Are there any specific items you put into your puppy contracts? Is it common to offer a full refund if they bring the puppy back in 2-3 weeks if they realise they can't cope - and then what do you offer if they bring it back after that timeframe?

I have some people calling and wanting to come and look at the puppies before xmas - they won't be ready to be rehomed until end of january, but I am well aware that people see 'cute for christmas' and don't think about long cold winter walks in february! Id rather they came back to me than were sold to less careful owners.

Also - if I was to chip all the puppies and then the owners changed the registered name on the chips - if the pups were sold on or ended up in a home, would the home be able to use the chip to link them back to me? Was wondering if this was a safeguard I should put in place - and then wondered if I am being overly cautious.

">wondered if I am being overly cautious

You can never be over cautious.

the only way to for certain have a permanent ID always linked back to you is by using the National dog Tattoo register, http://www.dog-register.co.uk/

No matter how often the owner or address details change you will stay on the record s breeder.

Nothing wrong with having both done, though I tattoo pups and encourage owners to chip.

Also - if I was to chip all the puppies and then the owners changed the registered name on the chips - if the pups were sold on or ended up in a home, would the home be able to use the chip to link them back to me?

PetLog did have plans to let people add permanent breeder records to chips, and I do know some people trialled it, but have since not heard anything further. What you can of course do is chip pups in your name, NOT hand over chip paperwork signed so it cannot be transferred, and simply add new owner's phone number as emergency contact. Should the dog get lost and picked up you will then be the first person contacted. Although this will not be possible when the new law comes in in 2016.

I have some people calling and wanting to come and look at the puppies before xmas - they won't be ready to be rehomed until end of january, but I am well aware that people see 'cute for christmas' and don't think about long cold winter walks in february!

Well there won't be any long cold February walks THIS year of course as pups should only be walked 5 minutes per month of life, so just 15 mins by February. :)

I don't put anything in my contract about returning money if pup is brought back (this was advice by a solicitor involved with dogs) as every case is different. I just state I should be contacted and that I will take a dog back at any time. For a start there is a huge difference between a pup sold at 8 weeks and brought back at 10, and a pup sold at 16 weeks and brought back at 18. In many breeds the re-sale value drops the older the pup gets. If you have to hang on to a returned pup for weeks and train it, or maybe never find a new home at all, that changes things as well. I would simply play things by ear and not promise too much, just make it clear you will always take a dog back at any age, any time, for any reason whatsoever.

I put in my contract that the new owners have a week to have the pup checked by their vet and if anything is found to be wrong with the puppy they can bring it back for a full refund.
Then it says that if they can not keep it at any time in the pups life I will take it back and try to rehome it and if any profit left from a rehoming fee minus expenses will be given to them.
ive put it like that as ive known a person who got a dog from a rescue but later on when they wanted to rehome it they wouldn't take it back to the rescue as they wanted some money back by selling it. I wouldn't want a puppy buyer to think like that.

im planning to chip and tattoo mine.

I like to be very specific in my contract , I will return the cost of the puppy if it's found to have something wrong with it by their vet up to 12 weeks old or for any other reason if it is returned to me in that time.Then half it's cost up to 6 months old. I explain to the new owner, when going through the contract, that a dog over 6 months (in my opinion) is classed as a re-home and I may have to keep that dog for many months or forever to rehabilitate it.
I also say that I will have the pup back at any stage of it's life and in my contract I specify an amount that has to be paid to me (double the cost of the pup) if I find out the pup has been moved on without my knowledge (this contract was drawn up by a barrister who owns my girl's litter brother) and Trevor Cooper confirmed in one of his Dog Law talks that it would hold up in court. There is a waiting list of people wanting older vallhunds so there is never any problem finding suitable new homes for them.

