the status of my dog's remains, I got no response from her and the e-mail had been delivered and not returned. I have since learned that Dr. Murnane apparently has already had his license to practice veterinary medicine 'compromised' by checking his 'record' out at: www.wa.gov/doh/hpqa1/Application/Credential_Search/Action_Detail_Rot.asp?PCN.  

Consumer's Desired Resolution:    I want a complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr.Hammond/Five Corners and Dr.Murnane/Phoenix Lab, along with a complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Williams/Burien Veterinarian Hospital with respect to my dog, my dog's condition, and any/all contact between/amongst the parties named here and Pfizer regarding same; an itemized billing of the necropsy charges as outlined in my fax demand letters; all of the demanded information in the faxed demand letters sent to both parties; the current 'status' of ALL of my dog's 'bits and pieces' as previously demanded; a full refund of the monies paid to Five Corners (which totals just under $2,000.00); a 'replacement' dog of like quality/training and a written apology from both parties that includes an explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory, why Hammond/Five Corners did NOT contact Pfizer or IF they did, when they did and for what purpose and upon what 'basis' Dr. Hammond/Five Corners utilized the alleged services of Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Central Laboratory and the 'credentials' of said laboratory and whether Ms. Jewett is actually and officially employed by Phoenix Central Laboratory and under what authority the Phoenix Central Laboratory is authorized to do business in the State of Washington.

Part#2

The Better Business Bureau serving Oregon and Western Washington

Complaint System  RESPONSE OF FIVE CORNERS

BBB CASE#: 22016444

NOTE:  The 'hard copy' of the Response of Five Corners was mailed to me and for some reason does not appear on-line; this BBB cover letter  was provided to the WA Vet Board as 'Exhibit #77; the Five Corners Response is 'Exhibit #78; my responses to each item of the letter #78 are in RED FONT for readability] - the following is a true and correct copy of that letter and my response:

LETTER:  #77: FROM BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU VIA U.S.MAIL REC'D 9/25/04, DATED 9/22/04, POST-MARKED 9/24/04 TO GINGER SANCHEZ:
9/25/04
 
Better Business Bureau Serving Oregon & Western Washington
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
Tel: 206 431-2222 Fax: 206 431-2211
 
The Better Business Bureau (BBB) has received a response from the business regarding your complaint.  Please review their response to your original complaint and advise us of your position in the matter by October 2, 2004.
 
The details of the complaint (including the business' response) are included on the reverse.  Please be sure to indicate whether the company's response has resolved the complaint.
 
If you find you are dissatisfied with the company's response, please provide us with a MIDDLE GROUND offer we can present to the company in an effort to resolve this dispute.  If this is not provided, the BBB may not be able to be of further assistance in this matter.
 
We encourage you to use our ONLINE COMPLAINT system to respond to this complaint.  The following URL (website address) will take you directly to this complaint.  You will be able to enter your response directly on our website:
http://www.thebbb.org/complaintconsumer.html?cid=22016444&auth=3fvwc4
 
If you are unable to respond using the internet, then please respond in writing to the address above or FAX to (206) 431-2200.  Thank you for using the services of the BBB!
 
Sincerely,
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
 
LETTER #78:  RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT BY HAMMOND/FIVE CORNERS VETERINARY  HOSPITAL [ENCLOSED WITH ABOVE BBB LETTER]
9/8/04                           DATE STAMPED: 9/13/04
 
Better Busines Bureau
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
To Whom It May Concern:
 
Redarding:    Complaint Activity Report
               Case #22016444 Ginger Sanchez
 
Ms. Sanchez presented her dog "Romy" to this facility as an emergency case on 24 April 2004.  On presentation the dog was unable to stand on her own and unable to support her own weight when lifted.  She had severe
 
(1) neurological symptoms [symptom of Rimadyl toxicity, see www.fda.gov/cvm/index/ade/ann.97.pdf, Adverse Drug Experiences, 1997 CVM Annual Summary, at page 10 for both horizonal and rotary nystagmus, which Hammond commented on in my presence]
 
(2) was hypothermic [symptom of Rimadyl/carprofen toxicity, see www.fda.gov/cvm/index/ade/ann.97.pdf, Adverse Drug Experiences, 1997 CVM Annual Summary, at page 10],
 
(3) had conjunctivitis [symptom of Rimadyl/carprofen toxicity, see www.fda.gov/cvm/index/ade/ann.97.pdf, Adverse Drug Experiences, 1997 CVM Annual Summary, at page 10], 
 
(4) and a urinary tract infection [symptom of Rimadyl/carprofen toxicity, see www.fda.gov/cvm/index/ade/ann.97.pdf, Adverse Drug Experiences, 1997 CVM Annual Summary, at page 10], 
 
Routine blood chemistries showed that she had (5) elevated liver enzymes [symptom of Rimadyl/carprofen toxicity, see www.fda.gov/cvm/index/ade/ann.97.pdf, Adverse Drug Experiences, 1997 CVM Annual Summary, at page 10,and NOTE: lab results were faxed to Williams/BVH on 4/25/04, see original fax document #3 - five out of five symptoms in this letter point to Rimadyl toxicity, which I INFORMED Hammond of prior and during the initial examination, which was the ONLY time I saw Hammond] [the foregoing referenced report is now document #80].
 
Ms. Sanchez was given a summary of initial exam findings [NOTHING was given to me except the BILL to be paid on the spot; the only paperwork I saw besides the itemized anticipated charges was the form I was required to sign stating and agreeing that when my dog was released from care with Hammond/Five Corners, I would take her to Williams/BVH for the next 180 days following her release, previously submitted as document item #5] and was offered referral to a board certified veterinary neurologist, which she declined [the ONLY thing said to me was that the first thing was to get ROMI 'diagnosed' via x-rays and lab tests and then 'stable' via IV's and 'monitoring'; that IF the diagnosis, AFTER TESTING, was of neurologic origin, THEN it would be recommended to do a 'neurological consult', but at that point, until testing and monitoring had been done; it would have been PREMATURE to have OFFERED a 'neurological consult' on Saturday 4/24/04 in the evening and it was 'wait and see' what the lab/x-ray results were and how ROMI responded to the IV's- there was NO 'neurological consultation "offered" and therefore no 'neurological consultation' was "declined".  In any event, it's totally irrelevant whether any 'neurological consult' was allegedly offered/allegedly declined and can only be viewed as a self-serving attempt to try to justify the mis-diagnosis that occurred because of the veterinarian apparent refusal to pay attention to the Rimadyl toxicity information provided; this is literally a case of 'beating a dead DOG to death']. 
 
