Pet owners at risk of being ripped off by private equity firms as vet ownership rules change
Pet owners at risk of being ripped off by private equity firms as vet ownership rules change | Pets | The Guardian Skip to main content Skip to navigation Close dialogue 1 / 3 Next image Previous image Toggle caption Print subscriptions Newsletters Sign in US US edition UK edition Australia edition Europe edition International edition The Guardian - Back to home The Guardian News Opinion Sport Culture Lifestyle Show more Hide expanded menu News View all News US news US politics Midterms 2026 World news Climate crisis Middle East Ukraine US immigration Soccer Business Environment Tech Science Newsletters The Filter Wellness Opinion View all Opinion The Guardian view Columnists Letters Opinion videos Cartoons Sport View all Sport Soccer NFL Tennis MLB MLS NBA WNBA NHL F1 Golf Culture View all Culture Film Books Music Art & design TV & radio Stage Classical Games Design a better world Lifestyle View all Lifestyle The Filter Wellness Fashion Food Recipes Love & sex Home & garden Health & fitness Family Travel Money Search input google-search Search Support us Print subscriptions Newsletters Download the app Search jobs Digital Archive Guardian Licensing Live events About Us The Guardian app Video Podcasts Pictures Inside the Guardian Guardian Weekly Crosswords Wordiply Corrections Tips Search input google-search Search Search jobs Digital Archive Guardian Licensing Live events About Us The Filter Wellness Fashion Food Recipes Love & sex Home & garden Health & fitness Family Travel Money Investigations have found pet owners pay 16% more on average at large vet groups compared to independent practices. Photograph: Yelena Shander/Getty View image in fullscreen Investigations have found pet owners pay 16% more on average at large vet groups compared to independent practices. Photograph: Yelena Shander/Getty Pets Pet owners at risk of being ripped off by private equity firms as vet ownership rules change Critics say changes by CMA will allow multinationals to obscure their ownership of vet practices Helena Horton Sun 30 Aug 2026 04.00 EDT Last modified on Sun 30 Aug 2026 08.46 EDT Share Prefer the Guardian on Google Pet owners have been warned that they could be unknowingly ripped off by private equity firms who have bought local vet clinics, after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) removed requirements for multinational companies to disclose which practices they own. The CMA recently ran an investigation into the monopolisation of vet practices , and found that the lack of competition and transparency of ownership had led to high prices and a lack of information for customers. Pet owners were often unaware their local vet practice could be owned by an international private equity company. It revealed pet owners pay 16.6% more on average at large vet groups than at independent practices. It said the £6.3bn market was not fit for purpose and needed to be modernised. View image in fullscreen More than 60% of veterinary practices are owned in whole or in part by six groups. Photograph: Monty Rakusen/Getty Images As a result, the CMA and ministers announced new rules in a white paper earlier this summer proposing capping prescriptions for pet medicine at £21 and more transparency over ownership. But the Progressive Veterinary Association (PVA), made up of a group of vets, has threatened the government body with a judicial review, after the CMA changed the wording in its plans in a way the PVA says allows multinational companies to obscure their ownership of vet practices. More than 60% of veterinary practices are owned in whole or in part by six groups: CVS, Pets at Home, Medivet, IVC and VetPartners, which are owned by private equity investors; and Linnaeus, whose parent company is Mars Petcare, a subsidiary of the US confectionery group Mars. Rather than the name of one of the large multinational companies or private equity investors being listed as the owner of the vet practice, the new rules will allow corporates to use a brand name, or the name of the original independent practice. The initial wording of the orders from the CMA said that vets had to disclose their ownership and name the “corporate vet group”. This language has been softened to “network or group”, meaning the name of the vet practice or subsidiary of the company could be named, instead of the large conglomerate. View image in fullscreen Vets argue that pet owners have the right to know if their local veterinary practice is owned by a large conglomerate. Photograph: Catherine Falls Commercial/Getty Images Dr Iain McGill, a director of the PVA, told the Guardian: “This is bad news for pet-owners and their animals. Ultimately, large corporations would be allowed to hide the fact that they are the ultimate controller of local vet practices and operate behind sometimes misleading brand names. “Where they have a choice, pet owners often prefer independent practices, which the CMA found, on average, to be cheaper th