My contract recommends amongst other things

a vet health check within 4 days of purchase. Full refund given if pup is found to have a problem rendering it unfit for sale as long as pup is in same state of health as when sold. (This is at owners expense)

Owners need to consider a puppy is a living thing which will become a loved member of family and breeder cannot be held accountable for any distress caused by returning it.

Keep in contact with the breeder to give regular updates (to be mutually agreed). If purchaser wishes to dispose of puppy to contact the seller beforehand so they have the opportunity to re home themselves.

Confirm before purchase you have consulted your vet about (breed ) and any possible diseases to which they are prone and that if this happens later in life they cannot be held responsible.

Strongly advise not to spay/neuter under a year. If you want to - try to leave bitches until they have had 2 seasons approx 14-16 months of age.

From experience we feel a puppy needs to mature before this serious operation.

If any of the "care of your puppy" recommendations lead to health issues or distress of the puppy the breeder will not be liable

There was also an information pack -

This talks about season suppression, insurance, meeting the puppies physical, mental & emotional needs, and in the generic info all the other responsible requirements; changing ownership, training, socialisation, feeding, endorsements etc etc. and that they are on hand for concerns of advice throughout the puppies life.

I think that was it all but could dig it out if necessary

Tish - it would be great to see a copy of your contract?!

Confirm before purchase you have consulted your vet about (breed ) and any possible diseases to which they are prone and that if this happens later in life they cannot be held responsible.

But how many vets would just reel off a list of diseases they commonly see in badly bred dogs of the same breed? A vet would be the last person I'd want a puppy buyer to get advice from -they tend to only see sick dogs and so their views of breeds will always be tainted. Also surely if you have not carried out relevant health testing of the parents of any pups you very much are responsible for future problems.

PM me your email I will confirm with breeder it is ok (would I have to blank out their details?)

Goldmali,

I think that as long as your honest then the 'buyer beware' thing is definitely needed. Even with health testing (a controversial issue that may well change dramatically in the next few years) the treatment of the puppy by it's new owners has been thoroughly and reliably evidenced to contribute to  upwards of 75% of the likelihood of health issues including dysplasia,  generalised joint problems and also eye health. The most current randomised controlled trials (gold standard evidence) show that currently available testing and breeding only from animals testing within acceptable limits had no effect at all on the prevalence of hip dysplasia in any breed known as 'prone'. Indeed all the evidence points to over exercise, over feeding and nutritional deficit as the leading cause of ALL joint problems. It will soon, I believe, become more widely known and hopefully accepted that hip scoring and eye testing are doing nothing to improve health of progeny and that they are indeed unnecessary interventions  lining the pockets of vets. HIP testing itself costs the veterinary practice very very  little to carry out, yet they charge upwards of 300% of the actual cost!

With nurture playing such an essential role in the future health of dogs it's imperative that breeders include this type of clause in their contract. I also plan to issue copies of evidence and thorough advise on the 'proper' way to promote the development of a healthy dog from my pups.

Whilst most breeders (myself included) would do all they can to offer advice and to help rehome a puppy that the new owners no longer want/can keep it would be suicide to accept responsibility for future problems as it opens up a minefield where puppy owners would be able to keep their puppy and claim vets costs for a problem they have created/accentuated by poor choices.

My breed is brachycephalic, they can be prone to eye problems, stenotic nares, but my interpretation of later in life would be the respiratory syndrome they can get.

This includes tracheal collapse some of this can be down to conformation / facial construction so the smaller the more constricted the respiratory airway the higher eye ulcerations. With the airway though as they enter old age it can deteriorate to the stage of tracheal collapse. If the dog is exposed to additional pollution smoking etc COPD.

This breeder I felt had larger and slightly longer muzzled dogs than my first. Having said that I have just had to inform her my puppy has entropien which she was very concerned about as none of her other pups or litters have this.

My breed has no required health tests, but I still feel this dog is so much healthier than my last one. No manic snoring, exercise intolerance, or bowed legs but I accept it is early days.

