Pup agreement - signing dog over to breeder

Rhenee Fadling · Nov 12, 2008

For those of you w/ experience what are the pros/cons of signing the AKC ownership over to the breeder in order to exercise a partial refund for a pup that didn't live up to the "contract"? This pup is a "replacement" for the first pup that had bad hips, this second pup has bad hips too.

Obviously I'm not going to breed but am keeping the pup; in order to participate in any "dog games" where AKC paperwork is required, I could would be the "handler", the "breeder" would be the "owner". Don't know how receptive breeder would be to this arrangement and if I want to really have contact w/ him any longer.

The refund would be about $450, we have considerable more $$ into this dog; I'm thinking about telling the breeder "thanks, but no thanks" because with this obvious disappointment, $450 isn't going to make or break us.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Guest · Nov 12, 2008

Forgo the $450, keep the dog... Not worth the trouble of having someone else own your dog. If they are the only owner on the paperwork, then "your" dog is legally there and they, technically, could come take your dog any time they want.

I BELIEVE this is just to prevent breeding. And if that IS the case, then co-ownership would work, too, because BOTH their and your signature would be required for AKC papers on any litters from the dog.

If I was the breeder of your dogs, I'd ask for proof of spay/neuter and compensate you somehow. The odds of getting two dogs from the same breeder, if it's a different litter, are quite slim, so you really got the shaft...

-K

DEDEYE · Nov 12, 2008

I personally wouldn't do that. If you are going to keep the dog AND play dogs games, $450.00 is a drop in the bucket and not worth the trouble.

FOM · Nov 12, 2008

I agree, keep the paper work and be done with it....$450 is not all that much in the scheme of things.....that's about 4 tests tops.....go have fun with your dog, play the games and I hope your next puppy is healthy as an ox!

FOM

LabLady · Nov 12, 2008

And I bet that's what the breeder wants you to do!!!!!

1st retriever · Nov 12, 2008

I agree with everyone else, don't do that. You can always just get the dog fixed and then if needed do limited registration. Sounds like they are trying to pull something to me!

HarryWilliams · Nov 12, 2008

LabLady said:
And I bet that's what the breeder wants you to do!!!!!

Shrewd observation. HPW

LabLady101 · Nov 12, 2008

I agree, if you intend to keep the pup, just keep the paperwork and send the breeder proof of spay/neuter. I think by wanting the paperwork back, the breeder is just trying to ensure the dog won't be bred. However, by sending them the proof of s/n, it's a show of good faith to upholding the intent of the contract. The Co-own idea could be good or bad. However, I think you already stated you were questioning whether you still wanted to deal with the breeder anymore, so I personally don't think a co-own wouldn't be the best option in this case.

You can always just get the dog fixed and then if needed do limited registration.

Limited Registration can only be designated when sending the initial Reg App. It can't be done after you've gotten the paperwork back.

1st retriever · Nov 12, 2008

I had heard you could change it but was more of a hassle than anything.

WRL · Nov 12, 2008

I would return the paperwork.

Yes I know the $450 is a "drop in the bucket" but with stipulations like "return the dog" or "sign over the paperwork" I think it is a clear way for a breeder to avoid the guarantee. If they don't want to make a guarantee they had that choice a few years ago. And most likely you would have gone somewhere else too.

I would talk to the breeder. Tell them exactly what you want to do (spay/neuter then play the games) and see if they would go with a proof of spay/neuter from a vet.

If they won't, then you are stuck. Caring for a dog you don't "own" could be a nightmare.

WRL

Page · Nov 12, 2008

Speaking as someone who has signed people on to her dogs and payed for it later I say run like the wind away from this deal.

I will never sign anyone....even a future spouse onto my dogs. He can have his and I will have mine.

I BELIEVE this is just to prevent breeding. And if that IS the case, then co-ownership would work, too, because BOTH their and your signature would be required for AKC papers on any litters from the dog.

Kristie brings up a good point. A bitch requires signatures from all owners to register a litter so a co-ownership would work in that situation, but the rules are different for dogs. In order to register a litter sired by your dog you only need one owner's signature. Seems like they are doing this so you won't be able to breed him.

$450 wouldn't be worth the extra hassle for me.

Rhenee Fadling · Nov 13, 2008

Dear All - thank you for the insight. I've decided to "tell" the breeder that I have my receipt for the spay, my vet would write a letter if I ask, and given that this is a replacement pup, we've been involved w/ this breeder for four years, he has an idea of the personalities he's dealing with and the receipts/letter should be good enough to issue a $450 refund w/ no signing over of ownership.

The co-ownership thing doesn't work for me, I want to wash my hands of any future dealings. I decided not to roll over on this one, your right, he does want me to walk away.

Pup agreement - signing dog over to breeder

Rhenee Fadling

Guest

DEDEYE

FOM

LabLady

1st retriever

HarryWilliams

LabLady101

1st retriever

WRL

Page

Rhenee Fadling

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities