Advert Description :

White staffordshire bull terrier with no defects She is on her 10th day of her 2nd heat She is a full staffy but have no papers She is 15 months old and has the perfect temperment and is great with all animals and is fantastic with kids Looking for a blue staffy who is willing to take pick of litter or cash of the first pup soldAny other questions feel free to contact me on xxxxxxxxxxx.

Exactly what prospective puppy buyers are looking for in the mother of their bundle of fluff. Can see where this 'planned' breeding is heading....wonder how many blue pups will be in the litter.

As far as I am aware they both have to carry the blue gene anyway to get blue pups so they could be disappointed. Just whats needed, more unregistered sbt

Well I found my most rage inducing one yet last night on my local puppy selling FB page.

Looking for 2 studs, cause both of her dogs came in to season at the same time so 'doing' them both. When someone asked if they'd be KC reg she replied "No mums not kc only getting puppies for fun x".

You are right lel. They both need to be blue carriers but that isn't made clear on the ad. The wording alone shows how much research and thought has been put in, probably along the same process that white + black = grey. I can remember a gsd ad about 4 years ago, where a white bitch and black dog had been mated - to produce blues and were looking to take deposits on a waiting list. Obviously they had looked at the 'paint by numbers' book instead of the genetics one.

Tectona, this is common practice. Last year a family bred both their gsd girls 'in the hopes that one will take', they both did. One had 9 pups and the other 10 but one of the bitches developed severe mastitis and they had to hand rear the litter with the help of the other bitch. Advertised on a pet site and sold the hand reared ones dearer than the other litter 'because of the time and care involved'.

Sad.

Nothing compared to what I found on pets4homes ...... somebody advertising puppies from a 'new designer breed'..... Jackie X Basset. With a stupid combination name.   £350.   Yes far lower than the going rate for a purebred Basset (not sure about the Jackies) BUT £350 for a mutt??   I took it on myself to write to the advertiser.   Needless to say, no reply.  That website is full of dogs at stud, females looking for a stud dog and so on.   Which is why I don't do that website.

I can remember a gsd ad about 4 years ago, where a white bitch and black dog had been mated - to produce blues and were looking to take deposits on a waiting list.

I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when those pups were born............ ;)

And the fact that the bitch is only 15mths very sad

The worst one I've seen was for a 7 month old dobe being offered for stud.  Yep, 7 MONTHS.  I emailed the advertiser to ask why so young and mention the risks of DCM and why they need to be older to be screened etc only to get the 'I've been breeding for 12 years, I know what I'm doing' and 'the vet told us he could breed from 6 months'.  I said yes, but could doesn't mean should; and if they had 12 years experience, then obviously they would know that 7 months was far too young to be studded out and I didn't need to tell them clearly!  No reply after that, oddly enough...

Best thing you can do really is to stop looking.  We'll never stop them doing it until legislation is brought in about breeding or at the very least, advertising, so there's no point getting your blood pressure up.  The odd one might listen - like the owner of the fawn dobe bitch who on my advice had her spayed before rehoming - but for me at least, the multitude of ignoramuses and the attitude you get in reply is not worth the stress (but then, confrontation of any kind makes me horrendously anxious!).

I dont look anymore, its too frustrating. If people ask for advice then I will offer it gladly. Too many adverts also without any mention of health testing. I read an article recently about 'buyers' being able to sue the breeder for any dogs that went onto get any health issues. The article referred to dogs as 'products' ... Will see if I can find it

I read an article recently about 'buyers' being able to sue the breeder for any dogs that went onto get any health issues. The article referred to dogs as 'products' ...

Yes that is pretty much it. In law, a dog is no different to a TV or a computer. It has to be fit for the purpose it is bought for. If a dog goes on to develop a health problem that could have been prevented by the breeder carrying out the relevant health tests etc (and then not doing that particular mating if results were poor), then the buyer can have a case.

I may be shot down for saying this but I think vets have played a big part in this. Not all, but certainly many, practically force neutering down your throat and I feel this stops a lot of people from talking about the pros and cons subjectively with their practice. Almost like they're gonna judge anyway so lets just do it. This coupled with maximum income for minimal effort beliefs just leads to ads and owners like these. If vets were more open about breeding and talking things through maybe people would actually ask. I could almost bet my life on these owners not knowing about things like pyometria, mastitis, enertia, swimmers etc.

On the same site there is a mali bitch that is on her 10th day of season being sold. This person imports working dogs but obviously not to work and he's selling her. She has just turned 2 but apparently already a proven brood bitch. I just don't understand the way these people think.

