New microchip law ?

RE: New microchip law ?

Sal the 1st — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:30:37 GMT

thanks for that - it is the conclusion I have come to as well. Our responsibility ends with the reporting of the chip

I am guessing we cant give keeper / dog details because of this

http://www.rcvs.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/client-confidentiality/

but if the chip has been previously registered (and that is still an if) then the keeper /dog will be on a data base somewhere and if (there's another if) the details have been kept up to date ie when a dog has been rehomed or sold for a couple of quid down the pub then there shouldn't be a problem for defra to contact the owner?

RE: New microchip law ?

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 08:51:54 GMT

[quote user="Laura Ringsell"]Thanks for that Arlo, so we report it....then what.[/quote]

Then nothing!

What I mean is, this law does not seem to oblige you to do anything further whatsoever.

As far as I know (someone tell me if they know otherwise), veterinary surgeons and nurses are not expected to police the law about microchips any more than you are required to make a citizen's arrest if you catch someone drink driving in a lime green shirt.

So my interpretation is that your responsibility ends when you've reported a duff chip here:

https://www.vmd.defra.gov.uk/microchipeventreporting/

(and looking at this, I note you are not asked to give the identifying owner/dog details).

Of course, common sense dictates that you advise the owner, remind them of their obligation under the new law, and advise them what it will cost for you to find / remove the duff chip and implant a new one.

If they choose to ignore your advice, that's their lookout, surely? And so far, I see no suggestion that you're at any risk if they do. As I say, you are only obliged to report the duff chip. Full stop.

RE: New microchip law ?

Laura Ringsell — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 07:50:34 GMT

Thanks for that Arlo, so we report it....then what. With the amount of dodgy Virbac chips that we have replaced, some animals are now on 3, the Secretary of State is going to be very busy ! We are still potentially going to end up with a lot of un-microchipped dogs for one reason or other. Nonsense regulation, impossible to enforce, this has not been thought out at all. BP simmering now!

RE: New microchip law ?

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 06:40:39 GMT

[quote user="Laura Ringsell"]

Were any of you at BSAVA and able to hear this first hand and clarify. I just can't get my head around it? So we scan a dog, it doesn't have a microchip or chip has moved or failed, we say another one is required......what if the owner says no, where on earth do we stand or am I misreading this?http://vnonline.co.uk/vn/news/13160/Controversial-microchip-law-revealed[/quote]

[quote user="Sal the 1st"] is this just another article to push up people's blood pressure for no good reason?[/quote]

Sal the 1st, Laura Ringsell - yes, my reading of this is that it is an article to push up blood pressure for no good reason.

I'm no lawyer, but the draft regs here seem to say one thing and one thing only:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2015/9780111125243

"Anyone who identifies an adverse reaction to a microchip or the failure of a microchip must report that reaction or failure to the Secretary of State."

It doesn't say you have to go looking for failed #microchips and scanning every Meg, Nip and Buddy. It doesn't say that if you scan an animal and there is no response from a chip, that means the chip has failed and you have to x-ray the animal to find where it has gone and report it.

It JUST says that if you identify a failed chip or an adverse reaction, you need to report it.

RE: New microchip law ?

Ben Ogden — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:03:03 GMT

It would be in the owners best interest to know if their dog is micro chipped, if the chip is functional and if the information is up to date. With that, surely it is the owners responsibility to ensure a functional chip with current information ?

Shouldn't our involvement runs as deep as 'scan on request'? In practice we scan new puppies and newly registered dogs, we wouldn't have time to scan every dog and try and find the details on the various databases.

This legislation is an answer to a question nobody asked, good luck enforcing it....

RE: New microchip law ?

Sal the 1st — Wed, 15 Apr 2015 21:52:09 GMT

tried asking the vets I was working with today - they don't seem to be concerned by it

RE: New microchip law ?

Laura Ringsell — Wed, 15 Apr 2015 20:59:46 GMT

Thanks for your thoughts Sal, hopefully someone who heard the talk at BSAVA will enlighten us. Could all be very concerning.....

RE: New microchip law ?

Sal the 1st — Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:24:39 GMT

I cannot find any other reference to this fine - so it must be a new thing?

https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/protecting-animal-welfare/supporting-pages/dog-microchipping

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368474/PCDOCS-_596562-v2-VMD_Leaflet_017_A_-_VMD_s_Microchip_Adverse_Event_Reporting_Scheme.PDF

I did note the last comments on the vnonline article

Dr Sally Everitt, BSAVA's head of scientific policy said she had received an explanatory email from Defra since the rule came into force. It stated that the government would not expect prosecutions to be carried out through the magistrates courts. Such cases would instead be dealt with by the RCVS disciplinary procedure

Gordon Hockey, head of the RCVS' professional conduct department, said he felt it unlikely that the college would be dealing with a steady stream of cases:

“I don’t think vets were even on their radar when this legislation was drafted. It may just be one of things that raises concerns in the profession that nobody else is worried about."

RCVS president Stuart Reid said his colleagues on the preliminary investigation and disciplinary committees would not consider these cases worth pursuing: “It is unrealistic to believe that they would identify this a professional conduct matter."

so if the RCVS don't see this a professional conduct matter and we are being told that the government don't expect prosecution through the magistrates court but expect the RCVS to deal with it ... its about as clear as mud- is this just another article to push up people's blood pressure for no good reason? or should we be concerned? If the former I wish vnonline would pack it in as they are losing all credibility in my book. I would still like to find more information on this.

RE: New microchip law ?

Sal the 1st — Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:10:18 GMT

Yes I read this last night. So many questions. ie why are vets and nurses being threatened with being fined for failing to report, how has this suddenly become our responsibility? what happens with some of the rehoming centres who dont even have a chip reader? or the people that have paid to have a chip implanted at a pet shop and the chip hasn't been registered anywhere? or people who have bought a chip on the internet and done it themselves and again not registered the chip. In both cases the dog would be chipped but not registered to a keeper - would that become our responsibility as well?

I have seen a cat whose chip is lying over its ribs and is nowhere near its scruff - we found it on xray - thankfully its a cat and not the species of interest.

I would like to read more about this from another source if possible - I don't entirely trust vnonline articles anymore, unless the information is backed from another source