BBB Accredited Business since
Phone: (610) 252-8276 Fax: (610) 252-8541 2015 Sullivan Trl, Easton, PA 18040
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
Request a Quote
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that Easton Animal Hospital meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.
BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.
Reason for Rating
BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.
Factors that raised the rating for Easton Animal Hospital include:
- Length of time business has been operating
- Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
- Response to 1 complaint(s) filed against business
- Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business
Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details
|Complaint Type||Total Closed Complaints|
|Problems with Product/Service||1|
|Total Closed Complaints||1|
Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews
|Customer Experience||Total Customer Reviews|
|Total Customer Reviews||0|
Licensing, Bonding or Registration
This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.
These agencies may include:
Department of State-PA
PO Box 2649, Harrisburg PA 17105
Phone Number: 717-787-8503
The number is BV012741.
Department of State-PA
PO Box 2649, Harrisburg PA 17105
Phone Number: 717-787-8503
The number is BV012322.
Type of Entity
Limited Liability Company (LLC)
Business ManagementMr. Glenn Nehoda, Owner Ms. Phyllis Potter, Office Manager
2015 Sullivan Trl
Easton, PA 18040 Directions
What is a BBB Business Review?
We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.
About BBB Business Review Content & Services:
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
Types of Complaints Handled by BBB
BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:
- Advertising or Sales
- Billing or Collection
- Problems with Products or Services
- Guarantee or Warranty
We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.
BBB Complaint Process
Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
What is BBB Advertising Review?
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
What government actions does BBB report on?
BBB reports on known government actions that are relevant to the business's marketplace dealings with the public.
BBB Reporting Policy
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.
BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.
BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.
Complaint Trends - Last 3 Years
Customer Review Trends
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.
|Customer Review Experience||Value|
|Positive Review||5 points per review|
|Neutral Review||3 points per review|
|Negative Review||1 point per review|
BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
BBB Letter Grade Scale
Star Rating scale
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: My dog **** was brought in to Easton Animal Hospital for an emergency visit, as she had vomited and gone to the bathroom on our home several times while we were out of the house. The vet went over **** and took an x-ray and determined that she had bladder stones...something that she's had issues with before and had surgery for about two years ago. The vet said that the stones had come back...something we had expected at some point, so we weren't surprised, although the symptoms were much different this time. They sent **** home with some medication, but by the next morning she was feeling much worse and not eating at all. My wife took her back to Easton Animal Hospital where they said the surgery to remove the stones was necessary. Of course we gave them the go-ahead as we didn't want to see our dog suffering. They gave us a low estimate and a high estimate, with the understanding that they're not to exceed the high estimate without prior authorization. During the surgery, the vet called my wife and told her that **** had pancreatitis. She said nothing of additional charges as a result. When my wife went to pick **** up the next day, the bill was over $500 more! The vet, who was not in at the time got on the phone and was annoyed that she had to have the discussion, and told my wife that she should have "inferred from the diagnosis that it would cost more." First of all, they did not get any authorization, and secondly, a diagnosis is very far from an estimate. We reluctantly paid, but the front desk people refused to discharge **** with any medication out of spite, although they did give us written prescriptions to have filled at a local pharmacy. This took several hours with our dog in awful pain. How can a veterinarian who is in the business of helping animals do something so inhumane as withholding medication? **** spent the entire night crying in pain, and by the next morning was not eating and her eyes looked glassy. She was rushed to a 24 hour emergency facility where they admitted her immediately and said she had a severe case of pancreatitis that was exacerbated by the surgery, and wasn't being treated properly to begin with. She was also going into shock from the terrible pain. **** spent the next three days under round-the-clock care on IV antibiotics and fluids, and finally came home in much better condition, another $3,000 later. The fact that Easton Animal Hospital misdiagnosed her initial ailment, performed unnecessary surgery and didn't treat the pancreatitis properly was a huge comedy of errors. They only had a vet tech call and check on her twice the first day, and not an actual doctor! I kept telling them that she wasn't eating and was in horrible pain and they told me that this was normal! If we didn't act and take her somewhere else, she most definitely would have died. I understand mistakes can happen, but this was completely avoidable. Had the doctor done the proper blood work and diagnosed her with pancreatitis before performing surgery, we might not have had to go through this.
Desired Settlement: I would like our money refunded from the two visits on Monday July 28, and the surgery performed on July 29. This is approximately $2,400. The inadequate treatment subsequently cost us another $3,000 at another animal hospital to rectify and save our dog's life.