Even with health testing (a controversial issue that may well change dramatically in the next few years) the treatment of the puppy by it's new owners has been thoroughly and reliably evidenced to contribute to  upwards of 75% of the likelihood of health issues including dysplasia,  generalised joint problems and also eye health. The most current randomised controlled trials (gold standard evidence) show that currently available testing and breeding only from animals testing within acceptable limits had no effect at all on the prevalence of hip dysplasia in any breed known as 'prone'. Indeed all the evidence points to over exercise, over feeding and nutritional deficit as the leading cause of ALL joint problems. It will soon, I believe, become more widely known and hopefully accepted that hip scoring and eye testing are doing nothing to improve health of progeny and that they are indeed unnecessary interventions  lining the pockets of vets. HIP testing itself costs the veterinary practice very very  little to carry out, yet they charge upwards of 300% of the actual cost!

I am almost speechless! First of all, we are not just talking about hip dysplasia. Secondly how do you explain breed mean scores getting lower and lower when breeders select dogs with low hip scores if genetics has nothing to do with it? Thirdly, how on earth would you explain for instance PRA being CAUSED by an owner? Something which can be DNA tested for and get a definite answer as to whether the dog is affected, a carrier or clear. Not worth doing then as the owner can cause it? I would also suggest you change your vet if he charges you that much and money worries you. BVA fee for hip scoring is £57. I last had a dog hip scored in July. Total cost £133. So my vet charged £76 for the x-ray plate and sedation. I would say that is perfectly reasonable.

Whilst most breeders (myself included) would do all they can to offer advice and to help rehome a puppy that the new owners no longer want/can keep it would be suicide to accept responsibility for future problems as it opens up a minefield where puppy owners would be able to keep their puppy and claim vets costs for a problem they have created/accentuated by poor choices.

By not carrying out relevant health tests you ARE leaving yourself wide open to be sued no matter what. Remember that case a few years ago (my ex husband reported on it for the dog papers) where a family had walked an 8 week old Labrador puppy for several miles a day, and it developed severe HD? They still won the court case against the breeder.

How can you write that eye testing has had no effect on the state of eye health. Back when I got my first Border Collie, around 20% of dogs had CEA(CH), the BVA & ISDS started the eye testing scheme(NOT the KC) & by refusing to register puppies from unscreened dogs & also from bitches that had produced 1 or more affected puppy & puppies from dogs that had produced 2 or more affected puppies from 2 different bitches(this was before DNA profiles was available)the percentage of affected dogs was reduced to less than 0.01%. Unregistered Border Collies from non screened pedigrees still produce 20% affected dogs. The DNA test now available now shows a much lower percentage of affected dogs & the number of carriers is about  the same as was estimated.

As CEA(CH)is a condition that can "go right" after the age of 12 weeks, the eye screening of litters & compulsory eye testing of parents & non registration of offspring of known producers obviously HAS had an affect on eye health.

Anyone who fails to fully health test their breeding stock is a negligent irresponsible fool.

>Total cost £133. So my vet charged £76 for the x-ray plate and sedation. I would say that is perfectly reasonable. <br />

Very reasonable you'll be charged around £300 in Bristol and the vet in Hereford I use (so add in Fuel) total charge in 2013 was £150 for hips and another £150 for elbows which I have done for the first time.

I wasn't talking DNA testing, and was referring to my breed which only requires hip and eye score so can't comment on other breeds tests.

As I stated mean scores for dysplasia in controlled trials haven't reduced AT ALL. If you read up on it thoroughly using academic peer reviewed, double blind journals you'll see the evidence for yourself. 

It is a controversial subject with many not willing to state their opinion due to the backlash, however I don't do anything without thoroughly researching it, in this case I spent two years researching to come to my conclusions and continue to read new evidence as it arrives. Doing something  just because that is the way it is done is in my view unethical. I have no problem with spending any amount of money producing and raising my litter (a luxury I can luckily afford) however I do have a huge problem with lining the pockets of others for procedures which are no longer evidence based..

