German Shepherd Dog > Breeder Rights? Breeder Greed? (242 replies)
by Jenni78 on 02 September 2011 - 17:52
|While I have already stated my view on this issue in terms of "giveback" clauses, I have to say that I am shocked that anyone really thinks that as a breeder, you shouldn't have any interest in an animal that exists solely because you bred it. If you aren't a total ass, you put a lot of thought, time, effort, training, money, etc., not to mention LOVE into a breeding, and I for one, am attached to every single one of them before they go home. I remember every single unique personality and will care about them all until I die. Sorry, but it's true. Now, I will go to my grave probably having only bred a handful of litters, but I don't think I would feel any differently if I bred a lot of dogs.|
I would not even sell a dog to someone who thinks the day he/she changes hands, that I have no further interest in the dog. Buy pens instead of puppies if you have a problem with someone caring about animals they created. I don't even understand why someone who feels differently would even want a dog if they think of them in that regard. I am grateful that the people I have sold puppies to appreciate the effort and thought that went into them and they are in turn grateful enough for their dog that they allow me the privilege of regular updates and even visits. In fact, I would consider nearly all of them to be friends.
by Niesia on 02 September 2011 - 18:17
Contact your Animal Control Officer and explain the situation, show them the contract, make a case. Call the cops, make a case. Get the Case #. Friends have no legal right to hold the dogs as they have no legal ownership over them. Solicitor has no legal right to dispose of those dogs against the written contract between you and the diseased owner - he would have to go thru Court himself. The Animal Control Officer can act on your behalf. That's usually enough.
If you want to go nasty you can accuse him of disposing of valuable property from the estate of the diseased. And friends with pocession of the property that doesn't belong to then. In this matter they have more to lose than you if they don’t play nice. If the dogs are worth over $4K (depending on the State) it’s a case for the Court. But if you win – they have to pay you all court costs and pay for any damages that they may caused to their training, behavior, etc. (depending on what can be proven in court). Get a statement from a trainer that the diseased owner worked with, his club, etc. to show that those dogs are not worked anymore and what state they were before friends took them in. I assume your contract states the amount the owner paid for the dogs - that's the mimimum capital gain on friend's behalf and that's the amount from the estate that the solicitor lost (embezzled) from the estate by 'giving' dogs to friends of the diseased. But don't put anything in writting. The only written legal document is your contract and leave it this way. Don't give anybody any amunition against you.
Be aware that that can turn both ways, if you get the dogs back, IRS can tax you on capital gain…
I know it is emotional for everybody involved, but contract is a contract and friends don’t have any legal rights to those dogs. I speak here from a breeder perspective - If they were a good choice as a potential new owner – I bet you (or me for that matter) would consider letting it go and not making a big issue out of it…
If it goes into Court you may request to have friend's dogs evaluated by the professional trainer to see if they (friends) can be considered a potential owner of trained (especially in protection) dogs. Do they have any prior experience in owning a powerful breed (two Sch/protection/bite trained dogs in this matter). You are right – trained dogs in a hands of the wrong person (doesn’t matter how much they love the dog) can be dangerous.
by Donald Deluxe on 02 September 2011 - 18:20
|"I would not even sell a dog to someone who thinks the day he/she changes hands, that I have no further interest in the dog. Buy pens instead of puppies if you have a problem with someone caring about animals they created. I don't even understand why someone who feels differently would even want a dog if they think of them in that regard." |
I have no problem communicating with my dogs' breeder about their development, health etc. I'm simply philosophically opposed to anyone having any legal or equitable interest in my property other than me. That's because while I can pretty much guarantee that I will get along with myself there are no such guarantees that others will remain reasonable, and if there's no outside interest then I'm assured of no future hassle.
"I am grateful that the people I have sold puppies to appreciate the effort and thought that went into them and they are in turn grateful enough for their dog that they allow me the privilege of regular updates and even visits. In fact, I would consider nearly all of them to be friends."
"Allow[ing] the privilege" is different than a contractual term or condition, which goes directly to my point.
by Niesia on 02 September 2011 - 18:53
You know what my biggest concern as a breeder? Person lies on the puppy app and lies to me in person. I sell that puppy only to THIS particular person and then – puppy gets sold or given away to another horrible person that destroys the dog mentally or physically and I have no way of helping that pup out. That’s why I put that clause in my contracts. Paring right dogs with right people is very important for me. That’s how as a breeder I can make sure that the owners get what they wanted and paid for while making sure that those pups will be taken care of.
