Pets At Home Complaints & Reviews
Complaints, Review, Comparison
Read reviews of Pets At Home, share your experience and resolve your issue.
Rate Pets At Home for value and service, and compare Pets At Home with other companies.
Have you got a complaint about a company or service?
Write to us and publicise your issues.
Scroll down to read our selection of your complaints and reviews about Pets At Home below.
Send your Pets At Home Reviews & Complaints
Send your complaints and reviews - and we'll publish the best, and worst! and make your voice heard.
Click here for details of all our complaints sections or view our shopping complaints section here.
Are you a company? Have you been complained about? Contact us here and we'll publish your response and help resolve complaints.
Your Pets At Home Reviews
S Ayre: 1/5 Stars
This lot are not interested in pets …
They sell only leading market products. Nothing for vegan dogs and only one vegetarian product, ONLINE! Response from company rep is they tried selling vegan/vegi dog food but it did not retail well so THEY WITHDREW. Surely it should be reasonable to expect a chain store as this lot are, to at least make it possible to be able to walk into a store and have at least one choice for the vegan dog. I was told by the operative that if they stocked vegan food that rarely sells, it would take up valuable ''Other Brands'' space in store. I find it bazzar that a store that purports to put animals first, sell live animals, whose species are found as ingredients in many pet foods. And yet to sell 1, ONE! brand of vegan dog food is not worth their bother. Shame on them. And before the ''Dog's are not meant to be vegan brigade?'' rise out of their shells. Some dogs have to have a plant based diet for health reasons. plus it is a fact that dogs are much healthier on a plant based diet these days, given the amount of ''Junk'' that passes as dog food these days. I will never darken Petsathome or promote their stores. I will however endeavour to do my best to discredit them
Pets At Home has not yet responded.
Sandra: 1/5 Stars
Refused to sell me fish
I was in your Newtownabbey store today with the intention of buying 4 fish for my grand daughter. However, when I asked for assistance, the attendant refused to sell me the fish. I was flabbergasted to say the least and taken a back at his abrupt and rude manner. When I asked why he bluntly stated that he needed to know the size of the tank, I tried to explain along with my daughter in law the size of the tank but the assistant refused to listen stating "I have exams!" "it is company policy!". Stunned by his complete lack of attention he was paying I managed to get another assistant who quite pleasantly said no problem. The attendant (I don't know his name as he removed his name badge!) was still complaining and arguing with me as he eventually gave into his colleague. I asked to speak to the store manager and was astounded by his rudeness. He never listened to what I tried to say and simply said "It is indeed company policy!" and he "was sorry I felt that way". I have never had this said to me in other stores or been treated with such contempt and as a result will not be back to Pets at Home in Newtownabbey. The customer service available at this store is absolutely disgraceful!!! Whilst this may be company policy (please advise me if it is fact a policy), the level of contempt shown towards me by the staff was utterly unacceptable. I hope that you will resolve this matter swiftly and I would like to be contacted with an apology from both parties. Yours Sandra Matthews
Pets At Home has not yet responded.