As for court cases, that's what sale contracts are for, precisely why the clause being discussed is a great idea and if your honest with your puppy buyers and it's in writing then they've made an informed choice..

>Even with health testing (a controversial issue that may well change dramatically in the next few years) the treatment of the puppy by it's new owners has been thoroughly and reliably evidenced to contribute to  upwards of 75% of the likelihood of health issues including dysplasia,  generalised joint problems and also eye health.

How can you possibly say that? By DNA testing for certain eye conditions, the birth of dogs destined to be affected by conditions (and therefore have their quality of life impaired) can be eliminated entirely, by ensuring that at least one parent of any mating is genetically clear of that condition; the worst you can produce is carriers, and they will never suffer.

Jeangenie, we were posting at the same time.....I wasn't talking DNA testing (not common in my breed )

The most important thing with any contract is letting buyers have time beforehand to read and thoroughly digest its contents.
My contract goes out at least a week before.
The number one excuse for any contract being challenged is that the buyer " didnt realise what they were signing".

This was the reason all loan agreements and other contracts have a "cooling off" period in law.

> and was referring to my breed which only requires hip and eye score so can't comment on other breeds tests<

Well you should make that very very clear which you didn't. BTW it is a proven fact that by "Penn Hipping" all breeding stock & only breeding from those with the best results the quality of the dogs hips from the offspring is improved-why don't you do your research correctly-you can Penn Hip in the UK & elsewhere in the world now, so you cannot claim that tests done on hips do not improve the health of any breed.

So you do not hip/elbow score or eye TEST because they do not help improve the health of dogs ?????

I do not breed & have never bred, I bring dogs into work from fully health tested parents & to date(after over 30 years)have never had a dog with a severe problem. The only dog in which Hip Dysplasia has never been diagnosed is the pure Racing Greyhound(hope you have read up on them) over 1,200 unrelated dogs were screened & no dysplasia was found, not even mild malformations. Only dogs with a 0 hip score can be stated to be HD free & they are quite rare especially from breeds in which do NOT routinely test.

Go on with your head in the sand attitude because you have managed to find scientists who diss health testing in dogs & you are one of those who believe vets only support health schemes to make money, I only hope none of the poor puppies you breed don't have life curtailing conditions because of your beliefs

Although this will not be possible when the new law comes in in 2016.

Do we know yet, what the law will be in 2016, other than it being required?    Personally much as I can see the need for microchipping, I REALLY resent being forced to have this done by a Government!!   And are they going to pay for mine to be done ...... of course not!    I've already had my Basset done, but the jury is still out, for me, re my Whippet much as I'm assured Whippets are fine with this.

My Sale Contract had a clause stating that in the event the owner couldn't keep the puppy (right throughout his life) I was to be involved in any rehoming.   Involved because keeping entire males, it might well have not been possible to accommodate another male.    I didn't mention a financial refund in my Contract.   However, a lot would have depended on how soon the puppy was returned to me and the reason why.    I only had one I had to take back and in her case not only did I take her back (bitch!) but I made a refund less a very minimal boarding fee for the time she was back with me, which in her case for only a week before I had a new home for her.  This bitch I'd run on until the sister of the dam of this litter produced her puppies, when it was clear they were 'better'.   So I homed her as a slightly older puppy and didn't charge much for her.   So in that, I'd totally agree with Goldmali and what she does.

ive put it like that as ive known a person who got a dog from a rescue but later on when they wanted to rehome it they wouldn't take it back to the rescue as they wanted some money back by selling it. I wouldn't want a puppy buyer to think like that.


Many Shelters only allow adoption on the basis the new 'owner' is in fact just a 'keeper'.   The dog legally belongs to the Shelter for it's entire life.   So to be selling on a Shelter dog would be illegal, assuming anybody found out.   One Shelter I was a home-checker for did follow-up visits which made sure the dog was still there - or if not, want an explanation as to what happened!!!

