‘Pain and trauma’: Pet owner, grooming salon in dispute over injury that led to removal of dog’s eye

Upon arriving at the vet, she was told that Rudy’s cornea had been damaged, with her eyeball popped out. After seeking advice from two other vets, she decided to have the injured eye removed.

In photos included in her Facebook posts, Rudy’s right eye appears to have a slice across it, even though Ms Chow was later told that Rado had bitten Rudy.

When she asked the vet about it, she was told that no scratch marks were visible.

Owner ‘shocked’ by Pawsome’s explanation

That night, Ms Chow said handlers from Pawsome who took Rudy to the vet told her that Rudy was hurt by Rado.

“This shocked us,” she said, explaining that the two dogs have been close for the past eight years, with Rado akin to Rudy’s “personal body guard”.

When she asked to see the CCTV footage of the incident, Pawsome informed her that the cameras on the second floor had been undergoing repairs for two weeks.

“This triggered us to think that the accident wasn’t that simple,” said Ms Chow.

She noted that both dogs had been with Pawsome for two to three years and regularly attended daycare, boarding and excursions.

Unconvinced by Pawsome’s explanation, Ms Chow engaged a lawyer. During this process, Pawsome “insisted” they had done nothing wrong and offered to cover 10 per cent of the medical fees “out of goodwill”.

She also noted that the two dogs remain “very close”.

“How can (Rudy) not be scared of (Rado) if he was the culprit?” she asked.

Ms Chow also contacted the Animal and Veterinary Service (AVS), which informed her that they have investigated the case and took “appropriate action against the facility for breaching the pet boarding license conditions.”

Stomp has reached out to AVS for comment.

‘Inaccurate and unfair to suggest negligence’: Pawsome

In response to Stomp’s queries, a Pawsome spokesperson maintained that Rado had caused Rudy’s injury.

Both dogs had been boarding with them for over three years “without issue”, and had been “fed together on multiple occasions, with photos and videos shared directly with the owner, who acknowledged and expressed satisfaction with our care”.

“At no point was any instruction given to feed them separately,” added the spokesperson.

When the incident occurred, Pawsome staff were present and “immediately intervened and provided assistance … in line with our care procedures.”

Pawsome has also refunded the owner’s unused credits and extended a “goodwill payment” towards Rudy’s medical expenses, “offered without admission of liability as a gesture of empathy and fairness.”

It is “therefore inaccurate and unfair to suggest negligence or disregard on our part”, added the spokesperson. “We have acted in good faith and in accordance with the information available to us at the time.”

Join the conversation