Now before anyone gets the wrong idea I am not selling my furry family !!!

Can anyone exlpain why a successful breeder who has a young pup for sale possibly run on is selling the pup at two prices one with papers and one without ? If a litter is registered why the price difference? Is this usual. 

Don't know how common it is in other breeds but one of my breeds most famous runs most pups on to 9 - 12 months old then sells what they do not want to retain for breeding or show.  They have two prices, one without papers and one with.

Does the price for "with papers" mean that people can breed from them? Seems odd to me

no idea they could put breeding restrictions on with papers and anyway they have regisitered the litter so there is no difference in cost. One thing that struck me is yes they would fetch less money if bred from but dog could still be used for breeding and surely that is the bigger worry.
Thats interesting , I have never noticed it before but maye I havnt looked inthe right places

I've never seen it before and can't think of any logical reason for doing it.

Unless by not handing over the papers they will still part own the dog so will have a say on any breeding?

I know some people might sell on older pups and dogs with out papers assuming that they will not be bred from, but as we all know you don't don't need any proof of pedigree or KC registration to register puppies bred from 'paperless dogs' with some commercial registers.
Another worry for me would be that if I sold a pup or dog with out papers and it got passed on the new owner could ask the KC for the registration papers, and if the new owner claimed that they were not aware of any restrictions when they got the dog they could be entitled to have the registration papers from the KC.

The only way to guarantee a part say in breeding is to register the dog in the breeders name and the new owners. If the original new owner then passed on the pup with out telling the breeder then the breeder could lodge a complaint and the person who now had the pup would have to come to an arrangement with the breeder, unless they bred a litter and registered it with a commercial register.

>if I sold a pup or dog with out papers and it got passed on the new owner could ask the KC for the registration papers, and if the new owner claimed that they were not aware of any restrictions when they got the dog they could be entitled to have the registration papers from the KC.

How could they get registration papers from the KC if the pup's registration had never been transferred from the breeder in the first place?

If they claim they had no idea I have come across cases where they have been given papers..... not sure how it works, although I did lose my reg certificate and was issued with another for £2

I find it hard to believe the KC would issue a registration certificate to someone who says "I've got a xxxx and I want papers for it. No, I don't know the name of the sire or dam." If they did that I know some very nice dogs I'd like!

I don't know the answer to your question, but I would worry that they're not KC dogs. I've started a new business recently and have been advertising through Facebook. The adverts for puppies on there really shocked me- Dogs are 'abba' or 'dog lovers' registered! Basically a company that will print out a certificate in exchange for someone telling them the breed of their dog and paying them a nice sum! I really really worry that people will start to think this is more important than the KC. :(((

not sure how it works, although I did lose my reg certificate and was issued with another for £2

It's £5 now and they will only issue a duplicate registration certificate to the registered owner.
http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/asp/PEDI/

A related point here, I know I've seen it mentioned (cannot remember if it was here or elsewhere) that PetLog will transfer ownership of microchips without having the current owner's signature. Again it's not quite as easy as that. I had one dog I'd bred back a few months ago. She was still KC registered in my name but her microchip was in the former owner's name. I could not (for various reasons) obtain a signature. I contacted PetLog and they sent me a special form to fill in, applying for transfer of ownership of the microchip without the previous owner's signature. For this I had to write down how I had got hold of the dog, why I had not got a signature, and I had to send as many supporting documents with the application as possible. (In my case I had emails from the former owner asking me to take the dog back.) PetLog then contacted the former owner and I assume it was either a case of being told yes, you can transfer, or not getting a reply at all and after x amount of time not waiting any longer -in any event it took many weeks before I finally had the transfer of the chip through, when it normally takes days. So it clearly isn't done lightly -even when the dog as in this case already was KC reg'd in MY name. (As that had never been transferred.)

>It's £5 now and they will only issue a duplicate registration certificate to the registered owner.

And if the pup was sold 'without papers' and so is still registered to the breeder, replacement papers will only be issued in the breeder's name, not the purchaser's.

Thats what I thought jg. Yes these are definitly kc registered, have decided that  although it is something that happens I think its odd confirmed by what you peeps have said. Something else to think about I guess when looking at website and breeders. :)
oh well was only browsing anyway :) the ones I have keep me on my toes