Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question for breeders

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question for breeders

    Ok I have question from a friend of mine, it's long so here goes.

    This lady researched and researched and purchased her very first Dane from a highly recommended breeder ( here in Aussie ).
    When she got the pup home she noticed she wasn't eating much but was drinking a lot, she mentioned it to the breeder and she said she just needs time to settle in.
    Well she got worse and ended up in the vets, they ran tests and did ultrasounds and found she had a issue with her bowel and kidneys, and surgery was suggest. The pup was only 4.5mths, she contacted the breeder and she said " oh how upsetting for u, please keep us posted " well she had surgery and things slightly improved but then she started to go down hill again so back to the vets and they ran tests and it came back her liver was failing and ended up being put to sleep at 7mths of age.
    Another female from the same litter had the same issue and was put to sleep at 6mths.

    My friend wants to know what the breeders responsibility should be in this situation?
    Would the fact she did back to back breedings contributed to this?
    She is hoping the breeder will help contribute to some of the expenses and possibly get a refund as she just isn't ready to get another pup, this whole experience has devasted her.

    As a breeder, what would u do? And why?

    Again I'm in Aussie so u won't know the breeder that's why I thought I would ask here.

  • #2
    Since it's two puppies out of the same litter and the breeder was so ho-hum over the whole thing, it tells me that she's likely seen this before and has no plans of helping out. So that throws the "reputable" out of the equation. Your friend can and should try to get her money back, but I would not be accepting another puppy from this woman.
    Katie & Scarlett
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      I agree totally yet seriously in the show industry she is highly recommended, been on tv etc.
      It's just so upsetting. This lady did all the homework, asked all the questions and gets burnt like this.

      Comment


      • #4
        That's really tough. I feel awful for your friend. My thinking is something went awry in the program and the breeder is "kennel blind" to what's going on in front of her. It happens.

        Was there a health contract? They're basically not worth the paper they're written on, but it's definitely worth trying to stick the breeder to it. But to answer your other question that I missed, I doubt back-to-back breedings would have caused this. Usually those breedings affect the dam more so than the pups.

        Has she spoken to the breeder yet?
        Katie & Scarlett
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Yes she has spoken to her but the breeder said " she is still discussing " what she can do.
          No health contracts, most breeders don't have health and spay/ neuter contracts here in Aussie, such a shame.

          My friend is hoping for a refund and something towards the medical cost which exceeded $6000 but she knows that probably won't happen.

          Legally maybe she doesn't have a leg to stand on but you would think morally the breeder would contribute some way, especially since there was another female in the same litter with the same condition.

          Comment


          • #6
            Without a contract, health guarantee, and a necropsy proving the hereditary nature of the issue - she likely doesn't have a leg to stand on 'legally'. Even with those things, it would still be a battle most likely.

            The back-to-back breeding probably had nothing to do with it. Though it is a bit harsh to put a bitch through 2 litters so quickly, it probably had no effect on the pups. Was it a repeat breeding to the same stud? And if so, did any pups have these issues in the previous litter?

            In a perfect world, the breeder should offer a replacement puppy or a refund. I would probably not want another puppy from this breeder so I would prefer a refund in this case. Reimbursement for medical expenses is another issue. The breeder is not necessarily responsible for those bills UNLESS she was fully aware of the issue she was producing (ie from the first litter), in which case I think she should reimburse. Though she should also have fully disclosed the issue prior to placing the puppies. Unfortunately, it sounds like none of this will happen.

            Would you mind PM'ing me the breeder? I think I may know who it is...
            *Jennifer*
            Member GDC of Mid-Florida
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by oceanbluedanes View Post
              Without a contract, health guarantee, and a necropsy proving the hereditary nature of the issue - she likely doesn't have a leg to stand on 'legally'. Even with those things, it would still be a battle most likely.

              The back-to-back breeding probably had nothing to do with it. Though it is a bit harsh to put a bitch through 2 litters so quickly, it probably had no effect on the pups. Was it a repeat breeding to the same stud? And if so, did any pups have these issues in the previous litter?

              In a perfect world, the breeder should offer a replacement puppy or a refund. I would probably not want another puppy from this breeder so I would prefer a refund in this case. Reimbursement for medical expenses is another issue. The breeder is not necessarily responsible for those bills UNLESS she was fully aware of the issue she was producing (ie from the first litter), in which case I think she should reimburse. Though she should also have fully disclosed the issue prior to placing the puppies. Unfortunately, it sounds like none of this will happen.