She was then presented with a detailed estimate for supportive care and continued monitoring of liver enzymes  [this is true- the gal with the clipboard was continuously giving me itemized printouts of how much money they wanted before doing anything;].  Ms. Sanchez opted to continue "Romy's" care at Five Corners Hospital at least overnight. [when I was there I paid the first set of 'anticipated charges' of $376.30 for the initial exam, blood work, urinanalysis and x-rays (the reports of which were never provided to me, despite my demand faxed letter); I WAS repeatedly told that once ROMI was released from care at Five Corners that I was REQUIRED to return her for ANY care for the next minimum time frame of 180 days; then I paid by phone authorization another $497.70 on 4/24/04 for the first 12 hours of ICU/monitoring & IVs, see exhibit #15][please NOTE that the statement of "continued monitoring of liver enzymes" is both misleading and self-serving:  unless there are additional laboratory reports that I have NOT been provided with there were only TWO [2] CBC/full chemistry lab tests done: the first one 4/24/04 at 3:55 p.m., shortly after admittance (item #7 previously submitted); and 4/25/04 at 7:24 a.m. which I requested being done prior to ROMI's being euthanized for the purposes of comparison and BOTH of these are additionally documented on the billing statements (Item #15) and BOTH of these were faxed by Hammond/Five Corners to Williams/BVH on 4/25/04 (Item #3) LONG before I ever saw them.  I was initially told that the liver enzymes were "off the chart" (another classic Rimadyl toxicity indication) but the second 'full cbc/full chemistry (liver enzymes) showed a significant reduction JUST PRIOR TO ROMI's death, although Dr. Meyer refused to wait either for lab results OR to give ROMI any more time to 'come out of it'].
 
On presentation, and during several subsequent conversations with Ms. Sanchez, she indicated that she was sure "Romy's" illness was secondary to the administration of Rimadyl that had been prescribed by the regular veterinarian [there was only ONE conversation that took place with Hammond, although it was a very LONG conversation in which I CONTINUED to relay the symptoms ROMI'd been having AND that they were all listed and explained on the www.srdogs.com and Pfizer.com websites, ALONG WITH the 1/800 Pfizer number to get veterinarian assistance  - the initial exam was conducted in the presence of the 'clipboard woman', and I repeatedly told BOTH of them I very strongly believed it was Rimadyl toxicity, ASKED if they had Internet access and provided both the www.srdogs.com website and www.Pfizer.com website and TOLD them to call Pfizer's 1/800 number (which was ON both websites) to verify the symptoms AND get the correct treatment information as to IV's, etc.].  Despite assurances by myself [I was NOT 'assured by Hammond that it wasn't Rimadyl; I kept telling Hammond that it WAS most likely due to Rimadyl toxicity and she just wasn't listening apparently] and later by Dr. Rachel Meyer, that Rimadyl toxicity does not cause neurologic signs [but it DOES, Pfizer knows that: see Items #24,#31,#32,#33,#35,#36,#38,#40,#59,#60,#61,#62,#63,#64,#65, #66,#67,#68,#73,#80 and veterinarians are supposed to know that's one of the "risks" with NSAIDs [Rimadyl/carprofen]- see: AVMA at: www.avma.org for "Minimizing the risk factors associated with veterinary NSAIDs, 4/15/04, Item #81; FDA Veterinarian for March/April, "Adverse Drug Experience Reports . . ." , Item #82; www.valleypetnews.com "Veterinarians Prescribing Rimadly: Don't Know v. Don't Tell", 4/13/04, Item #83; www.valleypetnews.com "Pfizer Repackages 'Rimadyl' Arthritis Drug To Educate Dog Owners of Risks", 4/13/04, Item #84;
 
Ms. Sanchez was unwilling to hear our professional opinions.  Ms. Sanchez never provided contact information and/or instruction regarding contacting Pfizer, the manufacturer of Rimadyl. [totally untrue, see above; additionally Five Corners was in contact with Williams/BVH, providing HIM with lab results, etc., by fax and doing so LONG before I had any of the information either verbally or in written form]
 
"Romy" was hospitalized overnight during which time her neurologic status continued to deteriorate while her liver enzymes improved [THIS IS A HUGE CLUE AS TO THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM, RIMADYL! and yet the ongoing veterinarian DENIALS CONTINUE to this very day!  When I called at 9:00 p.m., I was told ROMI "was resting comfortably and on IV, and it was a 'wait and see matter"].  Dr. Meyer attempted to contact Ms. Sanchez multiple times after midnight on 25 April 2004 to inform her of her dog's condition, even going so far as to call the operator to request an emergency interruption of Ms. Sanchez's busy telephone line, but was unable to contact Ms. Sanchez until nearly 7:00 a.m. on 25 April 2004.  At that point "Romy" was comatose and close to death.  Dr. Meyer advised Ms. Sanchez that due to the degeneration of "Romy's" condition overnight "Romy" was unlikely to recover and offered euthanasia for humane reasons. [Dr. Meyer offered CPR! and when I asked what CPR would do to bring her out of a coma, Dr. Meyer said 'nothing' but it was either CPR OR euthanasia, and that the alleged 'brain condition', that's once again claimed above in this letter response to the BBB, was DEBUNKED by the necropsy report] 
 
Ms. Sanchez indicated at that time that she was concerned, should "Romy" be euthanized, that necropsy findings would be altered and she would not be able to prove that "Romy's" death was due to Rimadyl. [NOT what I said; I said IF Rimadyl was INDEED the cause of ROMI's death, that needed to be 'exposed' by having a necropsy done so that other dogs wouldn't be dying needlessly, too]
 
(page 2)
When I arrived on the morning of the 25 April 2004, "Romy" had been euthanized and the owner's request for necropsy had been noted.  Joanne Rideout, I.V.T. and I arranged with Phoenix Labs to perform the necropsy [when I paid the remaining amount to cover the necropsy charge, I was ASSURED by the 'clip board woman' that the arrangements had ALREADY BEEN MADE THEN, AS SOON AS MY CREDIT CARD PAYMENT WAS CLEARED/AUTHORIZED which was 4/25/04 at 8:07 a.m. according to Master Charge records].  At that time, Ms. Sanchez was informed of the cost of the necropsy through Phoenix Labs ($1,100.00)  [what was Phoenix Labs actually PAID?] to which she agreed and paid.  While Phoenix Labs does not usually have a courier come to our hospital, the lab did arrange to have a courier come that day to pick up "Romy's" remains.  Since we don't have refrigerator space sufficient for a Rottweiler, we prepared "Romy's" remains as directed by the lab.  I can attest to the fact that "Romy's" body was in possession of the courier from Phoenix Labs by 3:00 p.m. that afternoon.
 
The full necropsy results were not available to us until the afternoon of 2 May 2004.  A partial report, the gross findings, was printed on 27 April 2004, but the microscopic findings were still pending at that point.  It is our policy that the veterinarian who was responsible for the case be the one to discuss laboratory results with the owner.  I was unavailable from 26 April 2004 through 3 May 2004.  Dr. Melanie Caviness read the preliminary report to Ms. Sanchez on 30 April 2004.  [the ONLY person who gave me any verbal necropsy information over the phone OTHER than Hammond on 5/3/04, was a young and VERY 'silly' sounding female who answered the phone, did NOT identify herself as a veterinarian, and after telling me that the 'cause of death was euthanasia', said that all the vets were busy, tried to read the report to me, was all tangled up trying to say the medical terminology and then 'gave up' trying to pronounce the words and said for me to call back and talk to Hammond; when I continued calling to speak to Hammond, everyone answering the phone offered to 'help me' as she was not available, and when I said I wanted information regarding the necropsy report, each and everyone of them said that ONLY Hammond could tell me anything; at NO time did anyone ever identify themself as a veterinarian at Five Corners.] I discussed the full report with her on 3 May 2004.
 