Only people who really want that pup for themselves will agree to the terms of the contract.
If I care about my puppy I would not dump it at the shelter or give it away to anybody for free or sell it with a profit. I would like to know that the breeder will accept the puppy back anytime and find him suitable home in my name. If I knew of a person that would want to adopt or buy my dog, I would contact the breeder, vouch for that person and give a breeder all contact info to check for themselves.
If my interest is to sell this dog in a future to the person I want to sell it to – I would find a breeder who doesn’t care about it.
by beetree on 02 September 2011 - 23:38
|I think it depends on the breeder whether it is greed or not. I don't think Molly's contract will stand up in court. At least I hope it doesn't. I'm with DD on this. What a gargantuan head to think that the breeder can only know where these dogs should end up. After that whole bit with hiding Gabby from her owner, what a crock. It is money for some. I am positive. I'd never sign a contract like that. My dog is my dog. You don't trust me, well, I don't trust you back. It isn't like there is a GSD shortage, is there?|
by eichenluft on 02 September 2011 - 23:53
|Beetree - what are you talking about? Gabi was rescued from her owner who would have bred her until her uterus fell out. And, I happened to be her co-owner with full rights to keep the dog whereever I chose to keep her according to the agreement when her owner abandoned her in my care and asked me to breed her again to help pay her bills. Nuf said, that's old news.|
My contract means, as most responsible caring breeders' contracts means, that the owner agrees, by signing the contract, to give the breeder first right of refusal, first contact if the owner decides to place or sell the dog. That's what my contract means, and it's what the owner agreed to when she signed it for both dogs.
by eichenluft on 03 September 2011 - 00:05
|Niesia, thanks for the interesting information. I have a couple questions - have you personally used any of these methods, has this sort of thing happened to you? were the animal control officers and/or police willing to help you - how did they help? What did the solicitor do? what was the situation you found yourself in, having to take these sort of steps to repossess or get back dogs that you bred? What happens if the dogs are in a different state than you? which state's police or animal control officials do you contact?|
do you have a contract that held up in court for this sort of situation? If so, could I read this contract?
Does anyone have a contract used for the sale of an adult dog, with a right of first refusal if the owner decides to place/sell the dog - that is proven to be legally binding in court?
thanks, mainly curious about all of this.
by beetree on 03 September 2011 - 00:05
|Molly I don't see your version as true, no surprise, and that drama/episode is all water under the bridge, except as an example of how you operate. And you said, as the breeder, I will paraphrase because I don't want to go back, "that who but the breeder... (you) knows what homes are best for these dogs." That is a pile of crock. It isn't that hard to know the dogs want to stay where they are familiar even if you know you can make them accept the adjustment.|
Clearly this "mentor" had skills, and I'll bet anything, those skills translate into dollars/potential earnings because the dogs are trained. You, I am sure have not lost sight of that for a minute, otherwise you'd leave these poor grieving people alone with their dogs.
by eichenluft on 03 September 2011 - 00:25
|They are not their dogs, beetree. They are dogs who lost their owner and their home. They are not in familier homes now, they are with strangers who don't even know anything about the breed or the breed's needs and requirements to make the dogs as happy and content as they were with their owner.|
they should come back to me, the breeder. I know what their needs are and I can meet their life requirements for the dogs' lifetimes, as I promise every puppy I put on this earth. Their owner agreed to this when she signed my contracts. If she didn't agree, she woudln't have purchased two dogs from me.
and if you want " proof" of the ownership issue of the other matter, e-mail me privately and I can certainly show you the akc registration with ownership info on it. email@example.com
by michael49 on 03 September 2011 - 00:33
|First of all I would never sign a contract giving the breeder first right of refusal or stating that I would return the dog to the breeder if I had to part with it. I feel that if I raised a dog from an 8 week old puppy that I would know that dog better then any breeder could when it left at 8 weeks. Based on that alone I feel I would know where the best home would be for the dog. If I chose to sell the dog and thought the breeder would be better suited to rehome the dog I would expect fair payment for the dog, after all I paid what the breeder thought was a fair price when I purchased it.|
Are there any breeders out there that really beleive they know whats best for a dog they last saw as an eight week old puppy?
