Search forum
Back to German Shepherd Dog
Liked top 20
ForumsGerman Shepherd Dog > Chequers BAGSD show (88 replies)
by Abby Normal on 01 July 2011 - 08:01 |
| I would like Charles to provide facts about his claims about the dogs too(yes, the only aspect that is important as far as I am concerned). This is becoming bizarre with 'boasts' about how quickly one rescue has grown versus the other etc. Guys, it's not a competition. This is sad, truly sad. Leiasmum - I didn't say whether GSDR UK did or didn't spay/neuter, I said that IMO all rescues should do it. How do you know GSDR UK don't? (just curious). Where does any rescue spend £120-£250 on a dog - you are kidding right? Hopefully, anyone following this thread can see that it is simply a vendetta and act accordingly. Who against who is IMO totally irrelevant. |
Abby Normal by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 08:36 |
| I can’t believe I am agreeing with you Abby Normal, but you are right. This has moved away from my original request that, before they hand over their hard earned cash, people take a serious look at the honesty and integrity of people who run the rescue BAGSD are supporting. I am more than pleased to provide facts about the claims I have made even though, unfortunately, there is nothing to regulate the way in which rescues are run. Including the one where Suzanne used a foster home where they were banned from owning dogs that Paul seems to have conveniently sidestepped! When I first raised my concerns with the BAGSD show manager she was keen for all concerned parties to go through her first, and so this is how I am happy to deal with things. Kay knows who I am and will provide anyone with a genuine need, my contact details. I am certainly not going to publish them on line! |
by seenthelight1 on 01 July 2011 - 09:51 |
| One question charlesppope or anyone else if you know the answer Is this the same rescue lady that was saving the sight of 2 dogs earlier this year, with a similar event emails were circulating then that it was a scam i never heard the outcome or if indeed the dogs were operated on we always seem to hear the rumours but never the outcome |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 10:12 |
| Is this the same rescue lady that was saving the sight of 2 dogs earlier this year, with a similar event I think it was 3 pups, not 2, but yes, this is the same lady/rescue The dogs wer born blind. There was never any evidence their sight could be saved. According to the rescues own newsletter, they have been rehomed - still blind of course! |
by Abby Normal on 01 July 2011 - 10:56 |
| Charles I never suggested you publish your contact details on line. If you have facts to back up your claims and you want those claims taken seriously - give us those facts - publicly. |
by PaulGSD2 on 01 July 2011 - 11:30 |
| Charles just name the dogs with dates, if they have been though our rescue the admin will know them. The three blind pups where rehomed in the end, yes still blind, Suzanne kept one of them. The rescue tried to raise money for tests to be done as the pups had some blurred vision, shapes etc. The vet quotation for this was put on the website so people could see what was happening, the rescue again came under attack with suggestions that this was a waste of rescue money and that the pups would be better off being PTS, in the end no money was raised and Suzanne covered the bill herself. This is again a good example of what happens when the this rescue does a plea for donations, Suzanne court actions is brought up and then portrayed into a con or a scheme where Suzanne will benefit by ripping people off. She is only trying to help dogs, people should be ashamed. |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 11:38 |
| The facts involve other people who dont want their names published on public forum and so I am respecting that. I am also trying to respect what was wanted by the show manager. Obviously I cant please all of the people all of the time. |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 11:50 |
| The rescue tried to raise money for tests to be done Weren't they raising £4,000? Did you say *nothing* was raised? Are you saying Suzanne paid the entire 4K herself? I'm sure most people with any sense understand the options available for congenitally blind pups, and surgery generally isnt one of them! |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 12:04 |
| The pups- Their plight was published in an appeal on this website : http://ukgsdshow.webs.com/eventsattractions.htm Interestingly, the home page on that site claims £1161 was raised The wording of everything is SO ambigious don't you think? You'll be trying to tell us next that the show was organised before the pups were accepted into the rescue. What a stroke of luck they must have been eh?! |
by PaulGSD2 on 01 July 2011 - 12:10 |
| The rescue never raised any money because of ******* like you and the lies you post, you can't even name the dogs, pm me if it helps. The £4000 was for the complete treatment, the rescue came under attack and after people wanting the dogs destroyed the fund raising was stopped. Suzanne paid for the initial tests, the dogs lost out here because of people like you. Anyway there is no point continuing with this thread, you can't back up anything you say and in my eyes you are full of ****. People low as you aren't worth pissing on. Back up what you are saying or **** off and find something better to do. |
by seenthelight1 on 01 July 2011 - 12:18 |
| thank you for that i only asked as an internet search on the rescue came up with the following which would tie in with emails earlier in the year http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-shows-events/150948-uk-german-shepherd-rescue-fun-dog-show-inc-gsd-rally-northants.html show. which was clearly raising funds for these dogs. if no money was raised for these animals as stated by PaulGSD2 . where did it go i am of course pleased these dogs are in homes |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 12:25 |
| "The £4000 was for the complete treatment" Treatment for dogs born blind? A vet quotes you 4K for *treatment* so, presumably you kept this quote? and we can all see it? Shouldn't you be out rescueing a dog somewhere Paul? |
