Question on what you'd do in this case - Page 2

this dog has a confusing history.
She was not bred by gerdeshaus gsd.  her mother, her and her brother were payment for another dog gerdeshaus was selling.  gerdeshaus sold the dog as a pup, I was told that owner returned her, and gerdeshaus resold her.  so for all I know, gerdeshaus has sold and made money on this dog twice. 

the 2nd person who was sold this dog never came back to pick up the papers.  they then turned around and gave the dog away.  and she may have been given away again. This poor girl has made the rounds on craigslist.

JMO, gerdeshaus is responsible for this dog and placed her in this situation.  the dog has a chance at a good home, but the home wants to titled her and eventually breed her after health test and titles, so they would like to have the papers. I don't see what the big deal is with handing over papers and lifting the limited reg after the dog is OFA'd.

Okay guys, I am not going to go into any details but have been in touch with both Gerdeshaus and the Buyer. The story is not really as it appears, and I won't go into detail but am getting it worked out. I do believe that Gerdeshaus will do what is best for Fiona. The owner tried to do what was best but it jumped up and bit her on the ass, so that is also understood. I don't think that unless the whole story is explained any of you should take sides. Remember taking sides is easy until you hear the whole story. I am the one that has Fiona now and I am currently working with Gerdeshaus regarding this dog, afterall I notified them immediately when I heard they had been looking for her.  Until we hash all this out I will not bad mouth or speak ill of anyone and I hope you respect this as the better way to deal with it.

Respectfully,
Debbie
Texas

First of all, let me, without going into details say a few things.

I am very close to this situation.  Here are the facts as I know them.

•The second owner did not know that the dog was not bred by Gerdeshaus.  The second owner was under impression that it was a Gerdeshaus breeding.
•The dog was sold, resumably as a young puppy and came back to Gerdeshaus because the first owner said she was food aggressive.
•The dog was again sold for $1800 to an individual who had a specific use in mind for the dog.  The dog was going to be trained as an assistance dog.
•On the day of pickup, Gerdehaus did not have registration papers for the dog.
•It was mentioned that a transfer paper would have to be gotten.
•Then again, it was mentioned by phone that the previous owner might not have sent the papers back, so they would wait and see if the previous owner did before spending money on a transfer.
•The second owner contacted Mrs. Gerdes and asked for a list of vets in the area to do OFA prelims.  The list never came.
•The second owner asked about papers again, and nothing was ever done, sent or said about papers, even though, the breeder had contact info for this person.
•The second owner "did not pick up the papers" because although she was aware the dog was registered, she was not aware who had the paperwork and was never told.
•The dog was not intended for breeding, but was intended to be an assistance dog.
•When the second owner became ill, and could no longer handle Fiona, she *GAVE* Fiona to a woman named Michelle, who said she trained dogs in Arizona for the police departments.  She thought this would be a good home for Fiona.
•Not that long after that, a friend told the second owner that Fiona was on craigslist.  The second owner was quite angry, assuming that she had given the dog to someone who would properly care for, work with, nurture and train the dog.
•The second owner wrote a post on craigslist calling the lady she *GAVE* the dog to, Michelle, a liar, and expressing frustration.
•Michelle told the second owner that she couldn't keep the dog because she had to go back to work.
•Due to the second owner's illness she could not keep the dog and therefore could not take her back.
•The second owner was heartbroken to find the dog again on craigslist.
•The second owner then heard from a friend that a person was trying to get their hands on the dog and that Michelle had decided to keep the dog...
•The second owner decided, "all's well that end's well, and I hope they have a great life together."
•Today, the second owner was contacted by the woman who has the dog now.  She was quite shocked to hear that Michelle claimed that the dog was sold for $100 which was not the case, since the dog was given away for free.  She was also shocked to find out that Michelle had told the current owner that she had nine days to pack up the house and get rid of the dog because her husband wasn't going into the service.

I don't believe Gerdeshaus was dishonest regarding the papers, really.  I believe there was a miscommunication somewhere along the line.  Since Fiona was not to be bred and was to be an assistance dog, once it was plain that the papers weren't available, the second owner quit asking.

This person should not be criticised for trying to do the right thing by Fiona.  She believed that Fiona was going to a good home, Michelle, and that turned out not to be the case.  She also sent a letter to the current owner releasing all ownership rights.

She was given a bill of sale, which she gave to Muchelle.

So, I think both Gerdeshaus and the second owner are