To Whom it May Concern:
Easton Animal Hospital is in receipt of *** *.’s complaint (ID# ********) filed with your office regarding his dog ****. Easton Animal Hospital (EAH) has prepared this response to address the claims made by *** *. The main purpose of preparing this response is to provide an understanding of why EAH will not consider issuing the refund requested by *** *. for the initial appointment, the surgery, and the follow-up care. The following two paragraphs provide a summary of the circumstances surrounding EAH’s interaction with **** and her owners. Dr. C**** had exclusive interaction with **** *.; other staff members of EAH had limited interaction with *** *. while **** was under our care, then more extensive interaction after her discharge.
Dr. C**** saw **** on Monday, July 28, 2014 for a scheduled sick-patient visit. **** was brought to EAH by *** *.’s parents for vomiting and bloody diarrhea that reportedly started that morning. Dr. C**** conducted a thorough physical examination and ordered X-rays, a urinalysis, and blood test to check for anemia and dehydration. Dr. C**** reviewed the X-rays, which revealed bladder stones and an opacity in the intestines suspicious for a potential blockage or tumor. Urinalysis indicated a urinary tract infection. **** had a history of bladder stones, of the type which could only be treated with surgical removal. Dr. C**** provided palliative treatment to **** for the vomiting, diarrhea, and urinary tract infection with instructions for feeding a bland diet and watching for worsening of gastrointestinal (GI) signs, which would require **** to be rechecked and additional diagnostics to be done. Dr. C**** recommended having the bladder stones removed surgically (cystotomy), as there is no medical (pharmaceutical) alternative for the type of stone she had historically. EAH staff provided a verbal estimate of $1200-$1500 to **** *. that same evening via phone for the cystotomy, which was required to remove the bladder stones. An itemized estimate for this procedure (from which the verbal estimate was quoted) was placed in ****’s file.
**** *. returned the following day with **** for a recheck appointment when her condition did not improve. Dr. C**** recommended proceeding with the cystotomy to remove the bladder stones, as it would also provide the opportunity to explore the abdomen for the cause of ****’s illness. Dr. C**** discussed with **** *. the proposed cystotomy and additional exploratory and informed her that the original estimate was only for the cystotomy. Dr. C**** informed **** *. that depending on what was found during the exploratory portion of the surgery, her cost would be higher. **** *. consented to the surgery and follow-up care in writing prior to **** being admitted for surgery. Dr. C**** removed the bladder stones. The exploratory portion of the surgery revealed an inconsequential mass outside the intestinal wall (above-mentioned opacity seen in X-ray) and an inflamed pancreas. Dr. C**** informed **** *. of the results of the surgery, the need for an additional blood test (cPL) to confirm the suspicion of pancreatitis, and the need for additional hospitalization and medical treatment for pancreatitis. Mrs. K. consented verbally to the additional work in a post-operative discussion with Dr. C**** on July 29, 2014. **** was treated with a professional standard of care in accordance with **** *.’s consent. Dr. Nankman discharged **** on Thursday evening, July 31, 2014 with prescriptions for an antibiotic, an appetite stimulant, anti-vomiting, anti-diarrheal, and pain medications.
The following are EAH’s responses to the claims made by *** *. in his complaint:
1. *** *. claims that EAH did not have authorization to treat **** for the pancreatitis. However, **** *. signed the consent form on Tuesday, July 29, 2014 prior to the surgery, which gave EAH permission to perform the surgery and provide the aftercare (see Attachment 1). In addition, Dr. C**** received verbal authorization from **** *. via phone communication post-operatively (the same day) to treat the pancreatitis.
2. *** *. claims that EAH exceeded the estimate of $1,200-$1,500. That estimate was for a cystotomy, with standard discharge time the following morning and without complications (see Attachment 2). EAH verbally provided the estimate for the cystotomy surgery to **** *. on Monday evening July 28, 2014, after the initial appointment with *** *.’s parents and before there was any discussion of also doing an exploratory surgery. Dr. C**** did inform **** *. at her appointment the following morning, Tuesday, July 29, 2014, prior to the surgery that the exploratory cost was not part of the estimate and, depending on what Dr. C**** found, the cost would be higher than the estimate. **** *. did not request a revised estimate and consented to the surgery and appropriate post-operative treatment (depending on the results of the exploratory) in writing. The final bill for the cystotomy and the additional exploratory surgery was $1,499, within the range provided in the estimate. Additional costs ($563.32) were incurred to treat the pancreatitis, which was diagnosed during the surgery. These costs were outside the scope of the estimate for the cystotomy. The surgery consent form signed by **** *. specifically authorizes EAH to perform further testing, treatment, and/or additional surgeries if necessary, and for which the owner is financially responsible. (see Attachment 1). **** *. received daily updates from the doctors who took over ****’s care July 30 and 31 and daily updates on her bill from the nursing staff (technicians) while **** was hospitalized as is EAH protocol. The final bill for **** was $2063.21. The charges of $563.32 above the estimate were reasonable and customary for the care **** received for the two additional days in the hospital.
