Dogs Sales And The Law

[Diva]

Anyhow I can see my best avenue is to go through consumer rights as from the response I got from them they seem to think it is unfair that I bought such a sick puppy. Go figure. Thanks everyone for your input.

All I can say is what I would have done if I had bred and placed a puppy with all the health problems you list, and that is refund you in full, be very distressed at the situation, and look long and hard at what was hereditary in this outcome and what that meant I needed to change in future breeding plans. Sometimes the unforeseeable happens, you can't blame a breeder if that is the case, but you can judge them on how they deal with it. Of course we haven't heard their side, I am taking the facts as written. And I am sorry for your distress and your pups ill health.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Diva

[OSoSwift]

I think that the last part if response is an over reaction.

You have a very sick puppy, or course you are emotional and upset. You buy a puppy expecting to have a cute, naughty, gorgeous bundle of mischief.

I would email them again but I would also call them. They may be arses, but maybe they are not, you will find out if you call them.

I have also been on the receiving end of buying a puppy who ended up with numerous genetic issues and was euthanased at 4. That breeder had suddenly moved and was not contactable - sure.

I have also recently bred my first litter. I sent those babies off with a clean bill of health. If suddenly one of my puppy owners called me tomorrow and said there was an issue, yes I would be shocked. I would want a written report, I may even want another opinion. This does not make me callous, I want to know what and why.

Personally I would refund the purchase price. I would also offer them the choice of returning the puppy but would not expect it.

[kayla1]

Funnily enough I was prepared to just deal with the BAOS I knew it was a risk in the breed, but it appears the problems just don't stop there. He has lower oesophageal sphincter dysfunction, a small liver and his blood tests reflect slightly low urea and albumin. (These are taken straight from his specialist notes, plus this has not been one blood test but many) Unfortunately none of these have a definite diagnosis due to his bradycardia. They have basically said they don't want to risk any more tests. Having said that he does go in tomorrow for more X-rays on his back to determine how much the hemivetebrae has deteriorated and to decide his best options. They are going to attempt them with only slightest sedative.

I don't know much about those conditions, but I just wanted to say I'm sorry to hear of your pup's problems. It must be an incredibly stressful time.

I hope you get some good news from the xrays tomorrow.

[Safffy]

Some problems that dogs develop (or even breed specific issues), there are no tests for - so how does one guarantee those issues will never develop? Seriously, as others have said, some issues just happen through no major "fault" of either breeder or owner.

Spot on mate, it states in the ANKC's rules that a breeder has to refund all or most of the money and take the dog back if a health issue arises in 12 months. You can even face litigation if you don't comply. Yet instead of having mandatory health testing on all reg'd breeders they basically say, 'You should do health tests, but we will register if you don't anyway.' Adding, in fine print, 'If you sell bad dogs they can sue you and take your car or house.'

Where are you getting this info from - could you provide a link or reference please?

Sure.

http://www.ankc.org....ANKC-Forms.aspx

Scroll down to GUIDELINES and click the 'guidelines for breeders' link, then scroll down to hereditary diseases.

• • • "Financial risk to the breeder
      • a breeder who produces a puppy that subsequently becomes affected with anhereditary disease must act responsibly in dealing with the buyer on the matter
      • breeders are prone to risk of litigation if an affected puppy is produced; a defences to be able to show that all reasonable care has been taken to avoid hereditarydiseases in the breeding program."

    "Legal advice is that the Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases should be adhered tofor the protection of both buyer and seller. "

    "Producing a puppy affected by an hereditary disease is not a crime, provided you have made all reasonable efforts to avoid hereditary diseases. The offence is in doingnothing, before and after."

Edited January 14, 2014 by saithroth

[Steve]

Some problems that dogs develop (or even breed specific issues), there are no tests for - so how does one guarantee those issues will never develop? Seriously, as others have said, some issues just happen through no major "fault" of either breeder or owner.

