1. You have only left a deposit, which is refundable. It takes time for them to do this.
2. Just so you are clear on the actual ruling. Here it is:
BCVMA v. K-9 DENTAL CARE
The BC Court of Appeal on April 8, 2005 confirmed the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of BCVMA v. K-9 Dental Care and Sylvia MacDonald. The case concerns representations and activity relating to the cleaning of dogs' teeth.
The BCVMA pursuant to the Veterinarians Act had sought a civil injunction against the respondents prohibiting them from performing dentistry including scaling of teeth; from offering, providing or making representations that they provide or are competent to provide 'dental care', oral health, services that are comparable or an alternate to what would be provided by a veterinarian, examinations, or assessment or evaluation of oral health or whether an animal should be referred to a veterinarian.
The BCMVA obtained the bulk of the relief that was sought.
The Court clearly found that the representations made by the respondents were confusing to the public, deemed them to be the practice of veterinary medicine and in violation of the Veterinarians Act. The Court issued an injunction against them, granting most of the prohibitions described above. K9 Dental Care and Sylvia MacDonald must remove the term 'Dental' from the name; and remove all advertising from the veterinary section of the yellow pages phone book. Further, the proprietor has now changed the name of the business to 'K-9 Bright Bark', and the former website is gone.
'K9' and Sylvia MacDonald are also prevented from representing that they provide 'dental' care and from the other above activities, with one exception.
The exception is the Court could not find that cleaning above the gum line, including by scaling, is 'dentistry' under the Veterinarians Act. The Court was clear that the lack of a definition of dentistry in the Act was the major factor and it is up to the BCVMA to lobby the government for a clear definition. The Court understood that all activity carries risk, but found that the line between what is 'dentistry' versus what is cosmetic must be drawn clearly in the Act and in the absence of that clear direction from the legislature, the Court should not and will not presume to do so.
3. Proper canine dental prophylaxis INCLUDE subgingival scaling/cleaning. Human dental hygienist also must do subgingival scaling. For canine species, subgingival scaling is considered to be the practice of veterinary medicine, thus only veterinarians or persons under the DIRECT supervision of a veterinarian can provide this service.
4. A little vocab correction, it is principle, NOT principal.
5. BotXXXXX XXXXXne is that proper canine dental prophylaxis must include teeth assessment via probing, supragingival and subgingival scaling/cleaning. Both teeth assessment and subgingival scaling have been ruled by the court (in B.C.) to be the practice of veterinary medicine. Thus only veterinarians are authorized to perform canine dental prophylaxis.