READ MORE: Shopping Guides & Tips | How to Avoid Scams & Online Shopping Problems
Caroline Gibson: 1/5 Stars
Pets at Home getting rid of their terminally ill pets by putting them up for adoption
To whom it may concern, We are trying to file a complaint of animal neglect at Pets at Home, after adopting a pet that had a contagious disease (we have another rabbit) and in terminal condition (she died just after 10 days of being home). We were not aware of her diagnosis at the time of the adoption as we were misled by Pets at Home members of staff. Snowy (adopted female rabbit) wasn’t fit for adoption. She was suffering and terminally ill. The places I’ve tried calling or writing couldn’t understand that our concern is not about the money we’ve spent (adoption charity donation, hutch, etc) but the fact that they are putting other pets at risk and not giving proper care to the ones they have in store. They are allowing new owners to bond with them without a full understanding of their conditions. Snowy was underweight and extremely weak. We tried RSPCA, Trading Standards, and Greenwich Council, but they don’t have an Animal Welfare department. We felt that just calling the store and their central complaints department is not enough to ensure that changes will be made to ensure the well-being of the animals based on their responses (which always start with excuses before you can even tell them what happened). We are writing to you because we don’t think it is fair that a company as big as Pets at Home, so full of regulations, rules and licences is able to get away with something so inhumane and cruel and we are not sure on how to proceed. Would you be able to advise what would be the best course of action? Any help we can get would be much appreciated. We’ve lost a beloved pet, and put another one at risk, due to their negligence. Nothing will bring her back but something should be done in order to avoid them doing it to other animals. Please find below a full (and long) breakdown of what happened: On May 7th we visited Pets at Home Blackheath, 100 Blackheath Road, London, SE10 8DA to enquire about a rabbit that was up for adoption. We specifically needed a female rabbit to be a companion to our male and this was the first thing we informed their members of staff. They were happy to do a gender check and after confirming she was female we asked a few questions about her condition and why she was put for adoption. We were informed that Snowy had been at the back of their shop for several months and they were not able to sell her due to her respiratory problems. She had been under treatment with their vet (Vets for Pets, which is located within the facilities) but they were not able to diagnose her with anything. They tried a few different caring techniques and came to the conclusion that her condition was due to a “dust allergy” and even joked about her being a rabbit with hayfever or asthma. She would need special care and to be checked by a vet every now and then if her breathing conditions were to get worse, but the best way to look after her would be to keep her on a dust free environment, special bedding and on a diet of hay cookies, since the dust generated from normal hay could trigger her allergy. We also enquired about her being neutered and if we could have a copy of all the medical treatment done at their facilities. We were given a copy of it and after the member of staff checked with Vets for Pets they advised that neutering wouldn’t be recommended due to her condition. With that information on hand we asked if her condition could be contagious, as the main reason for adopting her was to give my male rabbit a companion. We were told more than once, NO, it’s not contagious, it’s just an allergy. Our mistake was to take their advice. We are pet lovers that aim to provide the best care and life they can possibly have, but we don’t understand vet records, we don’t know names of all possible diseases a rabbit can have. We trust them to explain it for us. Since all she needed was special care, which we were more than happy to provide, we decided to take her home. When you adopt a pet from them you receive a voucher for a free health check and first vaccinations. We booked her in for the following Saturday (May 13th). We assumed that she would be seen by the vet that took care of her while she was on their shop but she ended up being seen by a different vet that, according to his own words, had no knowledge of rabbits and the best course of action in order to get more information about Snowy’s condition was to request a call back for the vet that had been treating her. She gave us a call on Monday (May 15th) and informed us that Snowy had been diagnosed with Pausterella, a common disease found in rabbits and worst of all, contagious and incurable. By this point, as we were not aware that Snowy had this disease, she had already started to bond with our perfectly healthy rabbit, so he was at risk of being contaminated. That was the first problem we had. I called their shop manager (Tuesday 16th) and explained that their staff had put my male rabbit at risk by not disclosing the full extent of her condition. Their response was that the staff have no understanding of medical conditions (even though they have a big banner saying it takes 9 books and 10 months of training to become a member of staff) and that she was only put for adoption once they had received an all clear from the vets. We were trying to negotiate a free health check and tests for my male