German Shepherd Dog > Buyer changes limited reg to full (52 replies)
by crhuerta on 14 October 2010 - 13:50
|In the past 15 + yrs....I have placed 2 puppies on limited registration, prior to placing or selling them.|
One was a female Rottweiler puppy with an overbite, and a few years back a male GSD puppy with one retained testicle. Both new owners were told at the time of purchase, if their puppies conditions changed, then I would gladly reverse the registration (no problem). I still feel it was the right thing to do. I also have no problem with euthanasia ..if a puppy or dog's situation warrants it.
I think breeders have all sorts of reasons why they do certain things.....
by KYLE on 14 October 2010 - 17:21
Limited registration is all about control. I sell all pups with full registration. Why because it is no longer my puppy. If some one buys a pup from me and decides to breed the dog, that litter does not have my kennel name. If you think the dog is not breed worthy, neuter/spay and, cull or give the dog away without papers. Limited registration is like getting a receipt from Walmart for a can of soda. What can you do with it, nothing but give the AKC money.
by Krazy Bout K9s on 16 October 2010 - 21:42
| So how about a dog that the people paid $3,500 for, on a limited registration, but as a breeding right dog. They heard that the breeder was not honoring any registrations, after that, so got rid of the dog. Problems with AKC etc...|
So is a $3500 dog, sold on a limited registration a pet or show/breeding quality???
by eichenluft on 16 October 2010 - 22:02
|doesn't make sense for a dog bought with limited registration and breeding rights - there are no breeding rights with limited registration, and the breeder/seller is the only one who can change the limited to full to allow breeding rights.|
by Jenni78 on 16 October 2010 - 22:11
| Robin, selling a particular dog w/a particular flaw is not the same as a blanket limited reg. policy, and certainly was not what I was referring to. |
Steph, that makes no sense at all. ANY dog on limited registration does not have breeding rights.
by crhuerta on 16 October 2010 - 22:21
|I know Jen....I was just noting the 2 times that I've done it & for the reason(s).|
I would only limit a dog's registration if there truly was a need to. I can't speak for other breeders.
I also did not understand a breeding dog on "limited registration"???
by Krazy Bout K9s on 17 October 2010 - 00:33
|Well, I saw the contract, it said full breeding rights for $3500, then the box was marked limited...go figure...|
by KETCAT on 17 October 2010 - 01:06
|I want to thank everyone for your response's on this post. i was mainly curious what other's would do if in this type of situation. A lot of response's were very interesting to say the least.|
The buyer who did this' read my post on here and sent me an email that she now has "yellow AKC " on her dog,and after so many litters they will make it purple. She also said she want's to prove a point that their are ways around AKC.
No one forced this buyer into limited reg. She wanted a pet at a pet price. Not every dog turn's out to be breeding material and not every dog should be bred. just my opinion.
Thank you all again. OP
by melba on 17 October 2010 - 12:14
|I believe you can lock registration type if you have an online account with AKC. I have only sold 1-2 on limited, but it was for obvious faults ( overbite etc...) and locked their registrations so they could only be registered on limited. It also keeps the name from being changed, I believe. I have since registered puppies individually and in my name so there is no dishonesty.|
If you have a good contract you may go after them for breach of contract, but it will cost ya. If you have corespondences in writing, you may have an obtaining property under false pretenses ( buyer wanted a pet, bought dog as such but has since "changed their minds". If they paid a lower fee for the pet quality dog then I believe it is.
False Pretenses and Cheats.
§ 14-100. Obtaining property by false pretenses.