Spot on mate, it states in the ANKC's rules that a breeder has to refund all or most of the money and take the dog back if a health issue arises in 12 months. You can even face litigation if you don't comply. Yet instead of having mandatory health testing on all reg'd breeders they basically say, 'You should do health tests, but we will register if you don't anyway.' Adding, in fine print, 'If you sell bad dogs they can sue you and take your car or house.'

Where are you getting this info from - could you provide a link or reference please?

Sure.

http://www.ankc.org....ANKC-Forms.aspx

Scroll down to GUIDELINES and click the 'guidelines for breeders' link, then scroll down to hereditary diseases.

• • • "Financial risk to the breeder
      • a breeder who produces a puppy that subsequently becomes affected with anhereditary disease must act responsibly in dealing with the buyer on the matter
      • breeders are prone to risk of litigation if an affected puppy is produced; a defences to be able to show that all reasonable care has been taken to avoid hereditarydiseases in the breeding program."

    "Legal advice is that the Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases should be adhered tofor the protection of both buyer and seller. "

    "Producing a puppy affected by an hereditary disease is not a crime, provided you have made all reasonable efforts to avoid hereditary diseases. The offence is in doingnothing, before and after."

Yes Im aware of that but where is the reference to the 12 months?

[Steve]

These are guidelines - not rules or regs and whilst some are covered in the code of ethics what you are looking at are guidelines only. In affect its basic advice for breeders - nothing more.

Further down there is this

"Will you be in the position to replace the puppy or to refund the purchase price if the dog

develops a serious hereditary defect in the first year of life? Are you prepared to

educate yourself sufficiently to be aware and conversant with major research on any

such defects which afflict your chosen breed?"

These are simply questions the guideline suggests a breeder should consider before they breed .

If breeders really did ask themselves that question few of them would ever have a litter. Very few breeders I know of have that kind of cash stashed in case something goes wrong and are able to keep thousands sitting around in case someone turned up with a problem for 12 months after they sell a litter to cover up to a dozen dogs which may show a problem. Most of us lose money on a litter and if we make any it goes back into caring for our dogs - as hobby breeders we are not able to insure against this either.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Steve

[Safffy]

Don't you see the hypocrisy? The council could be doing a lot more to help new owners understand how to get the best type of dogs.

Edited January 14, 2014 by saithroth

[Salukifan]

Don't you see the hypocrisy? The council could be doing a lot more to help new owners understand how to get the best type of dogs.

In my opinion, new owners could also be doing a lot more to help themselves. There is a raft of information out there on this for anyone prepared to do 5 minutes of online research.

Good pet ownership involves a lot of responsibility - sadly councils are hard pressed to deal with those who fail to demonstrate any.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[Steve]

I make it very clear verbally and in writing that I am unaware of any problems in the parents,family or ancestors ,what tests I have done and what I can guarantee the dog wont get due to its parents clear status for recessive disorders I have tested for which are common in the breed. I also make it clear that it is a living creature and may develop anything the canine species is able to get and particularly those known to occur in the breed and if it does that the buyer accepts it is beyond my control.

However I dont have breeds which have potential health issues due to their conformation which may impact on quality of life .I expect a breeder who does breed a breed which has conformation characteristics which may be an impact on quality of life would inform the buyer that this is a risk they take when they take the puppy home and even though - hopefully the risks are less because of the care taken in selecting the parents with a registered breeder it is not possible to guarantee that their puppy wont be one of the unlucky ones. If a breeder tells a puppy buyer or doesnt make it clear to a puppy buyer that the risk is still there then they are crazy but if the puppy buyer is buying a dog of a breed they have been informed that some in the breed suffer from XYZ and that buying from a registered breeder doesnt make them immune to that then they have chosen to accept this is a potential future problem and that they are prepared to accept the risk and responsibility of that as part of the sale. They are given full disclosure and accepted the sale under those terms. there is no implied warranty because I have removed the implication. They have a choice to insure the dog and have any future issues covered if something turns up.