The one puppy, mentioned here already, I had to take back, and gave them their money back less my minimal 'boarding fee', came back at me later on saying if they'd known what I was going to pay them back for her, they'd have sold her elsewhere.   Phew.   Both me and my puppy got off lightly there!!

But how many vets would just reel off a list of diseases they commonly see in badly bred dogs of the same breed? A vet would be the last person I'd want a puppy buyer to get advice from -they tend to only see sick dogs and so their views of breeds will always be tainted

I'd have to agree with this - too many vets cite back and ear problems with my main breed which isn't necessarily so!!!    Further I used a vet, for a short time, who saw a fellow-breeder's hounds and formed his opinions based on what he saw in her bloodlines, which was way different to what I was breeding!!!!!

Tommee...I wonder why you feel it's necessary or indeed acceptable to call people names and be generally very rude in your replies?

Controversial topics will always cause debate but there is really no need to be rude...

I have read WIDELY around the subject of hip dysplasia, not simply 'found someone who dises testing'. Racing greyhounds are a different subject altogether... Also Hip Penning isn't routine, nor widely 'robustly' tested to be any more/less effective in the diagnosis of dysplasia than standard prone testing which is the norm on the UK.  Just because the test is available does not add to the body of evidence to support is efficacy in improving a breed.

It's fab that in 30 years you've never come across a  dysplasic  dog, you are truly very lucky.  I have known a fair few dogs with varying degrees of dysplasia, not from my stock, not of my breed, however, interestingly enough, all of these dogs came from fully tested parents with excellent scores.

I don't hip score because I disagree with it's efficacy and I refuse to put my dog through the anaesthesia process unless it is medically indicated. That however is just what I do, those who feel differently do differently and that is their choice. My dog comes from a line of fit and active dogs who have had no history of dysplasia or eye defects anywhere in the line, as does my stud.  I feel that this, along with good management is the way to produce quality puppies.

Mamabas....

I agree on the chipping front, my toy breed male wasn't chipped until he was over a year old and being castrated as my vet and I agreed that it would be far too uncomfortable for him to be done whilst awake. He was tiny and had very little in the way of subcutaneous tissue. I wonder how this will be dealt with when the law is passed? Making close/thin skinned puppies of a very young age undergo this procedure will be cruel. My larger breed...no problem, but it's so individual!

Personally much as I can see the need for microchipping, I REALLY resent being forced to have this done by a Government!!   And are they going to pay for mine to be done ...... of course not! 

You WILL be able to get microchipping for free.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/all-dogs-in-england-to-get-free-microchips

The KC issued a press release not long ago about the new law, I shall see if I can find a link to it as we are not allowed to copy entire press releases on here.
Here we are:
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/press-releases/2014/november/petlog-and-kennel-club-highlight-breeders%E2%80%99-responsibilities-following-new-microchip-regulations/

I agree on the chipping front, my toy breed male wasn't chipped until he was over a year old and being castrated as my vet and I agreed that it would be far too uncomfortable for him to be done whilst awake. He was tiny and had very little in the way of subcutaneous tissue. I wonder how this will be dealt with when the law is passed?

Microchipping hurts a lot LESS than vaccinations. I have microchipped Papillon puppies as young as 4 weeks. I have also done dozens upon dozens of kittens. They don't even flinch. Then you take them to be vaccinated and they scream the place down. The thing is that the needle is so extremely sharp that it isn't felt. I know that from when I accidentally chipped myself in 2006. Never felt a thing until I noticed blood dripping from my thumb.

With toybreeds being targeted by thieves a lot, I would feel very uncomfortable indeed to not have mine chipped by the age of 8 weeks at the latest.  A friend of mine had a Papillon stolen from her garden. She got him back one year later entirely due to the microchip. He'd been sold several times and eventually ended up at a vet's when the latest owner was worried about the dog's health, the vet scanned him and found he was reported as stolen.

