Breeders- question for you - Page 2

I do not feel the breeder is at fault at all regarding what happened. I've been involved with dogs a long time and I know things happen that are unexplained. The breeder was actually very supportive during the entire ordeal, but is now stating she's not replacing the pup because it didn't die from a confirmed hereditary disease. If my family member wants another pup from this breeder she has to pay full price. I know according to the contract the breeder is not obligated to replace the pup, but she knows everything my family member went through and what a conscientious person she is. The breeder also knows she is absolutely devastated. I feel so badly for my family member.

A tragic experience. I don't believe from your description that the breeder is legally or morally required to replace the pup. "There was nothing the owner was doing that would cause seizures" This statement, although most likely accurate, may or may not be true. Theres a lot of grey here. 

 

That being said., Im more inclined to go with the dog from the desert. 

 

I would most likely replace the animal. Its hard enough placing in good homes. It appears your family is that. Back out the emotions and the breeder, as it appears, has no obligation to replace that puppy.

 

I would want to in this instance, because I really like the people I place my kids with. 

I also would replace the pup, as others have said,It's just the right thing to do". I really can't understand WHY so many that breed dogs have such a hard time offering a replacement pup. You read it here all the time. If it's so costly to produce a litter, why bother, and if you want to be compensated for the time you spend raising a litter, you shouldn't be doing it. I get so much pleasure from my puppies, that no money couldk compensate them, for the joy they give me. And isn't it satisfying when owners call you or e-mail you to tell you how much they love their dog. The breeder needs to replace that pup!

Sometimes doing something out of "Good Will" is more important than worrying about what the legal obligation is.

Years ago I sold a 2 year old gelding that I had bred.  The young lady who bought him paid for him over time religously.  The horse developed an incurable lameness in his hocks and had to be put down.  I had another horse a filly.. same age.. much better breeding.. much better horse.. and about two weeks after the first one was put down, I showed up at the girl's house with a halter and lead with the filly's name on it and I handed it to her.  She was amazed that I would replace the first horse.  

There was no contract.. first horse's bill of sale stated the horse was sold "as is" and I had no obligation to replace him.  I replaced him with a daughter of a stakes winning stallion by the Triple Crown winner Affirmed... the gelding had been an appendix Quarterhorse by a relatively unknown Quarterhorse Stallion out of a good Thoroughbred mare.  

There is no replacement for the animal lost.  There is also no replacement for Good Will.    

I don't think based on the information given that the breeder is obligated to replace the pup per their contract, so I wouldn't roast them if they choose not to.  However, I would, simply because these people are obviously a good home that will give their dogs the best care they can, and while it doesn't sound like it was neccessary a genetic defect, it doesn't sound like it was anything the owners did either, just one of those "sh!t happens" situations.  So why not give them a replacement.

I had my first experience with seizure activity  when a dog I bred started to experience grand mal seizures when he was around 5 years of age. Meds didn't keep him under control and eventually he suffered from status epilepticus and was put down.  He was from a litter of 11, I bred and owned his dam and I had never seen or heard of any seizures in the pedigree. I didn't refund the purchase price and wasn't breeding much, so I did pay for half of a new puppy. It was the right thing to do.

No obligation to do so, but a nice gesture. I would replace it or at least discount another if I had one. 

I had an seizure dog from a vaccine reaction and I took him off all processed food and never vaccinated him again, no tick or flea chemicals, etc. and he went from cluster seizures several times per week to one seizure every 6mos-1yr for the rest of his life. You can spend a ton of money and never find out why they happen. My guess on the OP pup would be the fever. My ex's brother had that; he had a high fever as a baby and had seizures ever since. 

Thank you all for your replys. It is nice to know there are so many compassionate breeders out there.

I agree that based on the contract the breeder has no legal obligation to replace the pup, but it just seems like the kind and compassionate thing to do.  The owner is so conscientious and she loved that pup so much. The pup died at 10 months of age and all along the way, since she got the pup, the owner was consulting periodically with the breeder because she wanted to make sure she did everything exactly right.  She thought she had a good relationship with the breeder, so when the breeder stated she wasn't giving her replacement pup we were all dissapointed and surprised.

I think it would make good business sense to replace the pup if nothing else. The owner was recommending this breeder to everyone who inquired about her pup and if the breeder had offered her a replacement pup or even tried to work out a compromise, she would have continued to do so in spite of going through the terrible ordeal with her pup that died.

In a previous post on this thread I stated: "I do not feel the breeder is at fault at all regarding what happened."

 
I want to clarify my statement: I believe there is nothing the breeder did to intentionally or knowingly to cause this problem. I also strongly believe nothing knowingly occurred or was obvious while the puppy was in the possession of the breeder. 

As a few people said on this thread that it's a good possibility the fever is what caused the seizures and ultimately the death of the puppy. If the fever or infection that caused the fever was what ultimately caused the death of the puppy, based on the contract, the breeder is not legally responsible to replace the pup. That said, it is likely that whatever caused the 106 degree fever was something that the puppy contracted before she was in the owner's possession, either while in the breeder's possession or during transport. Incubation period for most infections or viruses is typically a minimum of 5 days, according to my vet. I would not consider it the breeder's fault if this is what happened because even in the best of circumstances and environment stuff happens, but I still believe the right thing to do is replace the puppy.

If a breeder does all the proper health testing on the parents and thoroughly researches the dogs in the pedigree for health issues and a puppy from the breeding ends up with hip dysplasia or a heart defect it isn't the breeder's fault, but the breeder is still responsible to make things right with the puppy owner. In that case the breeder is legally bound to replace the puppy and do the right thing. In this horrible ordeal with my family member's puppy it is entirley up to the breeder to decide whether or not she wants to enforce the contract. She has to decide whether she wants to do the compassionate thing or the most profitable.

Thank you again to everyone who commented. I apologize for all the rambling, but if nothing else this has given me an opportunity to express myself and surprisingly it has helped me to start letting go, at least a little bit.

In my contract of purchase from both of my two younger dogs the contract states, in addition to a congenital defect, that if the puppy dies through an honest accident or disease and it is in no way the fault of the owner (in the first year) that the breeder will replace with an available puppy from a future litter with a clause that it may take a couple of years depending on waiting lists. As a buyer I think this is a nice line in a contract. As a breeder in the future I would add this to my contract. It looks good and thE odds of having to replace a puppy for this reason are small enough that I would take the chance and if I ended up ever having to replace I would.