rabbit to determine if he had been contaminated. The manager was happy to gather some information and see if the store could pay for a health check and a swab. A quote from Vets for Pets had been generated and they were waiting on a response from Pets at Home to see if they would cover the costs as a way of compensation from them not informing us of her contagious condition. By Wednesday 17th, not having received any response from them and by this point not feeling we could trust their opinion, we decided to take both of our rabbits to a rabbit specialist. After checking her lungs, nose and weight, the vet informed us that her condition was extremely chronic, and that she had almost no usable lung tissue left. While still on the vet’s table, Snowy had a seizure and died in less than 10 min. After the shock of seeing our beloved pet die, we tried to figure it out if we had done something wrong, but were reassured by the vet that her condition was so critical that it was only a matter of days for this to happen. We do understand that staff members of a pet shop are not qualified vets and don’t have a full understanding of their diseases. Our main concerns are: • If the staff members didn’t know about how serious her condition was, they shouldn’t advise us that it was perfectly safe to take her home and bond her. • If they knew, they willingly decided to keep that information from us. • Snowy had been seen by the in-house vet for several months prior to adoption. At the very least the vet should have informed the Pets at Home staff that they should be careful of transmitting the disease to their other rabbits for sale (washing hands after handling, etc.). • If they were given her an all clear from the vets, which excludes them from any responsibility, why didn’t they try to understand her condition more, so they could give her the best treatment while she was still in the shop (she was underweight, not given a proper diet, being handled without special concerns about the abscesses she had on her body) • Why did the vet give her an all clear to be adopted after just four days of finishing the treatment if her condition was so critical? Rehoming a pet is extremely stressful for them and we don’t think, knowing now the full extent of her condition, that it helped her in any way. She died in a very stressful, undignified way that was, in our point of view, unnecessary and cruel. • We have seen other pets for adoption with symptoms very similar to the ones Snowy had, and upon enquiry were told that they had nothing wrong with them. Unfortunately, at the time, we were not aware of what it was, so it makes us wonder if they are not doing the same to other animals. Whatever reason or excuse they have, that is still, in our opinion, animal neglect. • We have asked about several rabbits up for adoption in various Pets at Home stores in our area, and unfailingly they are from their sales stock that they were unable to sell for various reasons. It feels to me that their “charity” is nothing more than another way to sell their stock that had suffered in the hands of irresponsible staff and vets, as they are both part of the same company. We are kindly asking you to help us with this matter. Please understand we are not aiming for financial compensation or a pet replacement, like other places suggested. We just feel they should be investigated to avoid other pets receiving the cruel treatment Snowy had. If this is a matter you are unable to help with, could you kindly suggest any other association or social media platforms where we can tell our story and raise awareness?
Pets At Home has not yet responded.
Story by Fred Isaac
Two months after BBC Watchdog investigation, customers claim fish are still dying at Pets at Home
Their adverts say it is “where pets come first”, but Britain’s biggest animal store Pets at Home has been accused of a raft of problems including dead fish and dirty stores.
Watchdog investigates Pets at Home
An inquiry in June by BBC Watchdog found sick fish in all of the eight branches investigated.
The BBC’s expert found fifty three sick fish in total, infected with diseases such as:
* Fin rot
* White spot
* Ulcer disease
Pets at Home CEO Nick Wood responded to the inquiry by saying:
“We have been at the forefront of pet welfare for nearly 25 years.
“We have looked in detail at every single claim put to us by Watchdog, which are misleading and in many cases simply wrong”.
Falling like… fish
But two months after Watchdog’s accusations, A Spokesman Said user Gemma Hebron claims fish are still dying in Pets at Home stores.
Gemma, 31, a former teacher from Leeds, says she found dead fish floating in the tanks when she visited the Pets at Home store in Crown Point Shopping Park, West Yorkshire.
“They try to block the sight of dead fish with boarded up signs”, said Gemma.
“I am very concerned about the quality of the store.
“When I last visited, on August 19th, there were four dead fish and no one was rushing to remove them.
“The longer they are left in the water, the greater the danger they infect others”.Of the fish she has purchased, Gemma claims many have died in under a day.
“One of the fish died within two hours of getting home, another was infected and now has no tail or fins”.
Despite being offered treatment for the fish, and a gift voucher, Gemma is adamant Pets at Home have wider problems to address.
“Selling fish that die in days or even hours is unacceptable”, said Gemma.
“They need to do something about the way they look after animals”.