by Red Sable on 03 September 2011 - 01:09
Good point Michael.
by Jenni78 on 03 September 2011 - 01:18
|Ya'll forget that just perhaps, someone who has known the parents their entire lives just may know a teensy bit about that dog that was sold at 8 weeks. Genetics are weird like that. Thus, the "I know it best" doesn't always hold water.|
Really, a breeder is damned if we do and damned if we don't. According to RS, we need to butt the f--- out of all things to do with that dog,( a living, breathing being that we care about and are responsible for creating) because it's YOUR dog, unless there's any sort of lack of perfection with it, and in that case, we need to bend over backwards to fix it, regardless of whether we had any control over the problem or not, regardless of whether the buyer can accept any responsibility or not, because at this point, it's OUR dog and OUR responsibility, and the same as a faulty sweater or television or something. Sorry, can't have it both ways.
by Jenni78 on 03 September 2011 - 01:28
|And RS, maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you're saying that you'd rather buy from a "no hassle" breeder (because you don't need their shit) and just take your chances w/the pup than buy from a breeder who gives a damn and will buy the dog back at any point you have to get rid of it for any reason?|
by Wanda on 03 September 2011 - 01:38
|FYI - the dogs are being cared for by an experienced working line GSD owner. They are being worked at the schutzhund club where the owner and current caretaker trained together. Think about it; a woman with no chidren whose life revolved around her dogs and competition really only has serious friendships with like minded people, not some some random pet friends who took these dogs in to be couch potatoes. The amount of inaccuracies and contrived details coming out in this thread is nauseating......|
by Donnerstorm on 03 September 2011 - 02:27
|I think it boils down to if you don't like the contract again don't buy the dog. If you worry about wether or not your contract will hold up in court then have a lawyer look at it and help you fix it so it is iron clad if you have to go to court. We may all have opinions on how this should go, but we have no idea what is going on, who the people that have the dog are etc. The point is our opinion doesn't really matter there is a contract, dogs are considered property the owner died that makes them part of the estate. The owner bought the dogs he obv didn't have a problem with the contract he signed it. As harsh as it sounds if they wanted something else done with their dogs they should have left a provision for them in the will. I'm not saying that is my opinion here, but my opinion doesn't matter. I would think the breeder should have to pay the estate the market value of the dogs taking the training, titles etc into consideration. It also isn't as expensive to have a lawyer look at your contracts and help you as you might think. I would recommend it, it will keep you out of a situation like this. Everyone that is going to breed and sell with a contract should probably have it done. Take in your contract have them look at it, then explain what you are trying to do with your warranties, first rights of refusal etc they can tell you how to accomplish it, so you are covered there is no "play" room in the contract etc. Then if you do have to end up in court to enforce it, you can sleep easy knowing that the law is on your side.|
by michael49 on 03 September 2011 - 02:33
|Jenni, breeder knowledge of the temperament of their bloodline is a fact in some cases, but not all matings between the same pair of dogs produce the same type of puppies in every litter, that's common knowledge. Aside from that fact genetics are not the sole factor in the temperament of dogs, enviorment,socialization,training,living quarters and a thousand other things enter the equation after the puppy leaves the breeder. It's great that you are willing to buy back any puppy you sell,at any point in their life. Unfortunately not all breeders are willing to do so and I think you're aware that some only want the dog back in hope of financial gain.|
by Jenni78 on 03 September 2011 - 02:52
|Michael, that may be true occasionally, but even if someone totally ruined a dog I would still buy it back, for the dog's sake. I don't buy dogs back because I want them back; I buy them back so I don't wonder and worry about what happened to them when they lost their home due to __________. If I buy them back, the owner is happy, doesn't lose money, and I am happy because I can find a new, wonderful home for the dog that I brought into this world. I have a pretty good handle on those pups before they leave (I spend hours upon hours watching them and evaluating them in the 2+ months prior to their departure, and some I keep several months and sell a little older) and though environment does affect them, it goes both ways; they can behave one way w/that person and another way w/another. So, my point is that just because they may be far older and I may not "know" them anymore, I still feel I'm in a better position (or at least more likely to truly have their best interests at heart) to look out for them in an emergency. Another stranger isn't going to "know" them any better than I do, but the other stranger is not as likely, imo, to have the same concern as I do. However, I don't ever think they should be free unless they have clearly been abused or neglected in some way. I think the very least a buyer should get back is their initial investment. If they paid shipping, then I pay shipping, too.|
If a dog is worth more now than I can afford, then I'll just request to be updated w/the new owner's contact info. I think this is important should I need to get ahold of them for health reasons, for example. Let's say one of their littermates comes down w/some kind of hereditary defect; I think it's only fair that all owners are notified so they can be on alert and keep an eye out.