P.s I think a jackie is a jrt x yorkshire t - so a jakie x bassett is a jacket?

On the same site there is a mali bitch that is on her 10th day of season being sold. This person imports working dogs but obviously not to work and he's selling her. She has just turned 2 but apparently already a proven brood bitch. I just don't understand the way these people think.

For several years now there has been a belief (incorrect, needless to say!) that Malinois pups are not only easy to sell (I wish! I'd bet they are one of the very hardest of all breeds) but that the police will pay you £3000 for a puppy. So people breed and breed and hence we are now seeing the breed in rescue more and more frequently as of course the pups either remain unsold, or are sold to anyone on the premise of them making "great family pets". (Yes and I suppose a crocodile would also make a great family pet.) When I started in the breed you saw one or maybe in a bad year two in rescue per YEAR. Now it's on a weekly basis. And it's always the working strains. Too many of these people will sell pups to anyone no questions asked, either not endorsed or not KC reg'd at all. It's my big fear that it's the next breed to be featured in a news story where a dog has killed a person.

Marianne, I think the really sad thing with your breed is that all the different types are simply labelled under malinois or belgian shepherds and jo bloggs think ooooh just a smaller gsd and no hip dysplasia problems. In the 'I want' world we live in where a simple google search would point out the differences in 5 minutes, no one can be bothered and just turns up  at the 'breeders' - cash in hand.

> Marianne, I think the really sad thing with your breed is that all the different types are simply labelled under malinois or belgian shepherds and jo bloggs think ooooh just a smaller gsd

And many rescues ask for "Shepherd experience" when you would probably have better experience if you'd owned fast-thinking fast-acting reactive breeds like Border Collies before. Some of the working line Malinois are extremely hard work - very driven indeed. And if they have missed out on vital early socialisation (as many in rescue appear to have) then you really do have your work cut out for the next 12-14 years.

I read an article recently about 'buyers' being able to sue the breeder for any dogs that went onto get any health issues

I dont doubt you read that somewhere but if an owner tried that they could not possibly win & they would almost certainly have to pay all court costs.
.

Ms temeraire just to prove your point....by the same owner of the bitch advertised -

"8 month old Male German shepherd cross Belgian shepherd. Father is a GSD (Manus van tiekerhook son) Mother is a Uvito grandaughter and also a grandaughter of Tornado Du Boscaille Puppy needs some socialising and has had no formal training. Superb temperament, confident, super grip and lots of drive. Needs experienced handler as this dog needs training and will be a handful. All vaccs and micro chip."

Lots of drive doesn't always equate to successful working dog and also how can his temperament be super if he is already a handful? Surely he will need intensive training to turn that temperament super? I really wish they'd stop this particular cross altogether if it is being sold to the general public.

so a jakie x bassett is a jacket?

Advertised as a Jackett........ and as a 'latest designer breed'....... shakes head.

I read an article recently about 'buyers' being able to sue the breeder for any dogs that went onto get any health issues

Most breeders these days tend to have a clause in the sales contract protecting themselves from this kind of situation.   But again 'most' reputable breeders would want to hear about things that 'go wrong', for starters.   Depending on how long the new owner has had the puppy, a good breeder would offer to help with vet costs/take back the puppy etc.etc.   Sue the breeder?   Sigh - we get more 'American' by the day in this country.  There has to be a limit when it comes to how culpable a breeder is - when it comes to producing livestock all any good breeder can do is breed with knowledge, testing and good faith!!

And many rescues ask for "Shepherd experience" when you would probably have better experience if you'd owned fast-thinking fast-acting reactive breeds like Border Collies before.

The fact that police dog handlers used to GSD normally have to be retrained when given their first Malinois speaks volumes.

There is a facebook site that helps puppy buyers sue when they have been sold a sickly pup, in the main this has been puppies bought from pet shops, or puppy supermarkets, but they have been successful with claims through the small claims court.
If a precedent has been set then I think it would be perfectly possible to bring an action against a breeder who, breeds from untested stock or dogs that have poor health results, as the condition could have been reasonably been prevented.
Like a previous poster said, in law dogs are seen just like any other product and if they are sold then the purchaser would have certain rights under consumer law.
From what I have read it would seem that the crux of the cases are decided on if the condition could have been foreseen and prevented, and if the dog became ill because of the negligence or bad husbandry of the breeder.

