I'd think that most rational breeders are going to use their meeting/conversation based impressions as well as any form information to make decisions, but if you're going to be shipping a pup a long distance away you'd want to have something concrete, as well as be able to check and make sure that the person was as represented. ESPECIALLY with breeds that have the spectre of BSL looming over them, or the potential to be misused. A little different than placing a Pug or a Shih Tzu in a good home 
Do you really want your friendly neighborhood dope dealer to have access to superbly bred Dobes? Or Rotts? Or how about if he picks up a couple of Filas to guard his operation? In some cases with some breeds it wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea to run a background check . . . ya know?
Look at the straits our APBT's are in . . . . largely because they are all too accessible to the very sorts who should never have them
Do you really want your friendly neighborhood dope dealer to have access to superbly bred Dobes? Or Rotts? Or how about if he picks up a couple of Filas to guard his operation? In some cases with some breeds it wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea to run a background check . . . ya know?
Look at the straits our APBT's are in . . . . largely because they are all too accessible to the very sorts who should never have them
I think something some breeders need to consider is how enforceable is your contract? I've known cases where breeders and owners had disagreements and the breeder wanted to reclaim the dog, but had trouble doing so based on the contract and finding actual LEGAL BASIS (when actual legal ownership of the PROPERTY, which is what the animal is, lies with the owner, who is then free to do with it what they see fit) to reclaim the dog - and it cost the breeder thousands of dollars to even attempt it.
In terms of having people under 21 approach certain breeders - a lot would depend on the breed - I'm not sure I would sell a doberman to someone under 21 in many situations (despite me getting my dobe at that age) - probably not to a college student, etc - because as I've said in other threads, while owning a dog requires stability, it's a lot harder to rent and find housing, insurance, etc with a big, banned breed like the doberman (or a rottie, a pit, etc) than it is for a beagle, westie, etc - public perception and such DOES play a role in this. Stability in the life does play a role here.
In terms of giving my SSN/DL - probably not.
In terms of having people under 21 approach certain breeders - a lot would depend on the breed - I'm not sure I would sell a doberman to someone under 21 in many situations (despite me getting my dobe at that age) - probably not to a college student, etc - because as I've said in other threads, while owning a dog requires stability, it's a lot harder to rent and find housing, insurance, etc with a big, banned breed like the doberman (or a rottie, a pit, etc) than it is for a beagle, westie, etc - public perception and such DOES play a role in this. Stability in the life does play a role here.
In terms of giving my SSN/DL - probably not.
I've read a lot of stories on a few lists I'm on. The only thing that seems enforceable is monetary penalties in contracts.. So breeders that got screwed trying to enforce the unenforceable are often having contracts redone by lawyers, with penalty clauses great enough to scare someone into doing what they want, but low enough that it's still enforceable.. Most haven't had an issue to try to make their contract stand up in court again to test how it's working. So I guess the amounts are enough to scare people into following the contract.. It's admirable that breeders consider what they bred theirs even when not in their home. But someone has to be screwing up pretty large to get to repossess property. Seems a lot of people have contracts that wouldn't hold up in court.
I saw some TV court show that basically said the breeder's no breeding clause was bunk because it was hinging on "intangile future events" and "the sale had been completed" and thus was unenforceable. Contracts are supposed to be specific and it was too general etc. She threw it out...owner kept the dog they'd bred against the contract.
Judge used some lame analogy like "you buy a car in cash, paid in full....the maker of the car CANNOT come back and say you can only drive xx miles on it, when it belongs to you and the sale has been concluded. And you own title etc"
This was TV tho and contract law seems to be one of the more complicated branches, of the already complicated legal tree lol
Judge used some lame analogy like "you buy a car in cash, paid in full....the maker of the car CANNOT come back and say you can only drive xx miles on it, when it belongs to you and the sale has been concluded. And you own title etc"
This was TV tho and contract law seems to be one of the more complicated branches, of the already complicated legal tree lol
Hmm. If that's the case, perhaps the best insurance would be for a breeder to put limited registration on all of their pet puppies. I'm sure people wouldn't be as interested in producing puppies that couldn't be sold as "registered".
