Hi, I am new to this so please bear with me. I apologise for length of post in advance but could really do with some advice. Please no bashing. I have a three year old dobermann that had a litter 12 months ago. the puppies all went to their new homes at 8 weeks after being fully vet checked and given a clean bill of health and had their first vaccinations. One of the new owners contacted me a few weeks later and explained that when being checked for the second vaccine, the vet found a problem with her heart. I gave her all my vets details and said if there was a problem I would happily take her back and refund on full. I never heard anything again untill this week and the pup is now 12 months old. I was told that she had to be put to sleep due to dcm. Her vet said it was a rare and unusual casE. I have done my research on dcm but found there was not test for this and an ultrasound scan was only good for that day. The lady is now requesting a full refund And claiming I am a bad breeder. The puppy was given insurance and i told her to carry on the insurance once it ended as it covers Tragedies like this. I'm not a breeder for profit as my girl would have had more than 1 litter in three years. My question is should I be refunding for the puppy 12 months on when I offered to have her back in the beginning? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

This is a breed issue  http://www.ufaw.org.uk/dilatedcardiomyopathydoberman.php

4.           Number of animals affected
A recent study by Wess et al (2010a) showed that the overall prevalence of DCM in Dobermans in Europe was 58%.

for which here is a DNA test http://www.vetgen.com/canine-dob-panel-testing.html.

If her parents were not tested then morally I think you should refund what they paid.

>If her parents were not tested then morally I think you should refund what they paid.

But if there is a test and it is such a common problem in the breed then surely the buyer should bear some responsibility for checking that the litter has been tested? and if they dont check then why should the breeder have to take all responsibility.
I don't see that a refund is due. If they refused a refund and return when the "problem" first became apparent and kept the puppy I don't see how they can expect to have a refund down the line.

I don't think a full refund a whole year after the breeder offered to take back the puppy and refund is reasonable.

Not all new owners are clued up enough and it is why breeders should know everything that could affect a dogs health and know what tests should be done and therefore in this instance the OP therefore is morally responsible because they did not undertake a health test that could have been prevented this.

The moral of this is never go into breeding your dog unless you know everything about the breed and all the health issues and tests you should consider doing.

For the OP this is a lesson that they have now learnt and will have to deal with the consequences of their actions. I do hope however they take the lesson as something they will make sure will never happen again and go and do more research on their breed and get involved with the breed club if they haven't already done so.

Perhaps JG the puppy owner got so attached and didn't realise the seriousness of the condition and could bare to give the puppy back you do hear this happens a lot .

It could be worse they could be going to get all the vets bills back as well.

After 12 months? A partial refund would be a gesture of goodwill, but demanding a full refund (which was refused earlier) is out of order. Trevor Cooper, on his Doglaw page, is clear that as the puppy was not bought from a licenced breeder the principle of 'caveat emptor' applies.

Indeed legally the breeder has nothing to worry about at all. Morally however -had it been my pup and my puppy buyers I'd offer them a free pup from my next litter (or any future litter), but NOT purchase price back after a year as the offer was there at just a few weeks of age. They had that chance and declined.

Exactly, Goldmali.

I would agree if the refund was offered and refused then they can't expect it later, but I'd want to have evidence of it in writing if that was case. 

I still think morally I'd be paying them their money back (cost of pup only, as they chose to bear any expense once it was diagnosed).

How much does the breeder value their good name.

From the top link in Brainless' first reply: "As an autosomal dominant condition, it is likely that there are no silent carriers (ie animals that are unaffected themselves but which can pass it on to their offspring) - all individuals with the gene are prone to developing the disease and all will pass it on to their offspring."

This suggests that your bitch, having produced an affected puppy, is at high risk of developing the symptoms herself, as is the stud dog. I suggest you get your bitch DNA tested as soon as you can.

More information about it here.

did the op not say there was no test for this ? I was assuming they meant in either parents is that right ?
 

There is now a DNA test for DCM in the dobermann, but it seems to be only in the US. If it involves a blood sample then it's unavailable for UK breeders. It can be diagnosed by ultrasound.

>Indeed legally the breeder has nothing to worry about at all. Morally however -had it been my pup and my puppy buyers I'd offer them a free pup from my next litter (or any future litter),

Well the owner wouldnt get another pup from me! There is no way I would sell to someone whose first thought on losing a beloved pet is how best to recoup the money!

The OP does seem to have looked into the issue of DCM and with over half the Dobe population suffering from the problem the buyer should have been more aware of the risks. They had the chance to return the puppy when the problem first became apparent. By not doing so as far as I can see they have accepted the risk that their pup might not have as long a lifespan.

Well the owner wouldnt get another pup from me! There is no way I would sell to someone whose first thought on losing a beloved pet is how best to recoup the money!

We know nothing about them and nothing has been said to indicate they would be bad owners. Chances are they will be very upset, and part of the grieving process is of course anger -hence lashing out where you can. It doesn't have to have anything at all to do with money.

Both parties should learn from the experience.However I do tend to think asking for a refund so far down the line is unreasonable.

>but it seems to be only in the US. If it involves a blood sample then it's unavailable for UK breeders.

Lots of DNA tests áre only available abroad (e.g. Optigen for various tests) and there is not problem sending blood to USA or elsewhere, though if they accept them buccal swabs are a lot cheaper.

Vet gen accept Cotton swabs http://www.vetgen.com/documents/sample-collection-instructions.pdf

I admit I agree with smithy, the offer was given at the beginning  I am not sure in law how long an offer of a refund would stand but to comeback now seems all wrong to me.
I would also check with trading standards what the legal position is morally I feel they have done what they could

I would also check with trading standards what the legal position is

The legal position is how JG described -caveat emptor. It is up to the buyer to ensure the "goods" are in the condition they want them to be in, and if they do not do this, they have no comeback at all when it is a private (not council licensed) breeder. They would only have any comeback had the breeder deliberately lied (misrepresented) about the health of the pup.

This is where a good Sales Contract should always be in place.   For me, I agree with Smithy.   There is always an element of buyer beware when buying a puppy.  

Fact is you did offer to take the puppy back early on, which they refused.   So sadly now the worst has happened and they are coming at you for a full? refund??   Unless you gave them a 'life-time guarantee' (unwise!) I don't see you have any liability here.

They could, however, do you a load of damage via word of mouth, so you need to remember this, if you are a breeder who intends to breed more, and are involved heavily in your breed.   Protecting your reputation is paramount.   Do you have a good vet who would back you up re this puppy, and others you may produce?

Testing goes both ways and personally I only tested if I have a problem starting in my bloodline.  Even dogs that pass a test can produce affecteds, perhaps via recessive genes. 

For these people to expect any kind of refund for what's happened, a year on, when the puppy was sold to them and accepted by them, in good faith, is pushing it.   My opinion.

This is where a good Sales Contract should always be in place. 

Makes no difference to the law unless the breeder had put in writing that the dog was guaranteed to have a good heart.

thanks Goldmali missed JG comment from Trevor Cooper.

Makes no difference to the law unless the breeder had put in writing that the dog was guaranteed to have a good heart.

Yes but at least if it was spelt out that the breeder would only offer a full (or partial) refund within a specified amount of time, it MIGHT prevent a situation like this?   I know, only too well, how sometimes these agreements aren't 'worth the paper they are written on' however!!

Yes that is a good point MamaBas.