On 25 May 2004 we received a fax from Ms. Sanchez demanding an itemized breakdown of the necropsy fee, a written statement from myself to Phoenix Labs regarding the release of her pet's remains, information regarding specifics on the necropsy which were only available through Phoenix Labs, and "Romy's" full medical records.  We provided Ms. Sanchez with copies of "Romy's" medical records and I contacted Phoenix Labs regarding release of "Romy's" remains.  At that time Ms. Sanchez was provided with contact information for Ms. Linda Jewett at Phoenix Labs regarding "Romy's" necropsy and the release of the remains. [as stated in my response to this letter below, I was NEVER given any information by ANY PERSON regarding Linda Jewett; the ONLY information that I ever had was by my reading the letterhead of the necropsy report that showed the phone and fax numbers of Phoenix Lab and my contacts with THEM are outlined in the 3rd section of the complaint previously submitted].
 
All of "Romy's" medical records and the communications we have had with Ms. Sanchez can be made available to you on written request from Ms. Sanchez.
 
Sincerely,
[signed]
Margaret Lynn Hammond, D.V.M.
 
Part#3

The Better Business Bureau serving Oregon and Western Washington

Complaint System - Consumer Rebuttal to Response

BBB CASE#: 22016444

Complaint filed by: Ginger Sanchez    
Complaint filed against: Five Corners

Activity

Date
Activity
Description
09/27/2004  Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business   
09/27/2004  Received Consumer Rebuttal 

Re: Case #22016444: Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
Response of Ginger Sanchez to the Response of Hammond/Five Corners

Per your cover letter from the BBB, dated 9/22/04, post-marked 9/24/04 and received by me via U.S. Mail on 9/25/04: I went to the website listing provided in your letter, and while it gives the 'history' of the case and my complaint and the "Consumer's Desired Resolution" that was filed along with my complaint, I was not able to locate either the "response" of Five Corners on line OR find any way to ADD anything to the website, such as my 'response', which is now below and which includes the BBB required "MIDDLE GROUND offer" for presentation to Hammond/Five Corners:

1. The "company", Five Corners Veterinary Hospital's/Margaret Hammond, DVM's, "response" has NOT resolved the complaint because NONE of the issues contained in the Consumer's Original Complaint OR the Consumer's Desired Resolution have been addressed by the "company". This BBB complaint deals ONLY with the financial aspects and the previously demanded records information [and for 'making me whole'] and it is NOT a forum for self-serving 'rebuttal' statements regarding the veterinarian malpractice/incompetence mis-diagnosis and cover-up issues which are being dealt with by the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors, in Case#2004-04-0008VT originally filed on 4/29/04 and added to on 5/16/04 and 6/10/04, and currently still under investigation by that entity which does NOT deal with and doesn't have the 'authority' to deal with any financial/billing issues, production/furnishing of any records/information or 'making whole' of an injured party in any manner.

2. I will re-state the issues RELEVANT to the BBB complaint in the hopes that even the most dim-witted [or stonewalling] individual can comprehend what the issues ARE as outlined in the BBB 'complaint' filed by me and have additionally provided the BBB required "MIDDLE GROUND offer" to be presented at the end of each previously stated item:

A: I want a complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr.Hammond/Five Corners and Dr.Murnane/Phoenix Lab, along with a complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Williams/Burien Veterinarian Hospital with respect to my dog, my dog's condition[s], and any/all contact between/amongst the parties named here and Pfizer regarding same; [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

B: an itemized billing of the $1,100.00 necropsy charges, that were paid in full, as outlined in my fax demand letters; [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

C:  all of the demanded information in the faxed demand letters sent to both parties; [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];
the current 'status' of ALL of my dog's 'bits and pieces' as previously demanded; [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

D:  a full refund of the monies paid to Five Corners (which totals just under $2,000.00); [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

E:  a 'replacement' dog of like quality/training and a written apology from both parties that includes an explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

F:  why Hammond/Five Corners did NOT contact Pfizer or IF they did, when they did and for what purpose [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item];

G:  upon what 'basis' Dr. Hammond/Five Corners utilized the alleged services of Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Central Laboratory and the 'credentials' of said laboratory [as to a 'middle ground offer' for the BBB to present: "a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE written and signed explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will not provide this", if they continue to fail/refuse to provide this item]; 

H:  and, whether Ms. Jewett is actually and officially employed by Phoenix Central Laboratory and under what authority the Phoenix Central Laboratory is authorized to do business in the State of Washington, as according to the Hammond/Five Corners' 'response' "At that time Ms. Sanchez was provided with contact information for Ms. Linda Jewett at Phoenix Labs regarding "Romy's" necropsy and the release of the remains." Hammond/Five Corners NEVER provided me any information as to "contact information for Ms. Linda Jewett at Phoenix Labs". My SOLE 'source of information' was from reading the letterhead of the Phoenix Lab necropsy report upon which the name of "Ms. Linda Jewett" does NOT appear and NOTHING was ever conveyed to me by Hammond/Five Corners regarding any policies anyone had as to who would explain the necropsy findings [other than Hammond at Five Corners] and absolutely NOTHING was ever conveyed to me by ANYONE regarding any "policy" that would continue to prevent the release of my dog's remains for a 2nd necropsy and DNA identification testing prior to "Ms. Linda Jewett's" refusal to release any of the 'bits and pieces' or the 'frozen carcass' of my dog without a court order in the one and only telephone conversation that I had with "Ms. Linda Jewett" on 6/01/04 when I called and spoke to "Ms. Linda Jewett" after sending a demand fax to Phoenix Labs that included a copy of the demand fax sent to Hammond/Five Corners, BOTH of which have been totally ignored by both Hammond/Five Corners and Phoenix Central Labs [who is not a member of the BBB].

ALL of the items listed above are either IN the control and/or possession of Hammond/Five Corners or are accessible ONLY TO Hammond/Five Corners. For your convenience I am including in this e-mail response to the Hammond/Five Corner's response, a complete and true copy of the demand fax letter sent to Hammond/Five corners on 5/24/04 [mis-dated 5/25/04], receipt of which was verbally acknowledged by a "Margaret Baty, Operations Manager" of Five Corners, and which was incorporated into and provided to the WA Vet Board to include in the WA Vet Board Complaint via their investigator as Document/Exhibit #12:

May 25, 2004

Margaret Hammond, DVM
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
15707 1st Avenue
Seattle, WA 98148

Re: DEMAND/REQUEST FOR YOUR VOLUNTARY PRODUCTION OF RECORDS
Client ID: 17264
CLIENT NAME: Ginger Sanchez
PATIENT NAME: ROMY
Disposition: Euthanized 4/25/04

Dear Dr. Hammond,

It is with deep regret and sadness that I write to you regarding the unnecessary death of my sole friend and companion Rottweiler, ROMY, at your facility on 4/25/04. I am hereby DEMANDING that you VOLUNTARILY provide me with the following information/records regarding this matter:

1. An itemized breakdown of the necropsy fee charged in the sum of $1,100.00 [paid in full before time of service less the 10% senior citizen discount), including, but not limited to the sum actually paid to the Phoenix Central Laboratory, any/all transport fees, and the itemized costs/fees allegedly incurred for refrigerating ROMY with a description of said efforts, along with the time-frames such events occurred.

