| Vet accused of fraud
|
Issue: 30/03/2018
A vet has been accused of helping a gang that sourced puppies from abroad by providing false health checks and vaccination cards.
Daniel Doherty, who set up the MyVet 24-7 veterinary surgeries in Uxbridge and Hillingdon, has put in a plea of not guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud by false representation contrary to section one of the Criminal Law Act 1977.
The RSPCA has brought the case against Daniel Doherty at Isleworth Crown Court, West London. The case involves a gang of eight men and women importing puppies into the UK. The dogs had been bred mainly in Ireland and Eastern Europe.
Often these animals were very sick but they were advertised as being home bred in the UK. The RSPCA started to investigate after they received a number of complaints as the dogs were so unwell that they died shortly afterwards.
Mr Doherty is accused of deceiving the public by providing vaccination certificates for more than 4000 puppies. It is said that he was paid nearly £80,000 by the gang.
He denies conspiracy to commit fraud. The trial continues.
Comment(s):
Name: Anon
Comment: For such a trusted and amazing vet this man has truley fooled a lot of people and let them and himself down big time .and it all comes down to one thing (money) the root to all evil total greed and for what .really was it worth it.he could loose everything I feel for his wife and family so sad it really is
Name: D COOPER
Comment: I CANT IMAGINE THAT DANIEL HAS BEEN INVOLED IN SUCH A THING LIKE THIS HE IS A VERY CARING VET WHEN I LOST ONE OF MY DOGS HE HAD A TEAR IN HIS EYES THERES NOT MANY VETS WHO SHOWED THERE EMOSSIONS I ONLY HOPE THAT HES FOUND NOT GUILTY IT WOULD BE A GREAT LOST HES A ONE OF A KIND GOOD LUCK DANIEL
Name: Barbara Hunt
Comment: Daniel has been our vet for several tears now and like many others we travel a bit to see him but it is worth it , His reputation goes before him, and if he is found guilty (which I hope he isn't) doesn't take away the fact that he is an excellent vet. one of my dogs was seriously ill over Christmas and she was a complex case ,but he isisted on seeing her every day or two to monitor her progress,she was later diagnosed with an auto-immune disorder, if we had been with any other vet she would have died,because i know no other vet would have put in the time and devotion that he did at Christmas. We have all fingers and paws crossed for you Daniel.
Name: Peter
Comment: He was found guilty. Pure greed, and no care for the animals or the people conned out of thousands of pounds for puppies that were ill.
Name: Sherry Clarke
Comment: I find it hard to believe Daniel would do such a thing. He is such a very caring man. When one of my cats was ill he pulled all the stops out to help even to taking my poor cat home overnight. When one of our dogs had cancer he was upset when our dog had to be put to sleep. Best of luck Daniel
Name: Debbie james
Comment: Am shocked that Daniel has compromised all of his hard work and years of sweat to build up an amazing business never the less he is the best vet and always will be' I wish you well Daniel you made a mistake
Name: rosie
Comment: guilty and greedy
Name: Patricia Sutherland
Comment: I don't for one moment feel that Daniel Doherty knowingly conspired to commit fraud. We support him wholeheartedly and will hope that he appeals against this verdict.
Name: barbara
Comment: all of the well wishers be blessed you never fell foul to this vets cruel greedy actions .appauled by you
Name: Anon
Comment: I'm Sorry but what he has done s absolutely disgusting and NO-ONE should make excuses for him. He is an excellent vet but as a person a total fraud. I am so angry. How can he possibly get tearful over one dog and at the same time use fraud knowing how these 4000 supposedly have suffered. Get real everyone you have been conned as I was!
Name: DAVID
Comment: Having known Daniel since he started his work experience with a local vet.I find it hard to believe he conspired to commit fraud I wish him well and as I have always done place my B/C meg health care with him
Name: Pat Kerr
Comment: He was found guilty and I hope he is struck off forlife. He has brought shame on his profession and all other vets
Name: Trusted client
Comment: Don't believe everything you read. They haven't broadcast his side or his defence. He wouldn't have done this knowingly - no way. He's a good man and a talented genius vet. He has cared for my pets for ten years. I would still go back to him. The gang have duped Daniel - this isn't the whole picture.
