Sleaford Vets

Sleaford Vets describes itself as an independent small-animal practice and says it has been established for over 30 years. It also states it provides 24‑hour emergency care and is a veterinary nurse training facility.

From the latest reviews, it appears set up for both routine and urgent situations: owners mention same/next‑day appointments booked online, emergency slots (e.g., after seizures or sudden mobility issues), and follow‑up appointments being arranged. Surgical and end‑of‑life care also come up in detail (e.g., spaying and euthanasia support). Feedback is mixed on the front desk/administration: several owners praise individual receptionists, while others report rudeness and poor organisation, including around insurance.

Services

• •24‑hour emergency care (stated on the website).
• •Small animal practice (stated on the website).
• •Online booking / rapid appointments (reviewed: appointment made “on the system” and seen next day; emergency appointments also mentioned).
• •Surgery (reviewed: a dog spayed; discussion of “urgent appointment for surgery” for dental extraction).
• •Anaesthesia procedures with additional checks (reviewed: a dog had a “full MOT” while under anaesthetic during a spay).
• •Dental-related work (reviewed: tooth problems suspected and a plan discussed to extract multiple teeth; separate review disputes the diagnosis and says it was a mouth ulcer instead).
• •Diagnostic testing (reviewed: blood tests mentioned).
• •Treatment planning and follow-up (reviewed: options for treatment were given and a follow-up appointment was booked).
• •End-of-life care (reviewed: euthanasia appointments for elderly pets; support for owners described).
• •Care of found/lost pets (reviewed: a lost dog was taken in and looked after).
• •Website navigation also references information on pre‑op/post‑op care for cats & dogs, post‑op care for rabbits & small furries, post‑op dental care, kitten/puppy health guides, flea control, home visits, insurance, and discount packages (listed on the site menu; specific inclusions aren’t detailed in the provided summary).

Pricing

• •One reviewer was quoted £52 “vet” + £12 for a worming pill (they later say this was corrected after speaking with a staff member).
• •Another reviewer reports spending £500 with “no results” (no itemised breakdown provided).

People

• •Claire (vet): mentioned for performing a spay on a reactive rescue dog; the owner notes the team was understanding of the dog’s needs and that everything was explained. Another reviewer calls Claire “a good vet.”
• •Lynn (receptionist): thanked by name for supporting an owner through euthanasia, described as “going that extra mile.”
• •Cody (reception, per review): one reviewer alleges incorrect personal details were recorded and that pricing information was wrong; the same review describes an unfriendly greeting.
• •Reception/administration feedback conflicts: one review says veterinary care was good but administration was “appalling”, including a negative interaction with the person handling insurance payments; other reviews describe reception staff as brilliant during emergencies.

Reviews

Google rating: 4.6 stars from 49 reviews. “”

• •Fast access and emergency help: next‑day appointments via online booking; emergency appointments given for seizures and sudden mobility problems.
• •Clear explanations and follow-up: owners mention being given options and having follow‑up appointments arranged; one review highlights explanations around a procedure.
• •Surgery and anaesthesia care: spay surgery is specifically praised, including accommodating a reactive rescue dog and doing additional checks while the pet was under.
• •End-of-life support: multiple reviews describe compassionate handling of euthanasia and supporting owners through the process.
• •Reception/administration is a sticking point for some: a few reviews allege rudeness, disorganisation, and problems around insurance/pricing; others report helpful reception experiences during urgent visits.
• •Disagreement on diagnosis in one case: one owner reports being told dental disease was the cause of bleeding, then a different vet later said it was a mouth ulcer, alongside concerns about cost and outcomes.