I remember a case on the old Animal Court TV show. Buyers were suing a breeder over the limited registration. The buyers bred the pet-quality puppy they had purchased, and only *after* the litter was born did they realize that they couldn't register the pups. They were trying to sue the breeder for damages or something like that.
The judge obviously ruled in favor of the breeder. It was disgusting--after the ruling, the plaintiffs kept whining about how the puppies were now "absolutely worthless" without papers. Some people.
I remember a case on the old Animal Court TV show. Buyers were suing a breeder over the limited registration. The buyers bred the pet-quality puppy they had purchased, and only *after* the litter was born did they realize that they couldn't register the pups. They were trying to sue the breeder for damages or something like that.
The judge obviously ruled in favor of the breeder. It was disgusting--after the ruling, the plaintiffs kept whining about how the puppies were now "absolutely worthless" without papers. Some people.
Limited is only so good. UKC for example...is what I consider a reputable registry yet they will grant full privledges to AKC limited dogs. SO there's that worry...other registry's. I had a major beef with UKC about this but it's mellowed some. I mean they are thier own playground and just because big bad AKC says jump, doesn't mean they have to jump.
The only foolproof way it to fix pups before they leave. It's drastic and each breeder would need to consider the eventual impact of that...but I do know at least a few who do this...including one large breed person.
That and simply NOT sending papers with the dog at all, I suppose is an option. Owners could ILP and compete in whatever with UKC/AKC but not register get...
But whoever stated the rebate...that seems a good realistic compromise and it's something I've considered along with prespay/neuters.
The only foolproof way it to fix pups before they leave. It's drastic and each breeder would need to consider the eventual impact of that...but I do know at least a few who do this...including one large breed person.
That and simply NOT sending papers with the dog at all, I suppose is an option. Owners could ILP and compete in whatever with UKC/AKC but not register get...
But whoever stated the rebate...that seems a good realistic compromise and it's something I've considered along with prespay/neuters.
Contract law is deliciously complex, and one of my favorites . . . . it would depend a lot on the state and the precedents, AND on how the contract was written, but basically the TV judge got it wrong. There's no reason you can't contract about intangible future events . . . its done all the time. As for a complete sale, you have to make sure you retain some rights, which you can do if its written correctly.
Now, there is one problem . . . its hard to get damages. Recission, the cancelling of a contract (give the dog back) is an extreme remedy. Specific performance (you have to do what it says or else) is also considered extreme. Most contract breaches are montary damages, and what is the monetary damages of violating a pet contract? Virtually none. A clever lawyer might be able to write a liquidated damages clause (that's fixed damages) that would hold up, but courts do not like liquidated damages.
I think part of the problem is most breeder contracts aren't written by lawyers . . . at least, the sort of problems I'm hearing suggest that.
Oh, and some breeders won't turn the papers over until you fix the dog. No s/n, no papers. You can s/n when you want (like waiting until after puberty) but no proof of s/n, no papers, no "registered" puppies.
Now, there is one problem . . . its hard to get damages. Recission, the cancelling of a contract (give the dog back) is an extreme remedy. Specific performance (you have to do what it says or else) is also considered extreme. Most contract breaches are montary damages, and what is the monetary damages of violating a pet contract? Virtually none. A clever lawyer might be able to write a liquidated damages clause (that's fixed damages) that would hold up, but courts do not like liquidated damages.
I think part of the problem is most breeder contracts aren't written by lawyers . . . at least, the sort of problems I'm hearing suggest that.
Oh, and some breeders won't turn the papers over until you fix the dog. No s/n, no papers. You can s/n when you want (like waiting until after puberty) but no proof of s/n, no papers, no "registered" puppies.
I THINK some folks do the difference between pet (what they sold and intended) and show (what ended up happening) in price is due back, and they make that a big ole' amount LOL!
But couldn't a savvy person get around that by showing "fair market value" by a newspaper ad or something? I mean if a breeder is saying the diff between a pet Golden and a show Golden is like $1000 to scare someone...but there are Goldens in the paper for $200 with the registration?