This is all just how I feel about breeding and placement and not in any way commenting on the particular situation here. This was just intended to illustrate some of my concerns and why I have the guarantee I do, so people see another side besides the "gee, I think I'll sell this pup on limited reg., then get it back for free when the owner falls on hard luck, and then resell it for thousands now that I can sell it on full reg. because someone else spent a ton of time and money on it." There are people who really do just worry about the dog and worry about what happens when it loses its home. Bad things can happen to good dogs who belonged to good people, especially in times like this.
by hexe on 03 September 2011 - 05:28
|beetree, please stop muddying the waters of this thread by resurrecting something that is COMPLETELY unrelated to the topic. Molly was not the breeder of Gabi, and that situation had nothing to do with a deceased owner. If you really feel the need to re-examine that whole sordid episode in PDB's history, go start a thread dedicated to that subject, won't you? Thanks awfully.|
This thread is a discussion of something that is extremely important to all dog owners, especially those who fail to make legally enforceable arrangements for the care and ownership of their dogs in the event of the owner's death or prolonged incapacitation, and there are serious lessons to be learned here.
by Skylagsd on 03 September 2011 - 05:55
So Molly's what is your concern really?
by 4pack on 03 September 2011 - 06:13
|OK so what does Molly's contract say about buying back or FRoR? Is their anything about fair value of the dog or do you expect to pay the puppy price?|
I never even thought about a breeder trying to pry a dog back from a buyer who may have passed away. At that point your not even dealing with the buyer, so you can't say the contract isn't being followed. I don't have a will yet concerning my dog, but if my husband doesn't want to keep him, he knows to contact the breeder.I always assumed a FRoR was to benefit everybody, not just the dog. I gave my breeder that right and he couldn't take the dog, as he had just taken back another sibling at that time, but he also requested I forward the new buyers info to him for updates, he didn't make me feel guilty or ask to pay a puppy price. He trusted me to find the dog a suitable working home and I would have trusted him to take the dog at no cost to him, should I needed to place him for emergency reasons, rather than rush to place him blindly or at a shelter. I didn't feel trapped in some iron clad deal, more like a safety net should some crazy shit happen. A buyer can't "expect" a breeder to pay whatever price they request for buying back the dog at anytime and I don't think a breeder can "demand" they get the dog back no matter what, for free or at the original pup price. I thought most breeders just want to know that the dog is changing hands and who/contact info of the new owner for peace of mind. I never heard of a breeder demanding to place the dog without the current owners help if they so chose to handle that aspect.
Who is to know what this womans will said, unless you were there for the reading and I doubt the breeder/Molly was present for that? I would assume a contract wouldn't hold up without a "price" or FMV at the time of signature from the owner, or a death of owner clause. I didn't hesitate to sign my breeders contract, but I knew he would either pay me what I would ask the next guy for the dog (FMV) or decline, not fight me should the dog not workout for me in the end. I don't see a death as a "need" for the breeder to step in. The owner is gone, not looking to rehome the dogs. The breeder is obviously not being asked to step in, so this feels rather odd to me. Everyday pets are passed down to friends and relatives with no one going to court. A loving home is all that is looked at, no monetary values or whatever.
If said "friend" does keep the dogs, the reg owner is gone and cannot sign any breeding papers, so I would assume the dogs are "worthless" to the friend in that aspect or am I wrong? Wouldn't these dogs kind of become paperless the same as if they were adopted from the pound? If the owner does not sign ove rthe papers to the breeder/Molly how would she fair in the same aspect?
I hope this post doesn't sound too dumb. I'm working on about 8hrs sleep in the last 3 days.