I think you would have a hard time proving what constitutes a hereditary condition. Even something such as hip dysplasia may not be present in the parents/grandparents (or if the case went to court and had parents screened with results within kc/bva guidelines), it would still come back to the purchaser for not doing their homework. No one is forced to buy from an unlicensed breeder, the pup is not sold with a guarantee or warranty and the argument would most likely become one of nature vs nurture. The breeder could argue the health of the puppy being down to purchaser and the condition it is kept in. Joint/bone problems to over exercise/exertion,  coat/skin condition to diet/environment etc. The variables are too many.

My breed specific forum was set up due to hereditary problems and the dog's premature death. To this day, nothing has been resolved and those lines have been proven to carry more than 2 inherited conditions.

All things aside, most byb don't even provide a receipt so how can you prove you have paid for the dog in the 1st place?

I think you would have a hard time proving what constitutes a hereditary condition.

I doubt you'd have to. If it can be proven you could have for instance x-rayed hips but didn't, then that should be enough. Now if parents were hip scored but had bad scores, than that's different -then the buyer had the information but still went ahead with the purchase.

Not providing a receipt probably would not be enough, particularly if there was an advert for the puppy or there was a witness to the purchase. Also if registered KC registration would link the breeder to the puppy.
In some cases their have been several puppies from on place purchased by different owners and records from several different vets, which would indicate that it was not an isolated occurrence.
Also like Goldmali said if there is a test available and the breeder failed to do it, it could be considered to be negligent. Also going against BVA or breed club recommendations if two Carriers or affected dogs were mated together for example.

I understand marrianne but the point is still being missed...how can you prove you purchased the dog in the first place? Breeders word against purchaser. No receipt could be argued that the purchaser was given the dog for free. Until you can prove money exchanged hands, you cannot prove liability. Even with items purchased with warranty/guarantee, a receipt is required as proof of purchase.

We are talking about byb - remember that the original post was about a byb. And I highly doubt a buyer keeping copies of ads when buying from a byb. However, like I have mentioned. My breed specific forum is rife of buyers with dogs that suffer from some forms of problem or other and 98% are kcregistered dogs with on going disputes regarding liability.

As for witnesses - I have 4 dogs and never took anyone with me apart from my husband and he could not be classed as a witness due to invested interest. It is unlikely that a litter bred by byb would have buyers that can keep in touch with each other.

Not sure how it was done, but their is a FB page that has had people who have bought a puppy from the same litter and advised them how to make a claim through the county court.
Could be social media has helped who knows ?
Even BYB  KC register at least some of the puppies, have heard of two different prices being asked with or without papers.
Knew of a Bullmastiff breeder who had a litter every season one was KC registered and the next dog lovers, she said she could ask more money for the KC registered ones.
Even if advertised on Facebook I think you can screen save adverts, fairly easy to do.

"A receipt is required as proof of purchase" 

A receipt has no status in law. It's just. A good way of proving purchase. Sellers (in shops, for instance) who attempt to insist on a receipt have no legal right to do so.

They can have all the "receipt required" policies they like; the laws just requires purchase to be demostrated in a reasonable way. So if I've for goods you sell in, for instance, the bag you supply them in, that will generally be enough to persuade a court that I bought them from you.

Likewise with dogs and adverts placed, friends who witnessed, etc. Denying sale would be unlikely to be a convincing tactic.

Just seen one advert for a litter not Kc reg'd even though parents are, because the sire has endorsements in place :( how sad for his breeder. Assume it wouldnt matter even if the breeder knew, as they aren't trying to KC reg them so aren't doing anything 'wrong'? And I do mean wrong on paper, not morally.

Really sorry BeagleBaggie have to slightly disagree, your correct that a receipt is not required as law but a proof of purchase is.  Proof of purchase can of course be the receipt, a bank statement showing the payment either through card machine or bank transfer, PayPal transaction etc.  Unfortunately the bag the item was placed in when purchased would not count as it would be very easy to place an item from another store into said bag, how many of us use our carrier bags for all manner of things. 

For some retailers i.e Asda (George), Dotty P's, Peacocks etc that have all their items labelled with their own branding they tend to take items back with no 'proof of purchase' if it is still a current line as it must have come from one of their own stores, however for stores like the one I work in where we sell a variety of branded goods that are easily available elsewhere a 'proof of purchase' from our store is required to return an item, I deal with all of our companies faulty returns so am well versed and researched in the current law regarding returning items.

Obviously in the case of puppies and particularly with bybs it's not so easy, but then whenever making a big purchase (puppies or otherwise) the safest way has got to be through a traceable source i.e. bank transfer, paypal or even a cheque then you would have the proof of purchase needed as a 'product'