I have issued Petplan cover notes for new puppies for years and been very happy to do so, and with their breeder bonus points, it gives a few pennies for Rescue.

Today I received their updated 'Puppy charter' http://www.petplanbreeder.co.uk/documents/dog.pdf that you are required to comply with.

Was most concerned with this point, and as a result will probably have to stop recommending them:

"12 Conventional (i.e. not homoeopathic) vaccinations will be used.
All puppies aged over 8 weeks at the time of sale will have been
given their first vaccination by a licensed practising veterinary
surgeon, and any puppies sold at 10/11 weeks will have been
fully vaccinated in accordance with good veterinary practise.
A certificate to this effect produced and duly signed by the
licensed practising veterinary surgeon will be handed to the
puppy buyer"

I have a problem from several perspectives.  Firstly I do not send out part vaccinated puppies, due to the fact that most of mine go out of the area and are likely to find that their Vet uses different vaccines, and so the pup will have to re-start the course of primary vaccinations thereby being dosed more often than needed. 

Secondly unless I have a puppy I know is staying past 10 weeks, when I can have them fully vaccinated, I personally prefer to have mine done at 10 and 12 weeks of age in case the level of maternal antibodies is still high, given that my bitches have access to their pups until they leave and pups are never artificially weaned off their Mums.

I know there are breeders who do not give their dogs conventional vaccines, so this rule would also be a problem unless they home all pups before 8 weeks of age.

That rule has always been there. You aren't asked for confirmation when registering them with PetPlan so nobody is any the wiser as to whether the vaccination has been done or not. It also says the pups have to have been "fully wormed" but then it goes on to say wormed at least twice -but it also says that pups can be just 6 weeks old when sold in which case they obviously can't have been fully wormed. (Nor could they be at 8 weeks of course.)

Then someone needs to tell them that soem fo teh rules are not applicable/in the best interests of the puppies.

I was appalled at the implication that is was OK to breed on the 2nd season, and to have 6 litters!    I won't be passing more customers.

Jo

I personally prefer to have mine done at 10 and 12 weeks of age in case the level of maternal antibodies is still high,

When l was still breeding, for the same reason as Brainless, my puppies were vaccinated at 10 and 12 weeks.

I was appalled at the implication that is was OK to breed on the 2nd season, and to have 6 litters!

In my breed Boxers, it was quite normal to mate a  bitch on their second season, IF, they were mentally and physically developed enough - this would be round about 2 yrs of age. As to 6 litters, well, l don't know what to say. I am astounded that 6 litters is deemed to be acceptable. To me, that is tantamount to puppy farming. I would have thought that half that amount would have been more appropriate, or 4 say, in exceptional circumstances

> I am astounded that 6 litters is deemed to be acceptable.

It is acceptable by law under the breeding and Sale of Dogs Welfare Act 1999, and the number of litters the kennel club allows as a maximum, but that is changing from 1st of January 2012 to 4 for KC registration.  So I don't suppose they can go against what is legally acceptable.

There is a difference of 6 litters of 1's and 2's, and 6 litters of 10's, though 4 litters maximum should allow anyone to keep something of the right sex (unless extremely unlucky) for the next generation even in breeds with low numbers.

i like number 4.....about all pups must meet the breed standard......how on earth canone predict that at 8 weeks? they may grow too big or too small.......

I've heard a lot of people are calling them about the vaccination clause, so much so that an emergency meeting is planned.

They will need to change the number of litters by Janaury 2012 as all pedigree dogs are supposed to be KC registered.

My little ones go with the Kennel Club's own puppy insurance but the vaccination wording is something I always get myself wound up about and is another of the reasons that makes me wonder if puppies would be better off leaving after 10 weeks old....??

I don't want to be pressurised into vaccinating early....as like you B...I don't take the puppies away from Mum or force weaning and don't want to risk high maternal antibodies and unneccessary vaccinations (and vaccine reactions) I provide my new puppy guardians with lots of information about vaccination so they can make an informed decision...and not feel pressurised into vaccinating before 10 to 12 weeks minimum......but then in my puppy contract I advise seeing a vet within 48 hours. At which point they usually receive their first vaccine....as unless the new guardians already hold very strong views...they always seem to defer to the advice of the vet (who is deferring to the advice of the drug companies/insurance guidelines etc etc)

In my last contract I put that I reserve the right to have the puppy back here should it fall ill within 28 days of leaving...so I can moniter possible vaccine reactions in my own puppies.