Ouch! I hate needles!

Good to know that there will be a concession!

I don't hip score because I disagree with it's efficacy and I refuse to put my dog through the anaesthesia process unless it is medically indicated.

My vets, among many others, hip score under SEDATION. As mentioned earlier.

I had a Golden Retriever with a hip score of 96. He showed no signs at all until he was 6 years old. Imagine how many litters of pups he could have sired on the assumption that he was healthy as he acted healthy and moved well for 6 years.

>interestingly enough, all of these dogs came from fully tested parents with excellent scores. <br />

Because HD is multifactorial results are going to be more predictable with generations of scores, when there is a pattern of good scores the unexpected high score is pretty rare in my personal experience, of 20+ litters over 7 generations.

I have been breeding from 7 - 10 generations of hip scored dogs.  My current eldest is still trouble free and taking same evening walks as her fellows at 15 years of age with a hip score of 14.

The breed has a range of scores from the start of scoring in UK of 0 - 61, but the average and most common scores have reduced steadily over that time.  Very few dogs score over 20.  That is improvement.

It is also for my breed statistically significant as a very large proportion of those dogs registered are scored, around 20%, as we are a numerically small breed, so a high percentage are in the hands of people who do health test.  All KC registered stock is from hip scored parents

Hip Penning ????? never heard of that

Penn Hipping dogs is very common in the USA & gaining popularity elsewhere because it can be done from 4 months onwards. Penn Hipping has been closely studied as have the resultant dogs produced from dogs that have been deemed of breedable standard & it has improved the quality of the hips produced. Do you even know how the Penn Hip method was developed & why it is called "Penn Hip" ?

I did NOT write that I had never come across a dysplasic dog, I don't own & have never owned a dog with a 0 hip score so ergo all my dogs have had dysplasia to some degree. Racing greyhounds are dogs & the only "breed" to never had a diagnosis of hip dysplasia, which is why the study was done.

So you don't test because you do not see the point of spending money & "subjecting" your dogs to a GA ?? Hip Scoring can be done under sedation as can Penn Hipping so that reason is debunked. Also testing doesn't improve the breed-no it doesn't but it gives responsible breeder a tool to assess whether their dog should be bred from. So if you don't test & don't breed from tested dogs how do you know that they do not have HD/ED/eye defects ?? Do you not DNA test either or do any other tests on your dogs ? after all taking bloods for any reason is stressful for dogs & of course costs money. BTW are the dogs your dogs come from tested ?

As others have written there are dogs with severe HD that can be fit & active however they shouldn't be bred from as HD is at least partially genetic so just because your super fit dogs show no clinical signs of a condition doesn't mean they do not have one nor that they carry the predisposition to have it.

I have no idea what breed of dog you produce from your untested dogs, just hope that none of their offspring are found to have a condition that can be tested for in the parents & is partially genetic, otherwise it will cost you & the dog dear

Brainless...that's interesting and statistically if a scores have reduced then that is significant, I'm certainly not disputing that scores across the board are better and better which is obviously fabulous for our canine friends, however only randomised tests can show what these improvements can be attributed to. Along with the introduction of testing came ever improving knowledge on environmental causes of HD, tighter restrictions on line breeding including totally banning the registration of progeny of closely related parents and ever improving dietary advise. As with any scientific process. it's only as good as the evidence available at the time and the assumption that people use it.

I'm stepping out if the argument now as it taken over the poor OP's discussion, however I have requested that admin add the topic to the controversial topic discussion board as I think it's a subject worthy of debate and sharing of information/evidence.

I'd be interested to know what your breed is though Brainless? As all my puppies will be KC registered, they have no  statutory requirement for testing for my breed in order to register....I thought maybe they'd changed things since my last litter but having checked it's still not a mandatory requirement and they informed me that many litters are registered from non tested parents...

