Von Erzengel Z littler Puppy with Major Genetic Defects - Page 19

hellsbeast02, you know we would all be there!

Blitzen,

The pup is the concern, but we don't bash people who breed and have unheathly children, and they're allowed to breed again.  Things happen beyond our control, with humans and animals alike.  She's willing to take the dog back because she cares about this dog.  Anyone who knows Malinda can tell you, she loves her dogs.  Although I have not talked to her about this dog, I'm sure she wants it back more than any of us know.  That's just the person she is.

AZSHEP6=

"By the way, could somebody explain how a dog that is born with genetic defects can cause the breeder to be taken to court for animal cruelty?"

Yikes, I have been wodering the same thing. As much of a shame that the pup has problems, Seems pretty malicious/spiteful to call the SPCA over something that is quite OBVIOUSLY not an issue of animal cruelty. That is comparable to calling social services on parents who have a child with special needs or a genetic disorder. The SPCA has enough true abuse/neglect cases to worry about to waste their time investigating a pup with birth defects.

Stacy

hhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm now see, I have a different impression of the folks who post on this board.  I think everyone of them is concerned for the pup  and trying to find a solution and figure out what is the best interest of the puppy.  I believe the only confirmed problem is the hips.  The pup should be on  pain killers and/or a duragesic patch for the time being.  I believe every single person on this board is as much a dog lover as anyone else.

Maybe all the people she has trained for and who have purchased puppies from her should chime in.  Again, people have really bashed her and I really think she is a pretty good person. 

"generally speaking, if the defective goods need to be replaced or purchase price refunded, what is the obligation of the buyer regarding the goods he currently has in his possession?"

Usually the buyer is responsible to do three things: a) timely notify the seller of the claimed defect or defects and provide sufficient proof of same, b) take reasonable care to not further damage the good so as to lessen its value further, and c) return the good to the seller for repair, replacement or refund as the case may be.

"is it reasonable for the buyer to want to retain the defective goods and still demand a replacement or refund of the purchase price?"

No.

"is a buyer responsible to return defective goods at his expense?

Generally speaking, yes.  Think of a toaster you bought at Best Buy that doesn't work when you get home and take it out of the box - does Best Buy send someone over to collect the toaster and give you a replacement or, alternatively, does Best Buy pay for your gas to drive back to the store to swap your defective toaster for one that works?  No.  But if Best Buy delivered a refrigerator to you that didn't work, then they would need to pick up the defective fridge and deliver a replacement.

"is it reasonable that the buyer provide proper proof to the seller?"

Yes.

"can the seller demand that a second unbiased opinion is sought in addition to the first opinion which found the good defective?"

This depends upon the nature of the claimed defect.  If the defect is obvious on its face - let's say a hose that has a hole in it - then typically a demand for a second opinion would not be reasonable.  In the case of a claimed defect that is not so obvious or that is more complex in nature, then seller's demand for a neutral second opinion may become more reasonable. 

But any of these general responsibilities can be altered by the terms of a written contract. 

Just curious, how many reading this would put this puppy on a plane and return it in order to get your money back?

It is called a mob dynamic.  And it takes on its own form.  On this site it is a fairly common occurence because the site is unmoderated.  There is somewhat of a voyeurism that occurs as you watch two sides clash and see the destruction.

As I have written before, I met Malinda at a show where she was photographer.  She took fantastic pictures and I purchased them.  Very reasonable price and very professional and dependable.  I consider myself a relatively good judge of character when I meet people the first time.  I thought her to be a very soft spoken woman and therefore it is difficult for me to imagine that she does not care for the pup she sent to CA.  I also think that if I were in a similar position I would want to see for myself what is going on with the pup and go to my own vet with whom I have built up a long and trusting relationship.  It is for a fact that the DFW region has some top vets specialized in our GSD breed.  Bringing an animal into the world is to some a commitment for its life.  If  a difficult decision has to be made to put the animal down, it really should be hers to make, especially since it appears to be unravelling the owner.  In the meantime weeks have passed and for the dog, living in a limbo kind of existance, is not a good thing.  I can imagine the stress level in the household where he currently lives.  I believe it will reduce the stress on the pup at this time to go to a place where decisions made out of experience and hopefully love (and I have no doubt that Malinda is a person that can provide this to this pup out of her own breeding).

For the puppy owner, the stress of the situation will immediately drop to zero once the pup is put on a plane.  They can move on.  They have to be able to write this off as an experience that they will want to avoid.  They surely could go to rescue and look around to see if there is a young dog that meets their bill as they seem to be looking for a pet.  Or they can purchase another puppy.  Or decide not to ever have another GSD.  But now they have options again. 

I wish the best for the breeder, the pup and the owners.  I hope you come to a quick agreement for the welfare of the pup.  It is surely a tragedy for all parties concerned, but it is time to move on. . . and that will make you all feel better.

Blitzen, I would not be able to put a pup on a plane after bonding with him.  I would have called the breeder though and told them I had to put the pup down or such.  Perhaps the breeder would offer me a partial refund.  But I would have felt the responsibility lay in my hands.  I would also realize that this is terrible news to the breeder of the pup.  Two parties suffer when something like this occurs (that is if the breeder cares, and I think Malinda cares).  But one thing is for sure, if the pup is to be returned, the sooner the better, for the pup's sake. 

But when one party feels like "blaming" the other for their misfortune, reason quickly erodes.  Then you have the two sides that appear to never want to meet. 

"Just curious, how many reading this would put this puppy on a plane and return it in order to get your money back?"

That would depend on when I noticed defects, I guess (not saying this particular puppy is defective - who knows?).  If the pup arrived and I noticed serious problems, it would be a lot easier to ship him right back than it would be after I'd had him a while and defects then became apparent.

Hi Sunshine, I would never return a dog in order to receive a refund and I'd never buy from a breeder who required that so I doubt I will ever find myself in this situation. It is certainly reasonable for the breeder to expect a correct and proper diagnosis on this dog and that could be done by a vet in the area where the dog lives, he does not need to be sent back to the breeder. There may also be other breeders in the area where this dog lives who can take a look at the puppy if the word of the vet is not good enough.  I just don't understand why returning this dog is necessary. If I were the owner, I 'd just eat the price of the dog and shut up and go away. No one can tell this breeder what she can or cannot breed and if she choose to repeat this breeding, that's her business.

On the other hand, if I were the breeder, I would not require the dog be sent back, I'd ask for a vet report, copies of the hip xray, photos of the dog and, if I were satisifed that all said was true, I'd just give the buyer back the money paid for the dog.  This could have been settled simply and quickly, instead it's been spun into another PDB melodrama that will end up with some having hurt feelings and other carryting grudges against those  who opposed them. I am as guilty as the next guy, frankly I have stuck my nose in another's business because I hate it when any dog is referred to in the same manner as a broken kitchen appliance.  Good news for most - I'm going to try to not respond to threads like this anymore, I think way too much with my heart and not my head .