2. A Release Form, signed by you, Margaret Hammond, DVM, and/or Five Corners Veterinary Hospital, the original to be sent to Robert Murname, DVM, Ph.D, Phoenix Central Laboratory, Lab ID#: 04-07223, with a copy bearing your signature provided to me, which authorizes the release of ALL of ROMY?s remains, including any and all bits and pieces of ROMY, from their or your custody and/or control, including but not limited to any and all histopathological specimens, any and all reports and/or records regarding, in any/all forms either written or oral, relating to and/or referring to same; any and all tissue specimens, samples, or other such bits and pieces, including but not limited to any such items mounted on slides; the "Representative portions of all organ systems [that] are preserved in formalin. Adipose, heart, lung, kidney and liver frozen. [and the] Remainder of the carcass frozen?" as referred to in the necropsy report bearing Lab ID#: 04-07223 and your account number: 1190, with the instructions that said ?remains? shall be retained in appropriate condition until I have made arrangements for their examination and removal to an appropriate facility.

3. As the Phoenix Laboratory informed me that they will not tell me, as the pet owner, any information whatsoever about anything and that you are the only one they will have and/or permit any contact with regarding this matter, I additionally DEMAND that you inquire into the following, if you don?t already have such information, and provide me with the a copy of any/all results, in any form, whether written, recorded or as contemporaneous note, of such :

A. What tests, if any, were done to determine : ". . . there is no strong evidence of extensive hepatic toxicity such as from Rimadyl." [per the necropsy report];

B. Upon what source of information was the foregoing statement: ". . . there is no strong evidence of extensive hepatic toxicity such as from Rimadyl." [per the necropsy report] based;


C. A report and/or statement as to whether ANY evidence of liver toxicity existed and, if to so what degree; the expected length of duration such toxicity existed and upon what source of information such an opinion is based.

D. Upon what source and/or sources of information the ". . . overall only moderate hepatic liver compromise would have been predicted." [from the necropsy report] statement was made;

E. The full identity of the individual and/or ANY and ALL individuals who allegedly provided "A second opinion was obtained on this case on liver sections and the thyroid-associated mass section and concurred." [from the necropsy report], providing such persons? full name, address, telephone numbers and credentials as to providing such opinion[s];

4. A chronological listing developed from your contemporaneously kept treatment records indicating the specific identity/brand name and quantity of any/all of the IV fluids allegedly administered, along with the time-frame[s] of same and the specific identity/brand name quantity and time of each and every medication and/or other item allegedly added to each specified IV.

5. An itemized listing containing any and all x-rays taken along with any/all reports of same, either written or oral, containing any/all findings and/or reference regarding same.

6. Copies of any/all Release/Consent Forms signed by me, including but not limited to the form agreeing that I would take ROMY for any/all additional treatment to the original veterinarian during the 180 days time period after she was released from emergency care.

Dr. Hammond, it is my hope that this matter can be resolved to my satisfaction by you voluntarily providing all of the above-requested information and without the necessity of my having to ask the State of Washington, Department of Health, Veterinary Board of Governors to intercede on my behalf as I have had to do by filing a complaint against Dr. Williams.

Sincerely,

Ginger Sanchez
Additionally, please be advised that according to the first paragraph of 2nd page of the Hammond/Five Corners' "response":
"Joanne Ridout, LVT and I [letter signed by Hammond] arranged with Phoenix Labs to performed the necropsy." [I NEVER saw 'hide nor hair' of Hammond on 4/25/04, despite my being there from about shortly before 4:00 a.m. until approximately 8:30 a.m., I only saw Dr. Meyer and some of the staff people];
The ball park figure quoted to me by Dr. Meyer before Romy was euthanized was "about $500, a little more or less"; after Romy was dead, a person [whose name I don't know, but they appeared to be a staff person of some sort and walking around holding a clipboard] came outside of the building at the entry door area, where I was trying to compose myself, and informed me that I needed to pay $1,100.00 right then and there before she would make any call to the necropsy lab. When I asked her why the charge was going to now be more than double the estimated amount I'd been quoted, she stated that as they had nothing to refrigerate Romy's body in until the laboratory could pick my dog up on Monday, as they [the lab] "did not do 'special pick-ups'", that they [Five Corners] would "need a whole lot of ice". NOW in the Hammond/Five Corners 'response' Hammond states: "I can attest to the fact that "Romy's'" body was in possession of the courier from Phoenix Labs by 3:00 p.m. that afternoon."
Please advise by return e-mail if you received this, so I'll know whether it's going to be necessary to print it out and mail it or fax it to the number provided on your letterhead before the 10/02/04 deadline you have given me. Thank you.

Ginger Sanchez
e-Mail [ONLY]: GingerLSanchez@aol.com

Complaint Status:

09/27/2004  Re-open a Complaint   
09/22/2004  Manually Forward Business response to Consumer   
09/22/2004  Receive Business Response   
09/15/2004  NMBR-Resend Complaint to Business   
09/15/2004  NMBR- No response to first notice to business   
08/27/2004  Inform Business of the Complaint   
08/27/2004  Send acknowledgement to Consumer   
08/27/2004  Complaint Validated by BBB Operator   
08/26/2004 

Complaint Received by BBB 



***We are waiting for the business to respond. They have until October 12, 2004 to respond to this complaint. If they do not respond further action will be taken. *** 

PART #4:

This is the final "solution" of the BBB's efforts at a "resolution" as posted on-line via the BBB search engine on 10/13/04.

BBB Reliability Report

Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
15707 1st Ave S
Seattle, WA 98148

General Information

Original Business Start Date: April 1962
Local Business Start Date: April 1962
Principal: Dr Melanie Caviness, Medical Director
Phone Number: (206) 243-2982
Membership Status: No
Type-of-Business Classification: Veterinarians

Customer Experience

Based on BBB files, this company has an unsatisfactory record with the Bureau due to two or more unresolved complaints.

Additional Information

Additional TOB Classifications:

 Animal Hospitals

Report as of 10/13/2004
Copyright© 2004 Better Business Bureau®, Inc.

As a matter of policy, the Better Business Bureau does not endorse any product, service or company. BBB reports generally cover a three-year reporting period, and are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information contained herein is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy. Reports are subject to change at any time.

The Better Business Bureau reports on members and non-members. Membership in the BBB is voluntary, and members must meet and maintain BBB standards.

The Better Business Bureau serving Oregon and Western Washington

Complaint System

BBB CASE#: 22016444

Complaint filed by: Ginger Sanchez    
Complaint filed against:

Business Info

NAME:

Five Corners Veterinary Hospital 

 BBB MEMBER:

NO 

CONTACT:

Dr Melanie Caviness 

ADDRESS:

15707 1st Ave S
Seattle, WA 98148

PHONE:

206 243-2982 

FAX:

206 248-0264 

    (Less)
Complaint status:

Activity

Date
Activity
Description
10/13/2004  Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Inform Business - Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Inform Consumer - Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Bureau judged complaint to be closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Bureau judged complaint to be closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  No Response from Business re: Consumer Rebuttal   
09/27/2004  Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business 
 
[from the BBB on 10/13/04]:
We have received your most recent correspondence in the above-mentioned complaint.
You have indicated that you are NOT satisfied with the business' response in the matter.
The business has not made any further concessions to their original response.
Unfortunately, the Better Business Bureau (BBB) cannot pursue the matter further. This complaint is now considered
closed UNRESOLVED.
The BBB develops and maintains Reliability Reports on companies across the United States and Canada. This information is available to the public and is frequently used by potential customers. The company's level of cooperation in resolving to this complaint becomes a part of their file with the BBB.
A summary of this complaint case can be seen by clicking http://www.thebbb.org/complaintconsumer.html?cid=22016444&auth=3fvwc4.