My breed is in my profile as well as links to my website.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">no  statutory requirement for testing for my breed in order to register..

Not many breeds do I can only think of one, that doesn't' mean it should not be done voluntarily, as it is best practice,  or that breed clubs do not require their members to do it.

This topic is veering way off topic - I'd suggest if anyone wants to debate the merits of health testing breeding stock that they start a new thread (although it's not a subject that usually proves controversial since there is usually a consensus that testing is a postive thing).

Right, let's get back on topic now (any further off topic comments will be removed) :-)

Thanks

Thank you all for replying to my question. I got a little lost in some of the replies :) but I am full of the winter lurgy so I'll read up again later when my head is clearer.

Many Shelters only allow adoption on the basis the new 'owner' is in fact just a 'keeper'.   The dog legally belongs to the Shelter for it's entire life.   So to be selling on a Shelter dog would be illegal, assuming anybody found out.   One Shelter I was a home-checker for did follow-up visits which made sure the dog was still there - or if not, want an explanation as to what happened!!!

The rescue they went to was the type where if you turn up with money you can take home any dog you want, no home checks or checks to see how the dog was doing. They let this person with a small child take an akita who had bitten before and they had no experance with breeds of that type, They should of never had that dog and how they handled it made it so much worse. That's the reason they sold it as it bit them numerous times and they were afraid of handling it.

Apologies, not read all replies, just your post (OK, being totally honest, I've not read any of the replies - I'm just a bit annoyed about some of your questions!) ... so if other people have said same, sorry ;)

Are there any specific items you put into your puppy contracts?
Yes, breeding and export endorsements. If anything happens to owner then pup comes back to me, no matter what age.

Is it common to offer a full refund if they bring the puppy back in 2-3 weeks if they realise they can't cope - and then what do you offer if they bring it back after that timeframe?
Umm, very sorry, but if you think they might not be able to cope then why the hell are you selling them one of your puppies? Harsh this may sound, but intentionally so. If you are not more than 100% happy with your homes then you should not be selling them a pup, or maybe you should not be breeding. If there is a health problem with the pup, as stated by their vet (though all my pups are checked by my own vet prior to sale) then I will offer a refund if pup returned within 14 days.

I have some people calling and wanting to come and look at the puppies before xmas - they won't be ready to be rehomed until end of january, but I am well aware that people see 'cute for christmas' and don't think about long cold winter walks in february! Id rather they came back to me than were sold to less careful owners.
Sorry, again ... if you think this to be the case then why the hell are you selling these people your pups? People enquiring about a puppy should not be coming to "look at" the puppies. They should be coming to see you, to discuss how you rear your puppies, to meet your dogs ... only then if you are fully happy with them and what they could offer one of your pups should you even consider allowing them to "look at" your pups. If you think they will think 'cute' prior to Christmas, then make them wait until Christmas. In fact, why even show them the pups? You should be interviewing prospective owners without them even setting eyes on your pups. Only when you are fully happy with them, their commitment, etc, etc, should you be allowing them any where near your pups.

Also - if I was to chip all the puppies and then the owners changed the registered name on the chips - if the pups were sold on or ended up in a home, would the home be able to use the chip to link them back to me? Was wondering if this was a safeguard I should put in place - and then wondered if I am being overly cautious.
Sorry, again ... you're talking about pups ending up in a home. YOU REALLY SERIOUSLY NEED TO THINK ... are you fit to be breeding, are you breeding for the right reasons, are you selecting the right people for your pups?!!!!

If you chip your pups prior to sale, as I do, then they should only be registered in the new owner's name after the sale has taken place. Someone has mentioned Petlog and the trialled 'breeder button'. No idea what has happened to that. I have all my pups linked to me as the breeder because when they're chipped I ask Petlog to ensure that I got against all of the puppies names as the breeder. This not only makes me responsible and accountable for everything I breed, but is also an extra emergency contact should a pup be lost/found. Every breeder can do this, all that is needed is to pick up the phone to petlog and ask them to do it.

