Winnipeg veterinarian with 11 rulings against him faces another complaint with regulatory body
A Winnipeg veterinarian who has already had 11 rulings against him under the Manitoba regulatory body for vets is now facing another complaint.
A complaint filed with the Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association at the end of August alleges Dr. Wenchao Zheng made an improper diagnosis of a dog’s illness and proposed a care plan costing nearly $2,000.
The client, David Strickland, didn’t proceed with the plan and instead took his dog to a different veterinarian the next day, where he was billed $277 for a different care plan to treat the dog, which had diarrhea and was vomiting.
Strickland said he couldn’t afford the $2,000 bill he initially faced from Zheng and considered having his dog put down.
“I was furious. I could have put this dog down for nothing,” Strickland told CBC News. His seven-month-old dog, Chewbacca, is now doing fine following the less-expensive treatment.
“All the dog had was worms. And it cost me $277 to get the dog healthy,” he said.
Strickland says Zheng told him Chewbacca had parvovirus, an often fatal disease, and said if the dog wasn’t treated he could die. The vet suggested the dog spend two days in hospital and receive two blood transfusions.
Strickland says he eventually got a refund for the fees he did pay to Zheng.
Zheng challenges the assertions in Strickland’s complaint and denies he acted “unethically and unprofessionally.”
He also said he offered Strickland a subsidy to help pay for a more limited care plan that would cost about $500.
Zheng said he felt he was “doing a good service, but it’s not received the same.”
WATCH | ‘I was furious,’ dog owner says after experience with Winnipeg vet who is subject of multiple complaints:
Featured VideoDr. Wenchao Zheng has faced complaints from clients about fees and services at his vet practice, Animal Hospital of Manitoba.
Cases date back to 1999
The 11 prior regulatory cases against Zheng date back to 1999 and include issues ranging from failing to properly diagnose or treat an animal patient, to failing to consider a pet owner’s financial limitations when recommending treatment options, veterinary association documents say.
Zheng says he feels he’s been treated unfairly by the regulatory body.
“I feel some of the cases were not — I was not fairly treated,” he said in an interview with CBC at his vet practice.
“I practise with my heart. I feel I’m [a] very knowledgeable, experienced veterinarian. But we are in the lower economic zone.”
His practice, Animal Hospital of Manitoba, is on Main Street in Winnipeg’s Point Douglas area, a lower-income neighborhood.
Veterinarians have to deal not only with sick pets, but also “with the frustration of the pet owner and the financial restraints,” Zheng said.
He said he has helped clients with financial difficulties by offering subsidies to help pay their vet bills. That’s involved waiving more than $200,000 in fees for more than 800 families, he said.
The subsidy program described on Animal Hospital of Manitoba’s website says low-income clients can get a discount of up to $250 once a year per family.
‘Where is the justice here?’: complainant
Two of the 11 decisions against Zheng have been posted on the Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association’s website — a 2022 case in which he received a formal caution and a 2018 case that went to an inquiry.
Zheng appealed one of the regulatory decisions against him to the Manitoba Court of Appeal, which is the appeal body for veterinary discipline decisions. In September, the court dismissed his appeal and upheld the decision against him.
The client who filed that complaint, Wendy Anderson, says having 11 regulatory findings against the veterinarian demonstrates a problem.
“I don’t find this man being held accountable at all,” she said. “He appealed the [decision] and lost, and continues to practise. So where is the justice here?”
Anderson filed her complaint in 2018 after taking her dog, Jake, to Zheng on three occasions for what was determined to be skin and ear disease attributable to underlying allergies.
The complaint was initially dismissed by the association’s complaints committee, but Anderson appealed that result. Her complaint was eventually sent to a hearing before an association inquiry panel three years later.
In July 2021, the panel found Zheng guilty of several charges under the veterinary association’s bylaws and code of ethics.
Among the breaches, the panel found Zheng “failed to be competent” in his use of antibiotics with Anderson’s dog.
It also found he failed to practise veterinary medicine with integrity for not immediately refunding a duplicate payment of fees and charges for his services.
Duplicate payment
Between November 2017 and June 2018, Anderson took Jake to see Zheng three times.
On the third visit, she was quoted around $800 for his treatment, even though she had told the vet she had a budget of $300.
She applied for a loan program that was offered as a payment option at Animal Hospital of Manitoba. But after making the application, she paid the vet bill by credit card. The loan payment was approved and the vet practice received duplicate payment.
The veterinary association’s panel found that Anderson was not reimbursed for the extra payment for about 50 days after it was received, resulting in Anderson paying interest “which would not have occurred if she had been reimbursed in a timely fashion,” the decision said.
WATCH | Vet responds to question about clients who can’t afford bill:
Featured VideoA Winnipeg dog owner says he considered putting his dog down, after a Winnipeg veterinarian told him his dog needed a $2,000 care plan. The man took his dog to another vet who treated the dog for less than $300, and has now filed a complaint with the Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association.
The panel also found that in light of Anderson’s financial constraints, the dog could have been treated with oral antibiotic medications which would have cost less than injections he got.
Veterinarians are obligated to give their clients a prescription for pet medications upon request so they have the option to buy the products elsewhere at a lower price.
But the panel found Zheng failed to provide Anderson a prescription when she asked for one.
Zheng disputes that.
“We would never decline a prescription when the pet owner request it, especially if I recommend it,” he said.
“This individual obviously is very unhappy with our services.”
‘It’s a complaining world’: vet
The panel’s decision in Anderson’s case noted prior rulings involving Zheng, and said his “disciplinary record shows a pattern of repetitive behaviour demonstrating the practice of a substandard quality of veterinary medicine.”
“Most of those matters involved complaints of a similar nature, such as failures to keep proper medical records or to properly diagnose or treat a patient,” the decision said.
It also said the prior rulings raised issues such as “lack of effective client communication … unnecessary and/or inappropriate treatment, and failure to consider an owner’s financial limitations when recommending treatment options.”
CBC asked Zheng about what the Court of Appeal decision called his “lengthy disciplinary history.”
“It’s a complaining world,” he said. “Whenever clients are not happy, they complain.”
The inquiry panel imposed a $2,000 fine against Zheng and required him to pay the veterinary association $50,000 toward the estimated $100,000 cost of the investigation and hearing.
He was also ordered to reimburse Anderson $321.36 for part of the fees charged to her in June 2018.
The decision required Zheng to do 32 hours of continuing education in veterinary medicine and to practise under direct supervision of another veterinarian for two years.
It also required that his vet practice be subject to random audits of medical record keeping for five years.
That doesn’t satisfy Anderson.
“I think his conduct demonstrates to me that he should probably find a different career,” she said.
Under the authority of Manitoba’s Veterinary Medical Act, the inquiry panel could have suspended Zheng’s licence to practise.
The Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association’s registrar, Corey Wilson, said he cannot comment on why a suspension was not imposed by the inquiry panel, or what type of conduct would result in suspension.
Zheng said he has already paid the $2,000 fine imposed by the MVMA inquiry panel, but intends to seek leave to appeal the court decision in the Anderson case to the Supreme Court of Canada.
