Buyer Beware of Alicia Jordan, Von Jordan Haus kennels - Page 23

Correct Beetree, I know it did not matter to me that Alicia and her mother were business partners at that time. I researched her mom as well and didn't find anything to be alarmed about.

NA7,

So, you do know that your purpose for your dogs as FEMA K9s* are not affected in any way, whether your K9 partner has papers, or not. The dog just needs to pass the training.  Are you as interested in making a criminal case out of this, as others seem to be? Is your complaint based more on the principle of the matter for you? You have a contradictory style of expression, IMHO so it is not clear to me how you feel it would be fair; for you to feel justified in getting what you deserve.

 

*(Are you doing the training yourself? Or do you pay for that specialized training? Just curious as to your skill level. Are you and husband already on a CERT team, or this a goal?)

Yes Beetree I know that please refer back to my response earlier to another person & you will understand why we spent so much money on getting our dogs from a breeder.

Also, Beetree, we do have training, guidance and some certifications already. We are working with outstanding organizations to help us train our dogs thoroughly and travel all over to attend this training. They are not fly by night trainers. I'm not here to continue to argue with anyone and my expression has not been contradictory - I have been honest. What you have posted does not matter at all, as well as your weak attempt at obfuscation   My training and what I do does not matter in this issue.   It is not based on a matter of principle; it is a matter of criminal intent and felony across multiple cases, dogs and people.

What matters is what Alicia Jordan knowlingly did and did not do with intent, through calls, emails, messages and face to face meetings. Though I 100% believe she knew what she is doing. The papers started this issue but it has turned to much more! I was sold a dog with certifications he does not have and another dog whose mother with tiltes she does not have!  The father is still under investigation and now recently found out the one dog we do have may night even be a Thor/Candy pup. She put several litters together, the same age, no identificationa and have been informed we now have to pay for DNA to see if the dog we have is a pup of who she is registered to.

Weak attempt at obsfucation? Not at all by me. I can see how there has not been complete disclosure from the get go. Why? That is the curious question, whatever you may feel is the most important. And yes, you have presented quite a few contradictions and I am not going to go into all of them, only it is my opinion, take it or leave it. Just take this topic title as the start, your wording is inaccurate when you could have been more precise. It is that type of choice you make in your presentation of information that I find puzzling.

I really wasn't trying to get you defensive. It just makes no sense that since your stated goals are not in jeopardy, just that you did not get what you paid for in paper. The dogS  themselves are not defective for your purpose, since you are adamant you are not a breeder. 

Of course if you have papers, then you could change your mind about that. 

You see, when I found out the papers I paid for on my dog were worthless, I was very disappointed. It never occurred to me to reflect that fact negatively against my dog. I just chalked it up as a lesson to be learned. 

I just wondered what is the end point of satisfaction for you to have this settled. You want criminal charges? Is that correct? Or something more civil?

What is really sad is the fact there are no vaccines or deworming prior to the reciept of your puppy

Wow

I think, and this is an assumption only, that Patricia Jordan " vom Jordanhaus"  is not involved at all in this mess.
Sounds like she trusted her daughter Alicia, when she started breeding workingline dogs ( as she stated, Patricia ONLY breeds showlines...).
Alicia used her mother´s kennel name, but not her dogs. Now Patricia became aware of the problems her daughter evoked, and she is doing the only possible, to cut her kennel name from her daughter.
Sad
 

I agree, Susie. Totally. And it seems the idea was to not involve Patricia in a legal mess. But the paper trail? Is another matter and isn't that what the courts will look at? So I ask, is the only satisfaction going to be criminal prosecution? I don't see how one can excise one person from the other, from the single kennel name.

Beetree, You are missing the entire point. When this post was originated it was about papers. We had no idea all these other issues would pop up. Almost 20 people are involved and each have a little light to shed. So the papers are just a tiny little piece of the puzzle now. Our family alone pd more for the dogs because of papers, titles/certifications, history, etc. Point blank- Alicia has committed fraud on many levels and does not care at all about the dogs, zero! I could not even get a vet reference from her or shot record (after the dogs either arrived or at the point of sale when we picked them up - OFFSITE). So many horrible facts came to life just because of the fight for the papers. The most disturbing is her complete lack of concern for the dogs. We all will move on but the dogs could always suffer in one way or another. Like the two who are sickly due to lack of care (per their vets who have no affiliation with one another). I stated this before but I will again. In our fight for the papers for the import we purchased from her she refused to give me his papers unless I signed something stating I would never register a certain litter that she intentionally bred becasue she and her BF at the time of breeding broke up. I refused! so #1 not only did she breed our dog who does not even have his hips/elbows/dm on file anywhere she also does not want to register dogs because of her personal greed. These dogs may likely end up in the wrong hands (they were bred to be high drive working dogs) or shelters. To me that proves, in additon to the lies and lack of business ethics, she has no business breeding dogs.

I think you know that there is probably no way out of hurting both, if you succeed. IMHO

That is my point. It seemed to matter at first to pinpoint only one as the offender, but now, if it takes two to go down to get the one, that will be your recourse for satisfaction.

Your stated goals, however the strong conviction against the accused, are not impacted in any way, at this time. Only the papers you paid for are not forthcoming. 

Does your pending lawsuit also address animal abuse charges? 

I'm sorry, I have been informed I can't answer that question.