Name: Alan Fox
Comment: Daniel is the best Vet we have ever had. I find it very hard to believe that he would get directly and knowingly involved in anything like this. As is usual with the press we are not told the whole story. I would like to hear Daniel's side of it
Name: Lesley Wright
Comment: I have met Daniel several times as he looks after my friends cats. I cannot believe, for one minute that Daniel knowingly committed these offences. I have never met a more caring, hardworking and committed vet. He has lovingly cared for my friends cats and saved one of her kittens from sure death. I hope he will appeal and get the not guilty verdict he deserves
Name: Marilyn
Comment: he is an evil & corrupt man & deserves to loose everything for his greed pity all those poor little puppies that suffered be is thoughtless. I wouldn't let him near my two cherished rescue dogs. Hope he looses his licence for goid
Name: Tony
Comment: Lowlife scumbag
Name: Lisa J
Comment: Ok so many of you don't believe he was involved, funny how he accepted nearly £80,000 for his part in all of this! Guilty all the way! Hope he gets what he deserves!!!
Name: Patricia Sutherland
Comment: So many people just jump to the conclusion that if you are tried by a jury and found guilty then that is so-- whereas this is not the case at all. I have already left my comments and I stick with them. Daniel is not a greedy vet at all --never has been and never will be. Somehow somewhere along the line he has been totally stitched up! He is a very busy man and has a duty of care when puppies are brought to him to immunise them. Someone as busy as he is has no time for digging and delving into the source of the breeder. He is probably naive but no crook.m People should learn not to buy dogs off the internet--they are never a bargain!
Name: Martin
Comment: I cannot equate what I read with the man I have known for 8 years. His care of our 2 cats was beyond exceptional and although I now live in West Sussex I would still travel back to him for an opinion. There are two sides to every story and I fear we won't get to hear his because it would sell less papers.
Name: Patricia Sutherland
Comment: Totally agree with you Martin. Noone is reporting what Daniel's lawyer said in his defence. Unfortunately jurors do not have to take a test for common sense and juries have 18 year old people on the panel who have no life experience at all and many jurors do not make a rational decision. Daniel Doherty would never do such a dreadful thing knowingly. He is totally focused on animal welfare and gives his time unconditionally very often never charging at all evfen thoughn he has spent time with our dog. I wish people would look further than just reading what the vile press say.
Name: Anon
Comment: I was in court for much of the trial, observing. 1. He offered no defence at all. None, nothing, big fat zero, he didn't even give evidence himself. 2. In my opinion, having heard the evidence, the jury made the right decision. Due process was followed. He'll have about zero chance of appeal as he offered no defence and the jury were unanimous. 3. He can be the best vet since Dr Dolittle but that doesn't mean he hasn't done something really very, very wrong. I certainly wouldn't be giving him any of my hard earned cash so he can offer a discount to puppy farmers and smugglers to dupe people and cause suffering to animals.
Name: Andy
Comment: I pose a question for everyone to consider, and it is a far wider question than just this particular case. Fact: Puppy Farming is NOT illegal (of course it should be). Question: Faced with this, should a vet refuse to innoculate a puppy just because he realises it comes from a puppy farm, or should he refuse and as a result knowingly allow that puppy into the homing environment without being innoculated?
Name: Patricia Sutherland
Comment: Totally agree. Any vet would have done what Daniel Doherty did---his duty of care was to innoculate puppies.
Name: Charlotte
Comment: I went to Daniel every 6 weeks with my cat for 2 years. He put my cat to sleep days before the trial and was pretending he was going on holiday, not that I can blame him for not wanting to publicise the trial. He is an absolutely incredible vet but I am not so naive as his other clients refusing to believe his guilt. I followed the trial always hoping he was innocent and the evidence against him was overwhelming. The RSPCA investigated him going back 6 years and this was a huge trial and worst type of fraud. He offered literally zero defence in court after nearly four weeks and 17 prosecution witnesses. He will likely be going to prison for a number of years. It has been devastating to accept that he has done this but facts are facts. I wish it wasn't true. As for those saying it isn't unethical for him to have innoculated the puppies- you have MISUNDERSTOOD- he was done for fraud because he gave out certificates saying the puppies were innoculated but he NEVER saw them and NEVER INNOCULATED them. If so many puppies hadn't been ill or died, he would still be getting away with it. On top of that, some poor sods actually paid him to subsequently treat the sick puppies not realising he was complicit. Hope he gets a chance to reflect on his crimes and his greed at Her Majesty's pleasure.
Name: Another trusted client
Comment: Daniel will be appealling his sentence. To all those that believe everything they read how do you think the RSPCA gathered their evidence? Did they find 4000+ certificates at a puppy farm or did they just look at his computer records because every payment had been put through the books? The answer is the later.
Name: helen
Comment: charlotte thankyou for summing up mr doherty .fed up of people trearing him as if he is a god .you put the honest home truths across fair and straight .poor people who got scammed so cruely.
Name: Anon
Comment: If you think a unanimous verdict and giving no evidence somehow lessens the chances of a successful appeal you do not understand the appeals process.