Sincerely,
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
 
10/13/04
 
Deborah Schenck
Better Business Bureau Serving Oregon & Western Washington
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
 
Re: Case #22016444: Five Corners Veterinary  Hospital
 
Dear Deborah,
 
I am assuming, from having gone on-line and using the search engine to locate information on the Five Corners Veterinary Hospital group, that they have chosen to not respond and/or are not interested in reaching any sort of resolution in this matter, which I find disappointing, but not very surprising.
 
I do want to take this opportunity to thank you and your organization for all of your efforts in trying to provide some sort of solution to a very ugly situation and additionally want to be certain that you know that I do not hold either you or your organization responsible in any way for the despicable behaviors or attitudes of the Hammond/Caviness/Meyer/Baty/Five Corners group and their business practices, either during the initial malpractice/financial scam they obviously ran on me or how they've chosen to continue ignoring accepting or acknowledging any responsibility for the grevious damage they caused despite the obvious facts.
 
Thank you again for your time and efforts.
 
Ginger Sanchez
e-Mail [ONLY]: GingerLSanchez@aol.com

Personal NOTE: While it's unfortunate that the Five Corners Veterinary Group determined to not bother to respond to the Better Business Bureau concerning any of the issues regarding their financial scam, the cover-ups they were involved in with their veterinarian colleagues [DVM Lawrence Williams/Burien Veterinary Clinic and DVM Robert Murnane/Phoenix Central Laboratory/"Linda Jewett" aka: "Marketing Person In Charge of Everything", and of course their own behaviors] this has still proven to be an extremely valuable learning experience for me by having pursued it to 'the end': I am satisfied that by having taken this Better Business Complaint to its conclusion, that I actully now have all of the answers to my questions by the very fact that the Five Corners Veterinary group refused to provide any substantive answers to anything and perhaps the State of Washington, Attorney General's Department on Consumer Fraud will have better luck than the Better Business Bureau did.  For those reading this, feel free to draw your own conclusions as this is just my own true personal and documented experience. 

 

PART #5:

to "SPIN CITY"

This is the SECOND final "solution" of the BBB's efforts at a "resolution" as AFTER the BBB had CLOSED the matter, Five Corners/Hammond, etc., allegedly mailed a rebuttal to the BBB.  I received a copy of the "rebuttal" by regular mail on 10/29/04 [postmarked 10/27/04] with a copy of a Five Corners letter dated 10/20/04 stating their "rebuttal" had allegedly been mailed on 10/11/04 [which apparently the BBB never received], along with a "copy" of the alleged "rebuttal" dated 10/11/04 and date-stamped received by the BBB on 10/20/04, so now the CLOSED matter is once again OPEN as listed below per the BBB on-line form as of 10/29/04.  LITTLE did I know just how very appropriate the music title of "Yakity-Yak" was going to prove to be!

The Better Business Bureau serving Oregon and Western Washington

Complaint System

BBB CASE#: 22016444

Complaint filed by: Ginger Sanchez    
Complaint filed against: Five Corners Veterinary Hospital    (More)
Complaint status:

Activity

Date
Activity
Description
10/27/2004  Manually Forward Final Response to Consumer   
10/27/2004  Re-open a Complaint   
10/13/2004  Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Inform Business - Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Inform Consumer - Case Closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Bureau judged complaint to be closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  Bureau judged complaint to be closed UNRESOLVED   
10/13/2004  No Response from Business re: Consumer Rebuttal   
09/27/2004  Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business   
 
 
Posted: 10/30/04
 
The below three [3] items, marked as Exhibits #110, #111 and #112 respectively, are true copies of the cover letter and "rebuttal letter" from the Hammond/Five Corners group addressed to the Better Business Bureau regarding the complaint of Ginger Sanchez, Case#22016444 as provided to Ginger Sanchez by the Better Business Bureau by U.S. Mail received 10/29/04 and postmarked 10/27/04 and are now "labeled" and hereby assigned "exhibit numbers" as indicated for submission to the Washington State, Veterinary Board of Governors, Case#2004-04-0008 VT against Williams/BVH, Hammond/Meyer/Baty/Five Corners and Murnane/Jewett/Phoenix Central Lab and are being provided to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors as "Part 8" of the Sanchez complaint in addition to the cover letter from the Better Business Bureau which accompanied same.
 
Exhibit #110 [cover letter from the Better Business Bureau accompanying Exhibits #111 and #112].
 
October 27, 2004
 
Ginger Sanchez
637 South 159th Street
Seattle, WA  98148
 
re: Case # 22016444: Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
 
The Better Business Bureau (BBB) has received a response from the business in the above-referenced complaint.  Please review their response to your complaint and advise us of your position in the matter by November 6, 2004.  If we do not hear back from you, the BBB will assume you are satisfied and will close your complaint.
 
The details of the complaint (including the business' response) are included on the reverse.  Please be sure to indicate whether the business' response has resolved the complaint.
 
We encourage you to use our ONLINE COMPLAINT system to respond to this complaint.  The following URL (website address) will take you directly to this complaint.  You will be able to enter your response directly on our website.
 
If you are unable to respond using the internet, then please respond in writing to the address above or Fax to (206) 431-2200.
 
Sincerely,
[signed]
Jennifer Mitten
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
 
Exhibit#111:[this item is date-stamped by the Better Business Bureau as "RECEIVED" Oct 20, 2004]
 
October 20, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
Re:    Ginger Sanchez
File:   22016444
 
We are in receipt of your notice dated October 14, 2004, stating that you have not received our response to the unresolved complaint.  Please note that our response was mailed to your office on October 11, 2004.  I have attached another copy for your review.  Our reply has probably crossed in the mail with your subsequent request.
 
Please let us know if further information is required.
 
Sincerely
 
[signed]
Margaret K. Bath
Officer Manager [Five Corners Veterinary Hospital]
 
Exhibit #112: [this item is date-stamped by the Better Business Bureau as "RECEIVED" Oct 20, 2004]
 
October 11, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
Re:    Ginger Sanchez
File:  22016444
 
We are in receipt of the rebuttal by Ms. Sanchez.  To aid in the reply, we have separated the issues presented by Ms. Sanchez and will address each individually.
 
1.  Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Nurnane/Phoenix Lab.
 