The safeguards you should be putting into place ... ensure you are breeding for the correct reasons. Ensure that you are only selecting people committed to your breed and your pups, and ensuring that you are more than 100% happy with all of your prospective homes. Easy peasy.

Well, that was a lengthy and harsh reply, which seems to be more jumping on the wording I used rather than the thought behind it. Of course I am questioning every person before they come near the house and of course I am doing everything I can to check they are going to be good homes for my dogs.

Didn't anyone ever tell you to always prepare for the worst possible outcome?

Sorry, again ... you're talking about pups ending up in a home. YOU REALLY SERIOUSLY NEED TO THINK ... are you fit to be breeding, are you breeding for the right reasons, are you selecting the right people for your pups?!!!!

Erm, yes - because it says online and in 'the book of the bitch' and other places, that some of every litter will likely end up in a home. I could personally home visit every owner, meet every member of their extended family and friends, but that doesn't mean their circumstances won't change or that they have not lied to me. So, on the basis that this is the very first litter I have sold, and I am not experienced on picking new homes, I am trying to prepare in advance for every eventuality. Which is why I come here first for advice and ideas, to double and triple check everything I am thinking of doing and wondering whether, even if I chip them first, would it actually be effective in having the puppies come back to me, or would they just be sent back to the last person registered.

It seemed a simple thing to do, use a forum of experts to ask for advice, and the best way to get added protection and surety for my puppies. If you just jump on every new breeder and tell them they are unfit to breed, you will just encourage more 'backstreet breeders' to do it alone without support or you will end up with no breeders.

But thank you for your help. I usually ignore the unhelpful replies, but perhaps I am still too full of the lurgy to rise above.

Thank you to everyone who replied. I wrote the original post before I started the process of really answering all of the calls and emails I am getting, after I had just had a few initial enquiries from people I wouldn't sell a stuffed toy to. Some of the things they said are quite spectacular.

Now that I have spoken to a lot more I've discovered that it's not quite so difficult, from a phone call, to work out who are going to be terrible homes, and who is worth meeting with. You really can get a sense of people from their initial enquiries and then longer discussions.

>wondering whether, even if I chip them first, would it actually be effective in having the puppies come back to me, or would they just be sent back to the last person registered.

Soon it will become law for all puppies to be microchipped before they're sold, and it means that you can add your own phone number as an emergency contact number when you register the chip with the new owner's details. This saves the new owner having to change the details (unless they move house and most forget to do this) and means that, if the pup ever gets lost and the new owners can't be contacted for whatever reason, you can be, and you can possibly go and collect it.

I certainly wouldn't expect a number of puppies from each litter to end up in a 'home' (if you mean a dog's home like Battersea  - all dogs should have a home of their own!); in fact I would be surprised and very disappointed with my buyers (and myself) if they did.

Thanks, I'll be chipping them then. I just wanted to be sure it was actually effective - at the end of the day if anything did happen or if the dog got lost anytime in the future, I just want to be sure they have a way of coming back to me, before ending up in rescue.

I certainly hope they don't end up in a rescue, but after reading things like that I just wanted to do everything I could to safeguard against it. It feels like I am giving away my own children - mind you, if I could chip my kids I would.

Problem is if the new owners change the details (if pups are originally chipped to the breeder) then there is no guarantee the breeders details will stay on record or be used.

It relies on the new owner keeping that second contact.

You do get better at working out homes, but it has to be accepted that maybe not several but the occasional puppy does come unstuck and it is wise to put things in place to help pups find their way home.

One of the doyennes of my breed had a pup back where owners had lied to a local rescue that breeder would be uninterested, (they had lied to breeder about the wife not working, and pup was annoying neighbours by barking when left all day in garage) but being a small rescue who had a helper in our breed they contacted the breeder from the tattoo.

She ended up going to her breeder and became a champion.