But couldn't a savvy person get around that by showing "fair market value" by a newspaper ad or something? I mean if a breeder is saying the diff between a pet Golden and a show Golden is like $1000 to scare someone...but there are Goldens in the paper for $200 with the registration?
I dont think that works with live stock (yes dogs can be considered live stock)
For example Golden in the papper comes from non Ch parents but is reg. were say my golden (if i had one) comes from the winninest golden in history (just an example) there for it wouldnt be a fair comparision, because there will allways be pets in a litter.
Same as if i had a thoroughbred then i couldnt use fare market value against a kentucky derby winner. And lets face it news paper adds are often the bottom of the barrel when it comes to quality of the stock
For example Golden in the papper comes from non Ch parents but is reg. were say my golden (if i had one) comes from the winninest golden in history (just an example) there for it wouldnt be a fair comparision, because there will allways be pets in a litter.
Same as if i had a thoroughbred then i couldnt use fare market value against a kentucky derby winner. And lets face it news paper adds are often the bottom of the barrel when it comes to quality of the stock
The other problem with that scenario is that in Beagles...a pet pup here is around $500-600 and the show $700-900. If the contract stated the difference at higher than that spread I'd be really betting they'd have no claim to ask more. But I'd bet the breeder would want more than $200-300 bucks LOL.
Not to mention those breeders that have only one price for pups regardless of quality...which I've also seen. This is common in Leos.
Not to mention those breeders that have only one price for pups regardless of quality...which I've also seen. This is common in Leos.
Ok i have to say that part of my annoyance at the idea of a breeder requesting a SS# is because it is legislated differently in Canada. In fact, I think it would be illegal for a breeder to request a SIN (Cdn SS) and REFUSE a puppy solely because someone didn't give that information. I dont' know a whole lot about it but SIN are not given away that freely in Canada and I like it that way.
http://www.privcom.gc.ca/fs-fi/02_05_d_02_e.asp
And here banks can't 'ding' your credit score unless they have your permission.
http://www.privcom.gc.ca/fs-fi/02_05_d_02_e.asp
And here banks can't 'ding' your credit score unless they have your permission.
interesting thread--getting back to earlier posts-- I'm interested in the part about what has happend to past dogs. I think I had this discussion on here once before , but it was awhile ago. I got my Manchester from a very reputable breeder--one of the top in the country. He was a breeder placement at 9 months old after deciding he wasn't going to be a show dog. I have had family dogs most of my life mostly stray/ rescue type of situations. Well, long story short, when I was out of town visiting my parents my hubby was caring for Zippy and our ACD. It was my first time away from the new dog. Our dog yard is not attached to the house and even though everything went fine, on the last day Zippy got past the dog yard gate before hubby got the leash on him. He took off towards the road and got hit. I was on the plane on the way home so had no idea what was going on. Hubby rushed him to emergency. Zippy had extensive injuries, but $4,200 and a lot of love and tears later he is perfectly fine. He really is my miracle boy. I still get weepy thinking about the whole thing.
I was so afraid to tell his breeder, but I bit the bullet and explained everything to him and he was so wonderful. He was glad Zippy was going to be ok and that he was loved enough for us to do whatever it took to take care of him. He told me he would place a dog with me anytime and to just let him know when Zippy needs more company. I was so relieved. He really is great about keeping in touch and is a great guy and well respected in the breed. I know I would not have a problem getting another Manchester from him or any other breeder he recommended me to.
So my question is would what happend to Zippy exclude me from being considered for a dog in the future by other breeders? I have never had any other dog ever have any kind of serious injury. How would you breeders here on Chaz look at this?
I was so afraid to tell his breeder, but I bit the bullet and explained everything to him and he was so wonderful. He was glad Zippy was going to be ok and that he was loved enough for us to do whatever it took to take care of him. He told me he would place a dog with me anytime and to just let him know when Zippy needs more company. I was so relieved. He really is great about keeping in touch and is a great guy and well respected in the breed. I know I would not have a problem getting another Manchester from him or any other breeder he recommended me to.
So my question is would what happend to Zippy exclude me from being considered for a dog in the future by other breeders? I have never had any other dog ever have any kind of serious injury. How would you breeders here on Chaz look at this?