by lidia on 01 July 2011 - 14:44 |
| Oooh-la-la Paul. I just *love* it when you're so crude and masterful. Lets everyone know exactly what they're dealing with. |
by PaulGSD2 on 01 July 2011 - 16:44 |
| Good point Lidia, first let me apologise for my luggage, I am sorry if I have offended anybody, I do not run the UK-GSR, I simply donate the website and cover running costs of these sites, Suzanne will verify this. It may have appeared in the posts or people have presumed I run the rescue and so speak as a representative, this is not the case, I was merely trying to defend it from the lies that are posted about the rescue and Suzanne. The words are of my own opinion and not that of the UK German shepherd rescue. Once again I am sorry I have caused any embarrassment to the rescue or its members. >>Charles<< You will need to ask the rescue for a copy of the quotation. Just like to point out Charles that despite my repeated requests for the dogs names you still haven't offered any evidence, you are simply side stepping. I can only prsume you are fabricating lies damage a rescue. It is clear that you have no interest in anything good about the rescue but merely like to see the rescue get no funding and prevent the rescue from helping further dogs. I can't comment on the money raised at the show as I don't work with the rescue that close. This is my last comment on this matter. |
by Abby Normal on 01 July 2011 - 17:49 |
| Charles, you do seem to be sidestepping, which certainly makes it appear that this is just stirring, for whatever reason. Name the dogs and dates. You simply haven't backed up anything you have said. Certainly not about the claims you have made about dogs. If you are deliberately trying to blacken the name of a rescue and preventing it from rescuing dogs, then shame on you whoever you may be. On the *financial* side, other than an historic conviction (I don't condone it) for benefit fraud, nothing that I can see has indicated any financial irregularities with rescue funds. You seem to infer that a £250 adoption fee means the rescue is coining it in (not excessive when you factor in vet treatment and boarding costs). Some other rescues, as I have shown, charge the same. The case of the blind puppies may also be a case in point. If you want to discover whether anything can be done you are looking at specialist referral centres and lots of £££'s. The rescue centre that I do some work for had a disabled mastiff, quite a youngster. He needed a referral to pinpoint exactly what his problems were, and whether he could be helped. The rescue needed to raise that money before he was referred. A similar situation occurred, in that, as it transpired there was nothing to be done. Those funds were used for other dogs. I know other rescues that have done the same, and some of those with blind puppies. You don't simply assume that because a pup is blind nothing can be done. You find out. If you know differently that she is 'lining her own pocket' - let's have facts again. At the end of the day she rescued 3 blind puppies and provided a home for 1 of them herself and rehomed the other 2. Good for her, it is not easy to rehome disabled dogs. I would hate to think that what Paul has said is true, and that you are out to prevent them raising money and thereby reducing the number of GSDs that can be helped. Paul you did yourself no favours, but I can understand your frustration. Facts Charles, facts. Dogs, dates, evidence of financial irregularity. If you are going to ask other people to be judge and jury, facts are necessary. |
by leiasmum on 01 July 2011 - 18:13 |
| Charles told me to call him, slated me for not calling him and all he did was gave me the phone number of Kay Waddington! Again, this has turned into a silly excuse to have a go at somebody, but I do belive it is almost inciting hatred towards an individual- Suzzanne Syers- and that is disgusting and against the law. Give us some facts or go away Mr.Pope. p.s. You are all saying it was 3 puppies, Im sure it was only 2. |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 18:22 |
| I simply donate the website and cover running costs of these sites, Suzanne will verify this. Yeah, right, like she verified her benefit claim? Read back through what you have posted Paul, and see if you sound like someone who occasionally makes a donation to maintain a website. All of this polite "Sorry I sounded like scum" seems more like a damage limitation exercise to me! I'm sure your foul mouthed outburst was "all for the dogs" and so will be excused. Thats what normally happens isnt it? All that mouthing off and youre not even a representative of the rescue? I *am* disappointed. Seems you are just another anonymous body here who wants to be taken seriously. To Abby Normal : As for providing proof is concerned, I have made it quite clear how that can be obtained. If you choose not to follow it up then dont complain it wasnt available! |
by charlesppope on 01 July 2011 - 18:26 | ||||||
| Charles told me to call him, slated me for not calling him and all he did was gave me the phone number of Kay Waddington! NOT TRUE Leiasmum. I explained to you WHY it should go through Kay Waddington. The same reason I gave on this forum. Heres the email she sent me since you seem so hell bent on people justifying their self in public!
| ||||||
by PaulGSD2 on 01 July 2011 - 18:40 |
| An email of you grassing, still no dogs or dates Worzel. Charles, you type and talk like Jayne Shenstone, weired that. |
by Abby Normal on 02 July 2011 - 07:45 |
| For me this thread is done. As far as I am concerned this thread should be removed, since it is attacking someone without providing any validation. Charles - you put it on this board. You made it public and you should be prepared to back it up with facts, otherwise don't put it here. You are just spreading 'rumours' otherwise. Your refusal to do so should be noted by everybody. I don't know if this rescue is good or bad, and you have not provided enough to convince me that either way. If this is a case of two rescues back biting each other then frankly they should have better things to do. |
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!