rightvet.

AREA REPORT

Vets in Reading

Prices, reviews and ownership for 19 practices

LOCAL OVERVIEW

Reading has 19 vet practices. Only 7 are independently owned and most are part of larger veterinary groups. Consultation fees range from £40 at Harrison Family Vets to around £69 at typical high street vets. Most practices here publish their prices online. The highest-rated practice is Cherry Orchard Vets (previously The Reformation) at 4.9 on Google.

19 practices12 in a group7 independent£60 avg consultation
37%
independent
£60
avg consultation
18
publish prices

Find vets near you

Enter your postcode for personalised results with distances and local pricing

Or browse all 19 Reading practices

What vets charge in Reading

10 cheapest consultations from 18 practices that publish prices

1
Harrison Family Vets
Smaller group: Harrison Family Vets (9 practices)
£40
3.8/5
2
Vet's Klinic Reading
Smaller group: Vet's Klinic (2 practices)
£47
4.7/5
3
Cherry Orchard Vets (previously The Reformation)
Independent practice
£54
4.1/5
4
Valley Veterinary Group
Smaller group: Valley Veterinary Group (3 practices)
£55
4.2/5
5
Valley Veterinary Group
Smaller group: Valley Veterinary Group (3 practices)
£55
4.4/5
6
Valley Veterinary Group
Smaller group: Valley Veterinary Group (3 practices)
£55
4.2/5
7
The Veterinary Centre T/As Henley Vets Limited
Smaller group: Henley Vets (3 practices)
£58
4.7/5
8
Tilehurst Vets4Pets (Oxford Road)
Joint venture: Pets at Home (475 practices)
£58
4.5/5
9
Reading Vets4Pets
Joint venture: Pets at Home (475 practices)
£60
4.3/5
10
The Woodley Vet
Largest group: IVC Evidensia (914 practices)
£65
4.5/5
See all 18 practices with pricing →

1 practice in Reading don't publish their consultation prices online. Pricing transparency is one of the issues the CMA veterinary market investigation is addressing.

Who owns vets in Reading

Ownership breakdown across 19 practices

Independent 7
CVS Group 6
IVC Evidensia 3
Pets at Home 2
Medivet 1
Most practices in Reading are part of larger veterinary groups. Nationally, around half of all practices are part of larger groups. Here, 12 of 19 are part of larger groups.

Larger groups

CVS Group
6 practices
Public (LSE listed)
IVC Evidensia
3 practices
Nestlé / EQT / Silver Lake
Pets at Home
2 practices
Pets at Home plc
Medivet
1 practice
CVC Capital Partners

Reading vet rankings

19 practices in your area

Harrison Family Vets

RG6 1BE·£40 consultationSmaller group: Harrison Family Vets
4.8(204)

Vet's Klinic Reading

RG5 4AZ·£47 consultationSmaller group: Vet's Klinic
4.9(86)

Cherry Orchard Vets (previously The Reformation)

RG4 9BP·£54 consultationIndependent practice
4.9(39)

Valley Veterinary Group

RG8 7JQ·£55 consultationSmaller group: Valley Veterinary Group
4.1(14)

Valley Veterinary Group

RG7 1AA·£55 consultationSmaller group: Valley Veterinary Group
4.5(84)

Valley Veterinary Group

RG7 6JU·£55 consultationSmaller group: Valley Veterinary Group
4.3(10)

The Veterinary Centre T/As Henley Vets Limited

RG10 9JA·£58 consultationSmaller group: Henley Vets
4.7(20)

Tilehurst Vets4Pets (Oxford Road)

RG30 1PR·£58 consultationJoint venture: Pets at Home
4.8(207)

Reading Vets4Pets

RG2 0HS·£60 consultationJoint venture: Pets at Home
4.3(241)

The Woodley Vet

RG5 3JY·£65 consultationLargest group: IVC Evidensia
4.1(889)

Common questions about vets in Reading

Consultation fees in Reading range from £40 to £69. The average across 18 practices that publish their prices is £60. Harrison Family Vets offers the lowest published consultation at £40.
Rightvet has indexed 19 vet practices in Reading. 7 are independently owned and 12 are part of larger veterinary groups including CVS Group, IVC Evidensia, Pets at Home.
The highest-rated practice on Google is Cherry Orchard Vets (previously The Reformation) at 4.9★ in Reading.

Vets in nearby towns

Vets in Wokingham7 practices· avg £64
Vets in Tadley2 practices
Vets in Yateley2 practices
Vets in Wallingford3 practices
Vets in Sandhurst2 practices
Vets in Bracknell5 practices· avg £58
Browse all areas →

See something wrong? Suggest a correction