              Would you mind PM'ing me the breeder? I think I may know who it is...

              I have messaged you...

              Comment


              • #8
                I just wanted to say that, even the best breeders could have an issue in a litter, sometimes mother nature can through a spanner in the works.

                I think that it is how the situation should be dealt with thats important. If it were me that bred that litter, I would feel just horrible and help in whatever why I could.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bek74 View Post
                  I just wanted to say that, even the best breeders could have an issue in a litter, sometimes mother nature can through a spanner in the works.

                  I think that it is how the situation should be dealt with thats important. If it were me that bred that litter, I would feel just horrible and help in whatever why I could.

                  That is very true. Sometimes things go wrong, even in the best of circumstances. To me, what's important, is A.is this the exception or the rule, and B. what is the breeder going to do?

                  I am only a pet owner, but if I were a reputable breeder, I would look at the situation like this:
                  -Two pups from the same litter died while they were only a few months old.
                  -These two pups died from the same problem
                  -These two pups were from different homes--ruling out environmental causes.

                  Taking all that into consideration, as a reputable breeder I would be thinking, 'even if this was a fluke, these were pups I was responsible for bringing into the world, and I sold them on my word as a reputable breeder that they were healthy sound animals. I need to step up to the plate to make a reasonable offer of compensation'.

                  Just because someone didn't intentionally cause a problem doesn't mean they have no accountability if something bad happens as a result.

                  I cannot help but recall a situation on the forum a while back where a West Coast BYBer was recklessly using a sire with an inherited heart condition. Pups were dying because of it, yet the BYBer would not accept responsibility. In fact, they continued to use the dog. Whether the breeder in this thread is engaging in similar behavior remains to be seen, but if they are then they are no better than a BYBer, no matter what their dogs do in the ring.

                  JMO.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by wouldluv2haveadane View Post
                    That is very true. Sometimes things go wrong, even in the best of circumstances. To me, what's important, is A.is this the exception or the rule, and B. what is the breeder going to do?

                    I am only a pet owner, but if I were a reputable breeder, I would look at the situation like this:
                    -Two pups from the same litter died while they were only a few months old.
                    -These two pups died from the same problem
                    -These two pups were from different homes--ruling out environmental causes.

                    Taking all that into consideration, as a reputable breeder I would be thinking, 'even if this was a fluke, these were pups I was responsible for bringing into the world, and I sold them on my word as a reputable breeder that they were healthy sound animals. I need to step up to the plate to make a reasonable offer of compensation'.

                    Just because someone didn't intentionally cause a problem doesn't mean they have no accountability if something bad happens as a result.

                    I cannot help but recall a situation on the forum a while back where a West Coast BYBer was recklessly using a sire with an inherited heart condition. Pups were dying because of it, yet the BYBer would not accept responsibility. In fact, they continued to use the dog. Whether the breeder in this thread is engaging in similar behavior remains to be seen, but if they are then they are no better than a BYBer, no matter what their dogs do in the ring.

                    JMO.
                    Exactly. It's easy to slap on a health guarantee when the pup walks out the door but it feels a bit different when faced with refunding thousands of dollars for vet bill compensation and purchase refund.

                    The true test of a good breeder comes when something DOES go wrong. Anyone breeding for a long period of time will inevitably run into some issue some where. It is the choices they make at that point that really determines the quality of the breeder.

                    And in all fairness, this breeder has not yet made a decision on the issue. We can assume she plans to do nothing but don't actually know that for a fact until she responds to her puppy buyer. I can imagine it might take a few days or weeks to swallow the reality of the situation and come up with a fair yet realistic plan for compensation...
                    *Jennifer*
                    Member GDC of Mid-Florida
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bek74 View Post
                      I agree totally yet seriously in the show industry she is highly recommended, been on tv etc.
                      It's just so upsetting. This lady did all the homework, asked all the questions and gets burnt like this.
                      I just want to note, just because someone is "well known & recommended" in the show industry and been on tv does NOT make them a good breeder or a reputable one....there is far, far more that goes into responsible breeding.

