Does Rescue Have Legal Guidelines

[animals]

I just heard a story from a lady who said she adopted a rescue small dog however later (2 weeks later) after a routine vet visit the vet said the dog had major hip/leg problems .She was really gilling me about a dog I have in my care and everything I knew about him --But explained why and how she was really upset at what had happened with the other dog .the dogs knees were slipping in and out other stuff I can"t remember (she returned the dog ) so she said this time she really wanted to ask alot of questions before going ahead with an adoption enquiry --Fair enough I didn"t mind :)

The lady said she wasn"t informed of any medical conditions when adopting the dog .Yet when she contacted the rescue and gave them the vet report the rescue said they had infact informed her .

I know Im only hearing this story from one side but I then thought it could happen to anyone and go both ways .Im assuming the adoption contract is a legal doc and anything written in it therefore by signing it both parties agree etc (Im only the carer all forms legal stuff etc is done by rescuer) so ifs its a standard contract not based on individual dogs then would that mean a case of he said she said and the outcome either common sense or dare I say a full blown little guy misses out situation

(I edited it as a reread made it sound funny the first dog wasn"t from me but another group )

Edited November 14, 2013 by animals

[Burkes]

The dog should never 'miss out'. Any ethical rescue would take it back anyway. Things can get missed in vet checks, as long as both parties are in it for the dog it shouldn't really be an issue.

Our adoption agreement states that any further costs after the adoption are the responsibility of the new owner. In saying that if there was obvious negligence by the vet we may assist on a case by case basis or we would take the dog back.

[*kirty*]

On my adoption agreement I have a bit that states the animal has been vet checked and is healthy to the best of my knowledge, and that any known issues have been discussed with the new owner. It also says that the owner should have the animal checked with their own vet in the first week for their own peace of mind, and if anything is found I will take the animal back and refund them.

[_PL_]

There is no legal guidelines in rescue itself. No governing body and only the Companion Animal Act or POCTAA guidelines to follow. Home drafted contracts can be disputed.

However to my limited knowledge a buyer of any item (and animals are considered 'property') has a right to get what they pay for and if known defects haven't been noted on paper they have more rights than the rescue aka seller, who has sold a faulty product without black & white disclosure. (ACL reference brochure)

The rescue did the right thing if they took the dog back and refunded the money. That's all they can do. There's no guarantee of perfection in any living animal, it's just that known issues should be made clear and complaining about it after the rescue has settled the matter is pretty rough in my opinion. Now you have only one side of the story not both.

Steve may be able to clarify. And a second opinion by another vet would be useful before re-listing the dog.

[keetamouse]

I had a case some months back where the lady had adopted a Chi cross from me and has had Chi's all her life, she then adopted a pure breed Chi from me and took her to the vets for the check up and the vet said to her " this dog has serious issues with both her front legs and it will cost you over $400 for xrays, the lady had paid thousands for her other 2 dogs with laxating patella's and it never fixed the problems, so she was reluctant to spend money on this one and I fully understood, she returned her I had the xrays done for no more than $130 and there was nothing wrong with her legs, I did say to her that the dog is a pure breed and just looked different to her cross's, I couldn't see any problems with her legs.

I would never rehome a dog that had bad patella's I have always got the ops done regardless.

Regardless of the carer saying she told the woman she should have written it on the adoption agreement.

Maree

CPR

[Steve]

O.K. If you place an animal with someone they have a right under Australian consumer law to get what they have paid for - if they get it home and find out it has temperament or health issues you have to deal with this .You can offer a refund for return of the dog but they dont have to agree to that and that doesnt let you off the hook. You could end up paying vet expenses and damages if thats the way they want to go.

The only way around this is to put everything in writing and to ensure before they take the dog they receive a product disclaimer .

So you can say that the dog has been examined by your vet and has been given a clean bill of health and when - include a written document for the vet to say so and that you have not observed any potential issues, that it has been assess and by what method for temperament issues. you have to be very clear that you have done what you can but that you cannot guarantee future temperament issues or health issues because these things are beyond your control AND THEY ACCEPT THAT AS SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE GUARANTEED . If it gets to a hearing with the Australian Consumer tribunal or court that will help but it wont necessarily get you out of it altogether either. Of course if there is anything there that needs to be shared with the new owner even if you think its insignificant you need to put that in writing and have them agree to the fact that you have informed them.

There are many sub issues here and much more to talk about but the end story is people come to you as a small private rescue with an expectation that you will sell them an animal which eliminates some of the risks they may encounter by taking a dog from a pound - this implies to them even before they get to you that the product they buy will be better quality and they expect better service, a healthier and better temperamented animal. Even if they dont they can make a pretty good argument for that if it goes further. When they walk out your door they expect that they will be able to use the animal as a pet for a reasonable period of time with reasonable anticipated expenses. So the marketing you do which tells the public about how good you are and why they should come to you gives an implication for the buyer and an expectation which places you in a hotter position than [ say ] a pound if something goes wrong. It may be easier to see if you consider why a registered breeder is more likely than a pet shop or back yard breeder to have legals taken against them and demands way after the dog goes home. Its because registered breeders have marketed their ability to sell a healthier better temperamented dog to tell people to come to them instead of the others - so someone buying from a pet shop knows they have a 7 day guarantee and after that they are on their own, they purchase a purebred pup from a registered breeder with an expectation that it is a higher quality - so much of it is about the implication that coming to you brings with it . So we have to say we believe our products are better and we have done the best we can to eliminate or reduce the risks that come with purchasing a live animal but before they walk out the door they have to be able to say they understand you cant guarantee they will take home an animal which is perfect for an unlimited period of time. And that's only about when you HAVE done everything right and haven't told fibs or left bits out - then you are really in trouble.