One of my dogs was microchip a couple of years ago using a new company I have never heard of and doesn't look too professional, recently took a puppy to be microchiped and vets are back to using petlog. All my dogs are microchiped with Petlog except this one.

Is it possible to change the chip details to Petlog or is that just impossible.

As far as I'm aware once it is with a database, it is stuck with that particular database. The microchip implanter will have bought their chips from a particular manufacturer who has paid Pet log a subscription fee. However, I do believe there is an agreement between the vast majority of manufacturers. I scanned a dog recently before chipping, and found they were already chipped. A quick check of the pet log system and it told me they were chipped with another database.

> I scanned a dog recently before chipping, and found they were already chipped. A quick check of the pet log system and it told me they were chipped with another database.

My rescue dog which was chipped [we understand] in Ireland is not on Petlog and they couldn't help with transfer to a new owner. "Another database" doesn't help if you can't access the "another database".

I don't know if you read the story on an other thread [it totally deserves a thread of its own] - a dog was stolen some years ago, and the owner has just found out in the last few weeks, she was rehomed in 2006 via Dogs Trust. Big failure of rescue and chip companies to check and do the right thing there. No "another database" involved there, just massive fail on checking and scanning which has led to a stolen dog being rehomed and no chance of it ever going back to its grieving owner. Who - it has to be said - is being very strong and amazingly grounded and is just happy the dog is alive and cared for... but there won't be any happy reunions.

All of this HAS to be tidied up before any kind of chip legislation comes in. I may be wrong but I understand a tattoo has more clout in cases like these - if so I will go for belt and braces. I may not like the look of tattoos but if it has more chance of getting my dog back if stolen, then that's what I'll do.

The message went something like.

'This animal has been chipped with the ID-Tag database (Can't remember the name) You can contact them at... <Phone Number, Website, E-mail address>'

So yes, very helpful. In fact, if I scan my dog who is registered with Petlog, all I get is 'Yes, this dog is registered with Petlog.' You don't get the owner's details instantly, you have to call up. I believe it is part of the Data Protection Act. Imagine anyone with a scanner could access your pet's owners address simply by scanning a microchipped animal and entering their number online. Pet theft would go through the roof, and rather than being a deterrent, microchipping could quickly become the new tool to bribe owners of stolen pet dogs. I.E, Rover gets stolen, the thief scans him, and then has the owner's details immediately available to him in order to bribe/hold the dog to ransom.

The Dogs Trust story has nothing to do with different databases, it has more to do with failure of whoever dealt with that particular dog. The chip company has nothing at all to do with it. If it's not alerted that a dog with that microchip number has been handed in to the dogs trust, how on earth is it supposed to know? Nearly half the dogs in the UK are already microchipped.. do you think they should ring around the rescue centres every single time one goes missing 'just in case' the Dogs Trust hasn't bothered to check themselves?!

The pet log database actually sends an alert around to all chip implanters within a 30-mile radius of a missing animal. I would imagine the Dogs Trust would pay a lot of attention to these emails, considering they are getting a LOT of money donated to them from the public and rather than spending the money it must cost to re-home an animal, a simple scan and check with pet log could have had him back with his owners immediately. Although I'm sure this was just a one-off case where the Dogs Trust haven't checked, it is just such a shame that it has had such devastating consequences.

The exact same problem could have happened with a tattoo. The dogs trust could have seen the tattoo and not checked the database (Just like they have found a microchip not alerted the chip database, or not checked at all!) After all, if they could fail to do something so basic and blindingly obvious, I'm sure they could fail to report a tattoo, too.

Slightly less likely that noone else in the centre would double-check the tattoo number, but still.. you'd have thought it unlikely that the Dogs Trust would fail to check a microchip!

What I think needs to happen is routine scanning at the vets. The vet should scan the animal, enter the owner's supposed address (based on their records on file) and enter them. The actual owner's address wouldn't be revealed so no breaking the data protection act, however the system would flag up whether or not there was a match there.

Josh - the whole story hasn't been posted on here but there are other CDers aware of it. No time right now to explain further but it's not what you'd expect if you had any trust in the chip system. The "Vets get Scanning" campaign has also been involved.. it is the antithesis of what we as owners hope for when chipping our dogs.

My point is, if the existing databases can fail a dog to this degree [and yes it IS a chip database fail] then what hope is there when other databases who don't communicate with one another, to do the job?

One hopes that chipping your dog means it has a chance of getting back to you if lost.... If that can't happen or fails for ANY reason then what's the point? The way it works at the moment with the different databases etc. is a system set to fail, not to mention the case I have quoted where everything was done right by the owner.

>My rescue dog which was chipped [we understand] in Ireland is not on Petlog and they couldn't help with transfer to a new owner. "Another database" doesn't help if you can't access the "another database".

I often have to ring Petlog about dog identification, and they know from the first few numbers which database the chip's registered with and give me the contact details for them.

What REALLY annoys me is that yes some chips were initially registered with PetLog and then MOVED -happened to a few of my animals that were chipped by a friend about ten years ago. I had no idea until I tried to update details for them. (You'd have thought the owners would have been informed!) Had no luck contacting the other database, can't recall the name now, Animal or anima something? I make very sure myself to only buy chips that will be reg'd with Pet Log -the initial numbers show the manufacturer of the chip and most of course are with PetLog but not all.

Anibase? Apparently they were the first chip database.

Yes that's it -cannot for my life understand why some were moved to them when they were with Pet Log initially.

That does seem really bizarre.

My dog is with anibase and I wanted to change some details but the telephone number doesn't work and the website never connected. Is there any way of getting him registered with petlog too or is he stuck with anibase?

> I may not like the look of tattoos

even though they are usually easy to see you don't notice them when looking at the dog casually, even the prick eared ones like mine.

I have had every puppy I have bred and every adult owned ear tattooed.

Just had to update my dogs' details after recently moving house.

petlog was simple to do over the phone as was identichip but animate were a complete nightmare,incidentally these are for my two older dogs who I thought were on the petlog database,as they are unavailable to contact via telephone and the website is worse than useless as the supposedly unique regestration  code for each dogs comes up as invalid!

I have just sent them a letter of complaint and in future will only use petlog.

All my dogs were chipped as pups and with the older two I just went along with what the vet had available but will choose which company to use for future dogs

Just had to update my dogs' details after recently moving house.

petlog was simple to do over the phone as was identichip but anibase were a complete nightmare,incidentally these are for my two older dogs who I thought were on the petlog database,as they are unavailable to contact via telephone and the website is worse than useless as the supposedly unique regestration  code for each dogs comes up as invalid!

I have just sent them a letter of complaint and in future will only use petlog.

All my dogs were chipped as pups and with the older two I just went along with what the vet had available but will choose which company to use for future dogs

>My dog is with anibase and I wanted to change some details but the telephone number doesn't work

I rang them today and got through. I'll try to remember to check what number I used (it's at work) and tell you tomorrow.

Many thanks. I only have the one on the paperwork from 5 1/2 years ago.

The number I used, and got through on, is 01904 487600.