Name: ex client
Comment: another trusted client your post shows your not grasping the sad truth .you make no sense at all
Name: ATC
Comment: Ex client...he'd been accused and it had been reported that he'd done it for monetary gain in which case why put it through the books if he was conspiring to defraud and for such a relatively trivial sum? Secondly there are many reasons why you can appeal a verdict, misdirection from the judge being one of them...I guess we'll see when it comes out in the wash.
Name: Anon
Comment: Four men have today had their sentences increased after the Solicitor General, Robert Buckland QC MP, personally presented their cases to the Court of Appeal under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. Simon O Donnell, Thomas Stokes, Edward Stokes, and Daniel Doherty were part of a puppy-farming conspiracy thought to have raised around £2 million. O Donnell, Thomas Stokes and Edward Stokes were involved in importing farmed puppies from abroad; while Doherty, a vet who practised in West London, provided them with misleading welfare documents, including immunisation certificates, which were used to reassure the people who bought the puppies. Many of the supposedly healthy puppies sold by this group became unwell, leaving their owners with significant veterinary bills, or even the traumatic decision of whether to have them euthanised. O Donnell, Doherty, and Thomas Stokes were originally sentenced at Isleworth Crown Court in May, Edward Stokes in June. O Donnell and Thomas Stokes both received 3 years imprisonment. Edward Stokes received 2 years imprisonment suspended for two years, as well as conditions of 200 hours unpaid work and 15 days rehabilitation activity. Doherty received 12 months imprisonment suspended for 12 months, as well as a requirement of 80 hours unpaid work. Today, after the Solicitor General s referral, the Court of Appeal increased all 4 sentences. Thomas Stokes sentence was increased to 4 years 8 months, and O Donnell s sentenced was increased to 4 years imprisonment. The other 2 offenders have now been given immediate prison terms. E Stokes had his suspended sentence increased to 4 years 8 months imprisonment, Doherty s suspended sentence was increased to 3 years 6 months imprisonment. Commenting on the sentencing increases, the Solicitor General said: This group not only subjected thousands of puppies to atrocious living conditions, but also caused immense distress to families who had to watch their new pets suffer from serious illness. I am pleased that the Court of Appeal has today agreed to increase all 4 sentences, and hope this will bring some comfort to the victims of their crimes. Name: Patricia Sutherland
Comment: Totally saddened by what has happened and like most of Daniel Doherty's clients we are still completely on his side and hope he appeals against this gross injustice. We know what the press are saying and reporting but noone has heard Daniel Doherty's defence lawyer's words. The law in this case is an ass! Somewhere he has been misrepresented and I'm quite sure that the ex member of the staff who started all this had an axe to grind and acted in revenge for some reason known only to him or her! Hope whoever that person is feels satisfied that they have deprived a little child of his father, a wife of her husband and the community of an excellent and outstanding vet. Revenge is sweet but it has a bitter taste! Good luck Daniel and get out quickly because we are all behind you!
Name: John O'Brien
Comment: I have known the vet for 12 years I went to him for a second opinion on my cat as I had been told she needed radiotherapy for nasal carcinoma if not she would only live for three months.He treated her with some antibiotics and she survived another 10 years. One day I was waiting in the surgery and a gentleman next to me told me his dog had been taken very ill during the night and he had no means of getting the dog to the vet so the vet came to his house collected the dog and took it to the surgery for treatment and care. Another time a lady who was obviously on welfare with a lovely little dog who just had treatment only had to pay £16 for the medication and visit. He is also known to be giving his time to a local dog charity. We do not live in an affluent area, the small clinic is for examination and distribution of medicine, the second practice is the animal hospital where surgery is carried out. He is a hard working, caring, compassionate person working 18 hours a day if necessary. Making the cost of veterinary care and services more affordable to all of us. Many others in his profession are envious of his success. As for the press, in this country they do not like successful people., they will destroy sportsmen, professional people, business persons, any one to make a story. Hope you find time to read this true and honest statement.
Name: Mrs Maureen Jansen
Comment: Very sad and unsettled about the outcome of the prosecution against a wonderful, kind and non-greedy Vet. I have experienced his kindness and expertise for over 10 years with my very sick cat. I dont believe at all that he was a willing participant to those awful puppy breeders and the cruelty and harm they have caused. He had all his dealings with them recorded and shown to the RSPCA. Puppy farming should be abolished rather than prosecute professionals who come into contact with these despicable traders.
Name: Anon
Comment: An unsuccessful appeal, still guilty , needs to be struck off now , illegal puppy dealers need no where to hide , our local scabby pet shop travelled miles to get the puppies health checks done by Daniel Doherty, I wonder why ! Loads of sick puppies sold from there with good health checks from Doherty.