3. *** *. claims that Dr. C**** misdiagnosed ****’s pancreatitis, when, in fact, it was the exploratory surgery that led to the diagnosis. The physical exam findings, x-rays, and pre-anesthetic bloodwork were not consistent with pancreatitis at the initial visit. Dr. C**** met with **** *. to discuss the surgical findings post-operatively (in addition to calling **** *. during the surgery) and informed her that an additional blood test to confirm the pancreatitis was necessary based on the abnormal appearance of the pancreas. Once the test was complete, Dr. C**** called **** *. to inform her that the pancreatic function test was abnormal (i.e. pancreatitis) and that **** would require additional time in the hospital as well as additional medications. **** *. consented verbally over the phone to proceed with treatment (and, as previously stated, had signed the consent form to provide this treatment). While *** *.’s claim that a simple blood test could have confirmed pancreatitis has some truth, the statement is oversimplified and made with 20/20 hindsight; this special pancreatic function test is not run as part of the routine pre-anesthetic blood screening and Dr. C**** applied a standard of care consistent within the profession for a patient presenting with a one day duration of vomiting and diarrhea. Diagnostics, including a physical examination of ****, X-rays, urinalysis, and bloodwork gave no reason to suspect pancreatitis prior to the surgery and thus did not warrant running a specialized test as part of the pre-anesthetic blood panel, particularly when that test can have a false positive result if other GI disease is present, and as such becomes a red herring. (A study published in the March/April 2014 Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care found that this simple test “may provide a false positive diagnosis of pancreatitis in up to 40% of dogs presenting with acute abdominal disease”.)
4. *** ** claims that EAH withheld medication from ****. This is false. Upon discharge of **** on Thursday evening, July 31, 2014 **** *. informed the receptionist that she would not pay more than $1,500. There was a balance owed for the additional hospital stay and medications for the pancreatitis treatment, which included the medications to be sent home. When **** *. refused to pay her bill in full, Dr. Nankman prepared written prescriptions so that **** *. could have them filled at a pharmacy of her choosing. It is EAH policy that owners be given the opportunity to have medications dispensed elsewhere with written prescriptions if unable/unwilling to purchase them from our hospital. Ultimately, **** *. paid her bill in full, minus the medications to be dispensed for home care. EAH gave **** *. another opportunity to have the prescriptions filled at the hospital, which she declined and took the written prescriptions with her.
5. *** *. claims that EAH performed an unnecessary surgery. This is false. The type of bladder stones **** presented with required surgical removal, as they had previously. The purpose of the additional exploratory in conjunction with the required cystotomy was to attempt to determine what was making **** ill. The abnormal X-ray findings warranted further investigation, particularly after no improvement with palliative care. Ultimately, the surgery was successful in accomplishing both goals: removal of the bladder stones and diagnosis of the pancreatitis. Moreover, both were accomplished within the range of the estimate provided prior to surgery.
6. *** *. claims that EAH was not properly treating **** for pancreatitis, when, in fact, EAH’s treatment protocol was consistent with a standard of professional care and consistent with the treatment she received at the emergency hospital. *** *. also stated **** was “in shock” when she was admitted to the emergency hospital. However, when Dr. C**** followed up with the emergency hospital to inquire about ****’s condition she spoke with the internal medicine specialist and the admitting ER doctor. They informed Dr. C**** that **** was dehydrated and painful when admitted, but not in shock. Paperwork provided to EAH by the emergency hospital confirmed the conversations Dr. C**** had with the emergency hospital personnel regarding ****’s stable condition when admitted. Finally, *** *.’s final bill from the emergency hospital was substantially less than the $3000 he claims. (*** *. can provide copies of his invoice from the emergency hospital verifying this.)
7. *** *. claims that communication with EAH after **** was discharged was lacking. On the contrary, EAH had frequent (and documented) communication with him involving multiple staff members. EAH protocol is for technicians to do the call-backs on patients for updates on their condition and then relay to the doctor(s) pertinent information or questions that need to be addressed; this protocol was followed with ****, as it is with every patient that has an illness. EAH made repeated attempts to schedule an in-person meeting, at Dr. C****’s request, with *** *., **** *. and the appropriate EAH staff and hospital owner to discuss the issues he has raised. To date *** *. has failed to respond to repeated attempts to arrange such a meeting, and in his last communication with the hospital owner indicated that he and his wife were not interested in coming in for a meeting as they felt there is no point in it anymore.
Based on the above, EAH does not
feel that *** *. has made a valid request for a refund for the professional
services that EAH provided. All the
professional services EAH provided were to a professional standard of care. EAH informed **** *. and received her consent
prior to implementation of each phase of the care; therefore we feel that any
refund for services is unwarranted.
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at ****************** or ###-###-####.
Dr. Kelly C****