Nearly 100 miles north, at the Metro Shopping Centre in Gateshead, customers have also expressed concern at the treatment of animals.
Dawn Wilson, a property manager from Woolsington, blasted the Pets at Home store as “worse than a battery farm”.
“I took my two children to the shop on the bank holiday morning at 11 am”, Dawn told us.
“We were horrified at the rodent poo, sawdust and litter strewn all over the floor”.
Dawn knows a thing or two about animal welfare. In her spare time she rescues abused dogs and works to find them new homes.
She looks after a rescue spaniel called Fid, and a Great Dane called Dippy Doodle.
She says this has given her a passion for animal welfare.
“I’m concerned because if they can’t be bothered to clean up droppings, how are they treating the other animals?
“I’ve never seen anything so filthy in my life.
“The animals didn’t look well. You expect to see rabbits jumping around but they were just lethargic and morose”.
Like Gemma, Dawn claims she saw dead fish in the tank.
“My youngest daughter was very upset when she saw the fish floating at the top of the tank”, said Dawn.
Gemma and Dawn have voiced their concerns on A Spokesman Said seeking a fair response from Pets at Home.
Both think the company needs to address the problems highlighted by customers, and publicly state what is being done to remedy them.
“They shouldn’t be treating animals like that”, said Dawn.
“They need to tell us if this is a wider problem, and what they’re going to do about it”.
CLICK HERE: You could save up to £497 on your energy bills by switching your supplier| COMPARE ENERGY QUOTES NOW
Story by Fred Isaac
Picture of Pets at Home hamster sparks Facebook uproar
A picture of a hamster at a Pets at Home branch in Festival Park, Stoke-on-Trent Stoke, has sparked uproar on social media.
It shows the little Syrian hamster huddled in the corner of its cage with its eyes shut.
The Facebook user who uploaded the picture, Sarah Larking, claimed the furry pet was “seriously unwell” and posted it on the Pets at Home page.
Pets at Home reassured animal-lovers that a vet had confirmed the hamster was “absolutely fine” and that they check all their pets regularly.
UPDATE: We asked Pets at Home to provide evidence the hamster in the picture was OK. The company refused to comment.
But it didn’t matter. Social media erupted.
The post has been shared over three thousand times and scores of customers have replied with their own Pets at Home stories.
Customers complained at animals looking sick or being kept in cramped or dirty pens, and poorly trained staff that don’t respond to complaints.
One customer, Victoria Gibson, alleged that she had been sold a rabbit with conjunctivitis by the Festival Park store.
“They seriously need to consider the welfare of the animals they keep and they need to learn to check on them more often,” she claimed. “No animal in a pet store should be ill.”
Another user, Emma Butler, expressed concern that Pets at Home staff “don't have a clue how to care for animals.”
We’ve highlighted problems with Pets at Home, the UK’s biggest pet retailer, before.
Gemma Hebron, from Leeds, told us she was “very concerned about the quality” of a Pets at Home store in West Yorkshire after fish she bought died within a day.
“They need to do something about the way they look after animals,” Gemma, 31, told us.
Many pet-lovers will be worried the retailer has failed to respond to the BBC Watchdog investigation last summer.
The June inquiry found sick fish in all of the eight stores its undercover reporters visited.
In response, Nick Wood, Pets at Home CEO, challenged customers to visit branches themselves:
“Our stores are open every day and our colleagues will be happy to explain the care we provide for our pets,” he insisted.
“We have been at the forefront of pet welfare for nearly 25 years and our number one value is ‘Pets before Profit’.”
Many of those who shared and commented on the Facebook post disagree.
We have contacted Pets at Home for a response to the social media uproar and to clarify what they’re doing to improve the welfare of the animals they sell.
They pointed us towards their initial response to the Watchdog investigation.
If you want to make a complaint about a pet retailer, publicise the case on A Spokesman Said.
CLICK HERE: Compare the cheapest insurance quotes | Save money on your insurance bills