We have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which include any conversation(s) between Dr. Murnane and Dr. Hammond.  Specifically, the only conversation between Dr. Hammond and Dr. Murnane was on May 27, 2004 regarding the release of the remains and to be sure the release is authorized.  This was documented in the medical records, which has been previously provided to Ms. Sanchez.
2.    Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Williams/Burien Veterinary Hospital.
Again, we have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which would include any conversation that took place.  Dr. Hammond and Dr. Williams did not consult regarding Romy.  Ms. Sanchez came to Five Corners Veterinary Hospital on an emergency basis advising that her dog, Romy, stopped eating and was listless.  Ms. Sanchez advised that she was a client of Burien Veterinary Hospital.  As part of our customary emergency procedure, we faxed Burien Veterinary Hospital a Case Summary describing presenting complaint, history and emergency medical treatment.  A copy of this Case Summary was provided to Ms. Sanchez.
3.    Any and all contact between/amongst the parties named here and Pfizer.
There was no contact between Dr. Hammond and Pfizer.  While Ms. Sanchez shared that Romy was on Rimadyl for arthritis, she further advised that she stopped treating Romy with the Rimadyl and that, it was her opinion that Romy seemed to improve.
4.    An itemized billing of the $1,100.00 necropsy charges.
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital charged Ms. Sanchez $990.00 for the necropsy.  The actual invoice was $1,100.00 less a senior discount of $110.00.  Ms. Sanchez has advised that she was originally advised that she was originally advised by Dr. Meyer that the charge for this service would be around $500.00 but would need to contact the laboratory to determine the exact price.  The following morning our office contacted the laboratory to determine the exact price and was advised of the specific necropsy fee.  Our office contacted Ms. Sanchez and advised her of the $1,100.00 fee and Ms. Sanchez authorized us to proceed.  Please note that this is not a service that Five Corners Veterinary Hospital commonly provides, therefore, we had to contact the laboratory directly for an actual quote.
5.    All of the demanded information in the faxed demand letters sent to both parties.
We have provided Ms. Sanchez all copies of medical and laboratory records.  This included the names of all the drugs used in Romy's treatment.
6.    The current status of all of my dog's bits and pieces as previously demanded.
Ms. Sanchez would need to work directly with Phoenix Central Laboratory regarding this request.
7.    A full refund of monies paid to Five Corners.
Ms. Sanchez was presented an initial estimate for medical treatment for Romy, which she approved with her signature.  Subsequent medical treatment and associated costs was discussed with the owner who approved over the telephone by authorizing payment on her credit card.
8.    A replacement dog of like quality/training and a written apology from both parties that includes an explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory.
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital does not provide replacement animals.  In reference explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory, this information would need to be provided by Phoenix.
9.    Why Hammond/Five Corners did NOT contact Pfizer of[or] IF they did, when they did and for what purpose.
According to Dr. Hammond, there was no request to contact Pfizer nor was there evidence of any medical connection between Romy's symptoms presented to Five Corners being related to Rimadyl administration.
10.    Upon what basis Dr. Hammond/Five Corners utilized the alleged services of Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Central Laboratory and the credentials of said laboratory.
At the request of Ms. Sanchez, Dr. Meyer of Five Corners Veterinary Hospital arranged for a necropsy to be completed by Phoenix Central Laboratory.  Phoenix Central Laboratory can provide their credentials.
11.    Whether Ms. Jewett is actually and officially employed by Phoenix Central Laboratory.
This should be directed to Phoenix Central Laboratory.
12.    What authority Phoenix Central Laboratory is authorized to do business in the State of Washington.
Again, this question should be directed to Phoenix Central Laboratory.
As listed above, we have provided Ms. Sanchez with copies of all medical records, laboratory reports, necropsy report from Phoenix Central Laboratory and all invoices related to this case.  Additionally, we have advised Ms. Sanchez that she should contact Phoenix Central Laboratory directly regarding obtaining access to Romy and any questions regarding the services they provided.
 
Sincerely,
 
[signed]
Melanie W. Caviness, D.V.M.
Medical Director
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
    and
[signed]
Margaret K. Baty
Operations Manager
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
 
POSTED 11/01/04:
11/01/04
 
Better Business Bureau
[there was no e-mail address provided for: Jennifer Mitten]
 
Re: CASE #22016444 - Sanchez vs. Hammond/Five Corners
 
Apparently due to the length of my response to the Hammond/Five Corners "rebuttal", I was not able to use the website to post my response.  I am e-mailing my response to you so that you have it in a timely manner before the deadline given to me expires.  Please advise by return e-mail, or ASAP, that you received this e-mail response and advise if the BBB has accepted same.  Thank you.
 
Ginger Sanchez
 
*****
 
The below three [3] items are true copies of the "rebuttal letter" and accompanying cover letter of the Hammond/Five Corners group addressed to the Better Business Bureau regarding the complaint of Ginger Sanchez, Case#22016444 as provided to Ginger Sanchez by the Better Business Bureau with the BBB cover letter by U.S. Mail received 10/29/04 and postmarked 10/27/04 and which are now 'labeled' and hereby assigned Exhibit# 110, #111 and #112 as indicated, for submission to the Washington State, Veterinary Board of Governors, Case#2004-04-0008 VT against Williams/BVH, Hammond/Meyer/Baty/Five Corners and Murnane/Jewett/Phoenix Central Lab and are being provided to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors as "Part 9" of the Sanchez complaint filed 4/28/04 and currently still under investigation.
============================================
 
[True "clean" copy of item]
Exhibit #110 [cover letter from the Better Business Bureau accompanying Exhibits #111 and #112].
 
October 27, 2004
 
Ginger Sanchez
637 South 159th Street
Seattle, WA  98148
 
re: Case # 22016444: Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
 
The Better Business Bureau (BBB) has received a response from the business in the above-referenced complaint.  Please review this response to your complaint and advise us of your position in the matter by November 6, 2004.  If we do not hear back from you, the BBB will assume you are satisfied and will close your complaint.
 
The details of the complaint (including the business' response) are included on the reverse.  Please be sure to indicate whether the business' response has resolved the complaint.
 
We encourage you to use our ONLINE COMPLAINT system to respond to this complaint.  The following URL (website address) will take you directly to the complaint.  You will be able to enter your response directly on our website.
 
If you are unable to respond using the internet, then please respond in writing to the address above or Fax to (206) 431-2200.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Jennifer Mitten
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
 
==============================================
 
[True "clean" copy of item]
Exhibit#111:
October 20, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
Re:    Ginger Sanchez
File:   22016444
 
We are in receipt of your notice dated October 14, 2004, stating that you have not received our response to the unresolved complaint.  Please note that our response was mailed to you on October 11, 2004.  I have attached another copy for your review.  Our reply has probably crossed in the mail with your subsequent request.
 
Please let us know if further information is required.
 
Sincerely
 
[signed]
Margaret K. Baty
Officer Manager [Five Corners Veterinary Hospital]
================================================
 
[True "clean" copy of item]
Exhibit #112: [this item is date-stamped by the Better Business Bureau as "RECEIVED" Oct 20, 2004]
 
October 11, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
We are in receipt of the rebuttal by Ms. Sanchez.  To aid in the reply, we have separated the issues presented by Ms. Sanchez and will address each individually.
 
1.  Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Nurnane/Phoenix Lab.
 
