AREA REPORT
Vets in Upminster
Prices, reviews and ownership for 3 practices
LOCAL OVERVIEW
Upminster is unusual. Every one of its 3 practices is independently owned, far higher than the national average. Consultation fees range from £55 at Ace Vets Cranham to around £65 at typical high street vets. Most practices here publish their prices online. The highest-rated practice is Ace Vets Cranham at 5.0 on Google.
Find vets near you
Enter your postcode for personalised results with distances and local pricing
What vets charge in Upminster
3 cheapest consultations from 3 practices that publish prices
Who owns vets in Upminster
Ownership breakdown across 3 practices
Upminster vet rankings
3 practices in your area
Ace Vets Cranham
Upminster · RM14 1DZ
Excellent
OWNERSHIP
Independent
TRANSPARENCY
Good
PRICES
Around localAround local avg
REVIEWS
Excellent
Ivy Lodge Veterinary Clinic
Upminster · RM14 1TS
Excellent
OWNERSHIP
Independent
TRANSPARENCY
Very Good
PRICES
Below localBelow local avg
REVIEWS
Very Good
The Wylie Veterinary Centre Ltd
Upminster · RM14 1TD
Very Good
OWNERSHIP
TRANSPARENCY
Good
PRICES
Above localAbove local avg
REVIEWS
Very Good
Common questions about vets in Upminster
Consultation fees in Upminster range from £55 to £65. The average across 3 practices that publish their prices is £62. Ace Vets Cranham offers the lowest published consultation at £55.
Rightvet has indexed 3 vet practices in Upminster. All 3 are independently owned.
The highest-rated practice on Google is Ace Vets Cranham, rated 5.0 out of 5, in Upminster.
Vets in nearby towns
Topic hub
How to choose a vet
What to check when comparing practices on fees, reviews and ownership.
Topic hub
Vet costs guide
Live median fees for consultations, vaccinations, neutering and more.
Topic hub
Who owns UK vets?
How to tell if a practice is independent or part of a larger group.
Research study
Consultation cost research
What a routine appointment typically costs across UK practices.
Looking for a vet in a different area? Find vets near me
See something wrong? Suggest a correction