                      As said nature can intervene in even the best planned, researched, responsible bred litters..things do happen...a breeder can only do as much as humanly possible, however with that said a responsible breeder will do whatever they are able as quickly as they are able and will stay on top of the situation.
                      sigpic
                      Dale AKC CGC Evaluator
                      Associate Member GDCNE
                      Member GSPCA
                      Member NAVHDA
                      Member Central Maine Kennel Club
                      High Hopes Great Danes & German Shorthairs

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have a question . Given this same exact scenario what would should or could have been done after the second notification to the breeder that there was problems going on had this been a reputable breeder ? Just curious .

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Dickie Best View Post
                          I have a question . Given this same exact scenario what would should or could have been done after the second notification to the breeder that there was problems going on had this been a reputable breeder ? Just curious .
                          Good question.

                          Again, in a perfect world, the breeder should have spoken in detail with the vet who handled the first puppy with the issue, done a necropsy or at the very least conclusive testing as to what went wrong. Then the breeder should have notified all of the littermate owners to inform them of the issue and to have their pups checked out (if appropriate) so as to avoid (if possible) this from happening to them.

                          The breeder should also remain in open and frequent contact with the purchaser of the first puppy and then subsequently the 2nd puppy with the issue. I cannot imagine it being easy for the breeder to hear of the loss of their babies, but they should also be a support system for the mourning families.

                          At some point, an offer of replacement or compensation needs to be made. I think it is acceptable for this to take a little time (some test results can take a while to get back etc). The breeder also needs a chance to grieve and do some financial planning as well. Most breeders don't keep a stockpile of cash to reimburse/replace unforeseen issues like this. That does not mean they aren't to be held accountable. But flexibility and honest communication from both parties can be incredibly helpful.

                          At the very least, a replacement puppy needs to be offered. Not necessarily from the litter just born, but when the family is ready and possibly from a different bloodline if that is of concern to the family. Ideally, a refund would be made an option to the family though that does not always happen.

                          In general, medical expenses are unfortunately the responsibility of the puppy buyer. However, if the breeder had any knowledge whatsoever of the risk prior to the breeding but proceeded anyways and gave no warning to the buyers - I personally feel the breeder should reimburse part or all of the medical expenses. If the breeder had no warning and no knowledge of any risk, they probably are relieved of any medical expense liability (should be spelled out in purchase contract). That said, I think it would be a really great gesture for the breeder to offer to at least help cover those expenses depending on the specific situation.

                          Every situation is different so there may not be a "one size fits all" answer for every possible scenario. The above is just my personal opinion, somewhat generalized.
                          *Jennifer*
                          Member GDC of Mid-Florida
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Did the woman offer a replacement puppy to either person or does she just not care?
                            Highly likely there was an issue even in first litter if two had such an issue this time.
                            Sounds like it's probably some sort of auto immune issue.
                            I hope breeder does not rebreed parents together.
                            The responsible thing for breeder should be to offer a replacement, gather as much info on the condition and re-evalutate their lines/ breedings.
                            I believe( although rarely offered) a breeder should allow a puppy buyer a puppy sales payment.
                            Basically when a pup from another litter sales give the monies to the greived puppy owner instead of the puppy.
                            Basically refund although depending on timing it could be lower.
                            I never believe a breeder should pay vet bills unless pup was sold ill.
                            You mention the buyer had issues day one and discovered it was an issue.
                            In that case breeder should cover vet bills and accept pup back.
                            It's highly likely those pups never thrived even as young pups so breeder may be shady.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Breeder offered money back on first pup plus paid for euthanasia.

                              It's the second pup she isn't being to co-operative with.

                              First pup didn't have surgery, as her liver gave way before it was a option. So there were no great medical expenses.

                              In the second pup there are medical expenses and it seems she doesn't want to offer restitution as the bill is higher.

                              My friend would like a full refund and would be happy if she could help pay off the vet expenses with her ( she has a vet credit thing ), she isn't asking for a lump sum.

                              Other than " we are deciding what to do reply " the remaining emails are going unanswered :-(

                              I feel so sad for her, this is so wrong. Her young children are devasted, she is devasted and very angry. She is starting to think, what's the point of so called registered breeders, she thinks she would have been better off dealing with a BYB if a so called reputable one acts in the same manner.

                              I'm hoping it's just her broken heart talking.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X