We have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which include any conversation(s) between Dr. Murnane and Dr. Hammond.  Specifically, the only conversation between Dr. Hammond and Dr. Murnane was on May 27, 2004 regarding the release of the remains and to be sure the release is authorized.  This was documented in the medical records, which has been previously provided to Ms. Sanchez.
2.    Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners  Dr. Williams/Burien Veterinary Hospital.
Again, we have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which would include any conversation that took place.  Dr. Hammond and Dr. Williams did not consult regarding Romy.  Ms. Sanchez came to Five Corners Veterinary Hospital on an emergency basis advising that her dog, Romy, stopped eating and was listless.  Ms. Sanchez advised that she was a client of Burien Veterinary Hospital.  As part of our customary emergency procedure, we faxed Burien Veterinary Hospital a Case Summary describing presenting complaint, history and emergency medical treatment.  A copy of this Case Summary was provided to Ms. Sanchez.
3.    Any and all contact between/amongst the parties named here and Pfizer.
There was no contact between Dr. Hammond and Pfizer.  While Ms. Sanchez shared that Romy was on Rimadyl for arthritis, she further advised that she stopped treating Romy with the Rimadyl and that, it was her opinion that Romy seemed to improve.
4.    An itemized billing of the $1,100.00 necropsy charges.
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital charged Ms. Sanchez $990.00 for the necropsy.  The actual invoice was $1,100.00 less a senior discount of $110.00.  Ms. Sanchez has advised that she was originally advised that she was originally advised by Dr. Meyer that the charge for this service would be around $500.00 but would need to contact the laboratory to determine the exact price.  The following morning our office contacted the laboratory to determine the exact price and was advised of the specific necropsy fee.  Our office contacted Ms. Sanchez and advised her of the $1,100.00 fee and Ms. Sanchez authorized us to proceed.  Please note that this is not a service that Five Corners Veterinary Hospital commonly provides, therefore, we had to contact the laboratory directly for an actual quote.
5.    All of the demanded information in the faxed demand letters sent to both parties.
We have provided Ms. Sanchez all copies of medical and laboratory records.  This included the names of all the drugs used in Romy's treatment.
6.    The current status of my dog's bits and pieces as previously demanded.
Ms. Sanchez would need to work directly with Phoenix Central Laboratory regarding this request.
7.    A full refund of monies paid to Five Corners.
Ms. Sanchez was presented an initial estimate for medical treatment for Romy, which she approved with her signature.  Subsequent medical treatment and associated costs was discussed with the owner who approved over the telephone by authorizing payment on her credit card.
8.    A replacement dog of like quality/training and a written apology from both parties that includes an explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory.
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital does not provide replacement animals.  In reference explanation of why there is no BBB listing for the Phoenix Central Laboratory, this information would need to be provided by Phoenix.
9.    Why Hammond/Five Corners did NOT contact Pfizer of[or] IF they did, when they did and for what purpose.
According to Dr. Hammond, there was no request to contact Pfizer nor was there evidence of any medical connection between Romy's symptoms presented to Five Corners being related to Rimadyl administration.
10.    Upon what basis Dr. Hammond/Five Corners utilized the alleged services of Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Central Laboratory and the credentials of said laboratory.
At the request of Ms. Sanchez, Dr. Meyer of Five Corners Veterinary Hospital arranged for a necropsy to be completed by Phoenix Central Laboratory.  Phoenix Central Laboratory can provide their credentials.
11.    Whether Ms. Jewett is actually and officially employed by Phoenix Central Laboratory.
This should be directed to Phoenix Central Laboratory.
12.    What authority Phoenix Central Laboratory is authorized to do business in the State of Washington.
Again, this question should be directed to Phoenix Central Laboratory.
As listed above, we have provided Ms. Sanchez with copies of all medical records, laboratory reports, necropsy report from Phoenix Central Laboratory and all invoices related to this case.  Additionally, we have advised Ms. Sanchez that she should contact Phoenix Central Laboratory directly regarding obtaining access to Romy and any questions regarding the services they provide.
 
Sincerely,
[signed]
Melanie W. Caviness, D.V.M.
Medical Director
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
    and
[signed]
Margaret K. Baty
Operations Manager
Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
=========================================================
 
******
Sanchez Response to Rebuttal of Hammond/Five Corners filed 11/01/04:
 
Below are the Sanchez "responses to Five Corners, et. al, rebuttals" for both the BBB and the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors.  As I do not believe that the BBB ONLINE website recognizes "RED" writing, in front of each item I respond to will appear "RESPONSE:" for readability. In addition to the below documents being provided to the BBB online at their website, a complete copy of this e-mail is being sent via e-mail to both the BBB and to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors as Add-On #9 to the Complaint filed with them in Case# 2004-04-0008 VT which is under investigation.  As the BBB website is/was apparently NOT able to accept the full Sanchez Response, it is being e-mailed to the BBB folks at dupont.bbb@hurdmanivr.com, and deborah@thebbb.org this date, 11/01/04.
 
Ginger Sanchez
e-Mail [ONLY]: GingerLSanchez@aol.com
 
=======================================================
 
[True copy of item with Sanchez Responses]
Exhibit #110 [cover letter from the Better Business Bureau accompanying Exhibits #111 and #112].
 
October 27, 2004
 
Ginger Sanchez
637 South 159th Street
Seattle, WA  98148
 
re: Case # 22016444: Five Corners Veterinary Hospital
 
The Better Business Bureau (BBB) has received a response from the business in the above-referenced complaint.  Please review this response to your complaint and advise us of your position in the matter by November 6, 2004.  If we do not hear back from you, the BBB will assume you are satisfied and will close your complaint. 
 
RESPONSE/QUESTION TO BBB: It would appear that I [Sanchez] am now given eight [8] days in order respond in a "timely manner", whereas the Hammond/Five Corners group has apparently been chronically given some sort of extensions - so I would like to know why that is:
10/27/04    Manually Forward Final Response to Consumer
10/27/04    Re-Open Complaint
10/13/04    Case Closed UNRESOLVED
                      Report as of 10/13/2004: Based on BBB files, this company has an unsatisfactory record with the Bureau due to two or more unresolved complaints.
10/13/04    Inform Business - Case Closed UNRESOLVED
10/13/04    Inform Business - Case Closed UNRESOLVED
10/13/04    Bureau Judged complaint to be closed UNRESOLVED
10/13/04    No Response from Business re: Consumer Rebuttal
09/27/04    Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business
09/27/04    Re-Open Complaint
09/22/04    Manually Forward Business response to Consumer 
09/22/04    Receive Business Response
09/15/04    NMBR-Resend Complaint to Business [*** We are waiting for the business to respond. They have until September 25, 2004 to respond to this complaint. If they do not respond the complaint will be closed and this will be reflected in their record.]                      
09/15/04    NMBR- No response to first notice to business
08/27/04    Inform Business of the Complaint [***We are waiting for the business to respond. They have until September 13, 2004 to respond to this complaint. If they do not respond the complaint will be closed and this will be reflected in their record.] 
08/27/04    Send acknowledgement to Consumer
08/27/04    Complaint Validated by BBB Operator
08/26/04    Complaint Received by BBB 
The details of the complaint (including the business' response) are included on the reverse.  Please be sure to indicate whether the business' response has resolved the complaint. 
RESPONSE/NOTE TO THE BBB: 10/30/04: TRUST ME - I AM NOT "SATISFIED". Ginger Sanchez e-Mail [ONLY]: GingerLSanchez@aol.com
We encourage you to use our ONLINE COMPLAINT system to respond to this complaint.  The following URL (website address) will take you directly to the complaint.  You will be able to enter your response directly on our website.
If you are unable to respond using the internet, then please respond in writing to the address above or Fax to (206) 431-2200.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Jennifer Mitten
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
 