(a) If any person shall knowingly and designedly by means of any kind of false pretense
whatsoever, whether the false pretense is of a past or subsisting fact or of a future fulfillment or
event, obtain or attempt to obtain from any person within this State any money, goods,
property, services, chose in action, or other thing of value with intent to cheat or defraud any
person of such money, goods, property, services, chose in action or other thing of value, such
person shall be guilty of a felony: Provided, that if, on the trial of anyone indicted for such
crime, it shall be proved that he obtained the property in such manner as to amount to larceny
or embezzlement, the jury shall have submitted to them such other felony proved; and no
person tried for such felony shall be liable to be afterwards prosecuted for larceny or
embezzlement upon the same facts: Provided, further, that it shall be sufficient in any
indictment for obtaining or attempting to obtain any such money, goods, property, services,
chose in action, or other thing of value by false pretenses to allege that the party accused did
the act with intent to defraud, without alleging an intent to defraud any particular person, and
without alleging any ownership of the money, goods, property, services, chose in action or
other thing of value; and upon the trial of any such indictment, it shall not be necessary to
prove either an intent to defraud any particular person or that the person to whom the false
pretense was made was the person defrauded, but it shall be sufficient to allege and prove that
the party accused made the false pretense charged with an intent to defraud. If the value of the
money, goods, property, services, chose in action, or other thing of value is one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000) or more, a violation of this section is a Class C felony. If the value
of the money, goods, property, services, chose in action, or other thing of value is less than one
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), a violation of this section is a Class H felony.
(b) Evidence of nonfulfillment of a contract obligation standing alone shall not establish
the essential element of intent to defraud.
(c) For purposes of this section, "person" means person, association, consortium,
corporation, body politic, partnership, or other group, entity, or organization. (33 Hen. VIII, c.
1, ss. 1, 2; 30 Geo. II, c. 24, s. 1; 1811, c. 814, s. 2, P.R.; R.C., c. 34, s. 67; Code, s. 1025; Rev.,
s. 3432; C.S., s. 4277; 1975, c. 783; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c.
63, s. 1; c. 179, s. 14; 1997-443, s. 19.25(l).)
I would talk to your county's DA to see what could be done.
by Bhaugh on 18 October 2010 - 13:06
|I would like to know how many of you that have posted have actually been in this situation? I was but not exactly the same story. Now I no longer place pet pups with papers. I do however register the litter in my name so I can keep track of dogs for testing and such. |
Buyers who feel they can make some money off a dog in the pet market will do and say anything. If it were me and you have a signed contract, I would go after them in small claims court. Limited registration is worthless imo because AKC will register anything. Your only recourse at this point is the contract that was signed at sell.
We all know on here that when you have busted your ass to show and title your dogs, someone will come along and take credit for your work. Im sure the buyer is doing just that and like so many on here who post dogs for sale, will get more money for it without doing a damn thing (esp these people who lied and committed fraud for it) Grrrr .
I wont buy a limited registration dog myself because I spend too much time and money on dogs to be locked out should I want to breed the dog. Since buying pups is a crap shoot in the first place, I dont need that hurdle from the get go.
by happytogo on 18 October 2010 - 17:29
I have had the same thing happen so me a while ago. but since my brother didnt have a power of attorney from me to be able to sign my name to the contract he just signed my name by his name, AKC will not accept the contract as valid (i was out of town on an emergency when the pup was sold) my mistake. I make sure now all my I's are dotted and t's are crossed on the contract. I cut out the limited number in the box if I feel the pup should not be bred. in this case he small and I was concerned that he only was a pet not bred.
by Justk9s on 20 October 2010 - 05:26
|I name and register my puppies initially to myself.. If I sell them with limited registration, then I keep the initial papers and send in a change to limited registration form, then when I receice the limited registration papers back , I mail them to the new owners. |
Very easy to do.. Costs a little more, but saves the headache in the long run.
by VonIsengard on 20 October 2010 - 16:25
|Same thing I will do from now on, Kim. Last litter I registered I did it all online and was able to (online) make two of the pups on limited registration. If you do it online within a certain amount of time from registering the litter you get a pretty good discount, as I recall. |
Nothing wrong with limited registration with reasonable terms. It's not a spay/neuter contract, I'm not telling someone what they can and cannot do with their dog. Get OFA hips/elbows, one conformation rating, one performance title/certification, I lift it. It's the very least someone can do before making the decision to add more dogs to an already corrupted gene pool.