I had another incident in my last litter of 7...which resulted in me taking ONE puppy back at 18 weeks old after he received vaccinations at 8 (fine) - 10 (poorley) and 16 (seriously ill)  weeks....he had also been taken off his RAW diet and given a prescription diet....because of chronic diarreah and vomiting....in between his 10 week and 16 week jab. (He was like a skeleton and in a dreadful state by the time I got him back here...poor mite) I asked the owner to immediately get him referred to my homeopathic vet from her vet....and between us we nursed him back to health. (He went back home to his overjoyed owner after two weeks of homeopathic treatment and lots and lots of whole wild rabbits and rabbit mince!)

Ok....its one puppy with a vaccine reaction out of 7...but its still one too many....and I too want to see policy wording changed in the best interests of the little ones.

I have spoken to Pet Plan about the wording and it has been changed from pups receiving the first jab by 10 weeks to 8 weeks. I expressed concern about this point, as I always advise my owners to have their first jab no earlier than 10 weeks (I personally prefer 12 weeks for the first jab). I do have the pups vet checked before they go, so the new owner doesn't need to rush off to their vet in the first few days, allowing the pups time to settle into their new homes, before being pushed into vaccinating early by the vet.
Some years ago I had 3 litters over a 14 month period and had them vaccinated at 7 weeks, prior to them going to their new homes. All three litters developed Parvo, 6 days post vaccination. My own personal opinion is that early vaccination can do great harm to an immature immune system and I am certainly not going down that road again!
Mum stays with her pups right up to them going to their new homes and I now give the pups homoeopathic nosodes and probiotic (to boost their immune systems) from 4 weeks. I haven't (I am touching wood here!) had any problems since.

> They will need to change the number of litters by Janaury 2012 as all pedigree dogs are supposed to be KC registered.

Have I read this right - apologies if not - does it mean that PP will only insure KC reg dogs? What about non-reg and crossbreeds?

> I have spoken to Pet Plan about the wording and it has been changed from pups receiving the first jab by 10 weeks to 8 weeks. I expressed concern about this point, as I always advise my owners to have their first jab no earlier than 10 weeks

I am glad I hadn't drammed it as I am not in the habit of agreeing to something like this without reading the charter.

> Have I read this right - apologies if not - does it mean that PP will only insure KC reg dogs? What about non-reg and crossbreeds?

it will only issue Breeder puppy cover notes for pedigree litters that are KC registered.

i like number 4.....about all pups must meet the breed standard

And indeed, to some of us breeding, the breed standard means tiddly squat anyway :-)

Thought better clarify the above comment - breeding for work ability the looks, set of shoulders, or whatever might be in a breed standard, are of no importance. Although I do breed from exceedingly beautiful dogs :-D

Have I read this right - apologies if not - does it mean that PP will only insure KC reg dogs? What about non-reg and crossbreeds?

You can insure crossbreeds and some named designer breeds...cockerpoo fo example. It only states that IF a pedigree the bitch must be kc reg and if a pedigree the puppy must be kc reg. What I think they are trying to get at is, if you are calling the dog a pure bred pedigree dog then it must have Kc papers to back up the named breed, otherwise its a crossbreed. Confused...lol....especially as the Cockerpoo and the like is not a Kc recognised purebreed therefore not able to be Kc reg....and a pedigree is simply the ancestors and a puppy can be as pure as the driven snow yet unless it holds that magical piece of paper with KC reg on it, its not....

Anyway, I digress, so yes, non Kc reg and crossbreeds can be issued with puppy note cover.

Not replying to anyone in particular, but just replying from the last post (there should be a 'general' reply button LOL)

I used Petplan last time, but if they don't change this in the next few months then I'll likely be sending the pups home with KC insurance activated. 

This vaccination clause just makes NO sense to me at all :(  I feel the same way as others on the thread, so no point in repeating it.  But I'm just shocked and saddened and hope they change it before the end of the summer.

ive used kc insurance this time because of this!
xxxx

You aren't asked for confirmation when registering them with PetPlan

But you are asked if you comply with the charter before taking details?
Angela