=========================================================
[True copy of item with Sanchez Responses]
Exhibit#111:[this item is date-stamped by the Better Business Bureau as "RECEIVED" Oct 20, 2004]
 
October 20, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
Re:    Ginger Sanchez
File:   22016444
 
We are in receipt of your notice dated October 14, 2004, stating that you have not received our response to the unresolved complaint.  Please note that our response was mailed to your office on October 11, 2004.  I have attached another copy for your review.  Our reply has probably crossed in the mail with your subsequent request.
RESPONSE/QUESTION FOR BBB: Please advise if you ever received the ORIGINAL "rebuttal" letter dated 10/11/04 and allegedly mailed, and IF SO, what the actual postmarked date on the envelope was and what date YOU actually received it.  Thank you. 
Please let us know if further information is required.
 
Sincerely
 
[signed]
Margaret K. Baty
Officer Manager [Five Corners Veterinary Hospital]
 
 
[True copy of item with Sanchez Responses]
Exhibit #112: [this item is date-stamped by the Better Business Bureau as "RECEIVED" Oct 20, 2004]
 
October 11, 2004
 
Deborah Schenk
Better Business Bureau
Complaint Department
PO Box 1000
Dupont, WA  98327
 
Dear Ms. Schenk:
 
Re:    Ginger Sanchez
File:  22016444
 
We are in receipt of the rebuttal by Ms. Sanchez.  To aid in the reply, we have separated the issues presented by Ms. Sanchez and will address each individually.
 
1.  Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Murnane/Phoenix Lab.
 
We have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which include any conversation(s) between Dr. Murnane and Dr. Hammond.
SANCHEZ RESPONSE: Hammond/Five Corners has not been asked about medical records that I have ALREADY received which might or might not include any conversations between Dr. Murnane and Dr. Hammond.
 
Hammond/Five Corners has continuously been asked and is AGAIN asked to produce ANYTHING that would contain ALL CONTACTS OF ANY SORT, such as notes, recordings, memos, etc.
 
If there were NO CONTACTS of ANY sort/type ever made between the Hammond/Five Corners group and the Murnane/Phoenix Lab group OTHER than such information already contained in the medical records that WERE provided to Sanchez, i.e. NEVER any phone calls, no correspondence, no notes of records or information of any sort provided to Murnane/Phoenix Central Lab, it should not be difficult for the Hammond/Five Corners group to put that in writing, sign it and provide it to me, UNLESS they are covering up something and/or have provided different and/or 'conflicting information' to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors
 
OR ALTERNATIVELY, AGAIN AS BEFORE, THE MIDDLE GROUND OFFER is ONCE AGAIN: a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE WRITTEN and SIGNED explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will NOT provide this, if they CONTINUE to fail/refuse to provide this item.
Specifically, the only conversation between Dr. Hammond and Dr. Murnane was on May 27, 2004 regarding the release of the remains and to be sure the release is authorized. 
 
SANCHEZ RESPONSE [and statement NOW being submitted to WA VET Board Part #9 Add-On and as Exhibit #113]: As I do not HAVE anything in writing that states, confirms and/or describes, including the date(s), times(s) and all parties involved as well as the CONTENTS of ANY conversations, between either DVM Hammond and DVM Murnane or the Hammond/Five Corners group and the Murnane/Phoenix Central Lab group, I once AGAIN demand that such information be PRODUCED. Since Hammond/Five Corners has now ADMITTED here that such conversation(s) took place, it should not be difficult for the Hammond/Five Corners group to put that in writing, sign it and provide it to me, UNLESS they are covering up something and/or have provided different and/or 'conflicting information' to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors OR
 
ALTERNATIVELY, AGAIN AS BEFORE, THE MIDDLE GROUND OFFER is ONCE AGAIN: a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE WRITTEN and SIGNED explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will NOT provide this, if they CONTINUE to fail/refuse to provide this item. 
 
This was documented in the medical records, which has been previously provided to Ms. Sanchez. 
 
SANCHEZ RESPONSE [and statement being provided to WA Vwt Board as Add-On #9]:  there is NOTHING other than one scribbled note in the Hammond/Five Corners "Progress Notes" [WA Vet Board Exhibit #6]  indicating ANY contact with Murname/PCL.  IF there were NEVER any phone calls, no correspondence, no notes of records or information of any sort provided to Murnane/PCL other than that outlined, it should not be difficult for the Hammond/Five Corners group to put that in writing, sign it and provide it to me, UNLESS they are covering up something and/or have provided different and/or 'conflicting information' to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors OR
 
ALTERNATIVELY, AGAIN AS BEFORE, that THE MIDDLE GROUND OFFER is ONCE AGAIN: a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE WRITTEN and SIGNED explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will NOT provide this, if they CONTINUE to fail/refuse to provide this item. 
2.    Complete written record of all contacts and the substance of such contacts between Dr. Hammond/Five Corners and Dr. Williams/Burien Veterinary Hospital.
Again, we have provided Ms. Sanchez with all medical records, which would include any conversation that took place. 
 
SANCHEZ RESPONSE [and statement being provided to WA Vet Board as Part #9 and Exhibit #114]: Hammond/Five Corners has not been asked about medical records that I have already received which might or might not include any conversations between the Hammond/Five Corners group and Williams/BVH.
 
Hammond/Five Corners has continuously been asked and is AGAIN asked to produce ANYTHING that would contain ALL CONTACTS OF ANY SORT, such as notes, recordings, memos, etc.
 
If there were NEVER ANY CONTACTS of ANY sort/type ever made and/or conducted between the Hammond/Five Corners group and Williams/BVH  i.e. NEVER any phone calls, no correspondence, no notes of records or information of any sort provided to Williams/BVH by the Hammond/Five Corners group, it should not be difficult for the Hammond/Five Corners group to put that in writing, sign it and provide it to me, UNLESS they are covering up something and/or have provided different and/or 'conflicting information' to the State of Washington, Veterinary Board of Governors OR
 
ALTERNATIVELY, AGAIN AS BEFORE, THE MIDDLE GROUND OFFER is ONCE AGAIN: a TRUTHFUL and COMPLETE WRITTEN and SIGNED explanation as to why Hammond/Five Corners will NOT provide this, if they CONTINUE to fail/refuse to provide this item. 
 
Ms. Sanchez came to Five Corners Veterinary Hospital on an emergency basis advising that her dog, Romy, stopped eating and was listless. 
 
SANCHEZ RESPONSE: When I went to Five Corners Veterinary Hospital on the emergency basis I STRONGLY ADVISED that my dog, Romy, was experiencing a MASSIVE TOXIC REACTION TO RIMADYL.  I advised that ROMI had been preseribed/dispensed RIMADYL on 4/13/04, one tablet twice a day.  That she began having problems with refusing to eat and being listless and that on 4/20/04 she'd had what appeared to be seizures/strokes, was unable to stand or walk and would not leave her crate.  I advised that I had go