Hi Everyone I am new to the forum.

I have just bought an 8 week old pedegree Black Lab but the litter was not registered......The people we bought the pup from said that there was too much risk in registering the litter as they had not been Hip and eye scored and incase there was any come back and they were liable to be sued???

I have the papers and KC numbers for the mum and the dad so how do I register my Puppy??

Does anyone have contact numbers for our Kennel Club so that I can register her?? is the main head office in London somewhere.....I bought her from Mansfield??

Thank you in advance for any replies :0)

The kennel club

Thanks Jacki what form should I fill in any ideas....cannot really see one which applys??

Thanks Martin

Hi,
I think I'm right in saying only the breeder can register your puppy. Sorry.

Hi Jean.......The breeder said that I had to register the puppy because they said it cost a lot of money to register 11 pups........They gave me the Pedegree history for the mum and dad KC numbers etc and off I went......I live over 300 miles from them....Are you certain there is no way for me to register my Pup?

Thanks Martin

99% certain, Martin. You could always phone or email the Kennel Club, but as far as I know only the breeder can register the pup - and it's only £12 per puppy to register a litter.

It's true - only the breeder of a litter can register a puppy with the Kennel Club. Sadly, if you have bought an registered puppy from a breeder who does not eye-test or hip score their dogs, you have probably bought from someone only interested in the money & not in the future health & welfare of any puppies they produce :-( You could ask your breeder to register your particular puppy & offer to pay the fee yourself, but I would not hold out much hope that they will agree to this.

Hi Jane

The People I bought from had bread their bitch (Golden Lab) for the first time and didn't seem to know an awful lot about the pups but they did give me a diet sheet papers reg numbers etc

Does this mean I have bought a poor puppy??

I have taken her for her first injections and the vet said that her coat(No white fur) and bite was excellent eyes and hearing were excellent and hips felt fine but would need x rays etc

Im confused now this is my first dog?

Martin

It's hard to say how your pup will turn out - it's hard to say how any pup will turn out! But really labradors should be hip-scored and eye-tested before they are bred from to try to limit the possibility of passing on the particular hereditary problems that labradors are prone to.

Just out of interest, do you know how old the mother was?
:)

Yep the mum was Yellow dad was black....dad was 2 years old and mum was 3 years old first litter.

The mum was a very thick set Lab and the Dad was a very thin Athletic looking dog :)

Martin

On the face of it there's no reason that the litter shouldn't be registered, if Mum and Dad were both registered, as Mum isn't too old/young for her pups to be registered. The only possible problem would be if either parent's registration was endorsed to say that their progeny couldn't be registered. The fact that the pups aren't registered wouldn't prevent the possibility of the breeder being sued for any reason, so they shouldn't use that as an excuse, and it isn't expensive either - I mean, what is £12 when you're probably charging about £200 or so for an unregistered pup when a registered one would be more like £350-400?

If I were you I would contact the breeders and ask them to register your pup.
:)

Martin,

Based on the info you have been giving re the breeding being the only one who can register, I suggest you call your breeder tell her you cannot register the puppy as she has said you could and that you would happily provide the £12 for her to do it. Be clear and make sure you point out she said you could do it.

The reason I say this is although you technically have bought the puppy without papers you were or bought on the understanding the puppy could in fact be registered. If she says no which I hope she doesn't, tell her firmly that her information was misleading and inaccurate.

Good luck..

Pam
Pam

i gave you the link so you could contact the kennel club, the address and tel no are on there, but JG is probably right maybe the breeders can only register the pup but you can always ring them to check, no harm in trying :) welcome to the board by the way and good luck :)

JG is correct, only the breeder can register the pup. Your pups breeders were either too laze to find out how to breed the best litter possible or too greedy. The idea that they can't be taken to task if you have a problem is erroneous, if you or any other puppy buyer has a problem because of the careless way the pups have been bred they are liable, registered or not.

if the breeder was reputable,he would have done all necessary tests on the parents to ensure he was using healthy stock,he would have then seen if the parents had poor hips,that would have been in his defence if the parents hipscores were good,but one of the pups had developed hip displaysia later on.He could say that he had done everything to prevent hip problems. It seems this breeder is a "money" breeder,he has seen the pound signs before anything else! these breeders are what people should really avoid!!

Hi Martin

There is no guarantee that you will get a pup with good hips from good hip scores as we have experienced but it really is the only way to reduce the possibilities of it happening by having both parents scored and only breed if they have good scores. We have just been unlucky with our youngest. And why they said they were not getting them scored just in case they got sued ??!! You can't do that unless you knowingly have bred dogs that have bad hips and have therefore passed on the condition. I maybe wrong in what I have said there but that is what I assume. Please correct me folks if I am wrong !

If you end up not getting the pup registered it will not be the end of the world as I presume you have got the pup as a pet rather then to show or breed ? If that is the case then put this down to experience as you will know better next time ! :)

One thing though I would definately recommend is get some good health insurance for the pup for if for any reason the parents have passed on any deformities that may need medical attention than it is better to be safe than sorry !!

I would put this behind you and get on and enjoy your little Lab !! They don't stay that little for too long ! :)

HTH

Lucy

Hi Lucy,

You are right if people take all reasonable steps to eliminate faults/ilness then the liability is limited unless of course there was a contract written given more rights to the purchaser in the event of problems which certainly is not the case here. In all honesty although it would be a waste of money and time to persue the breeder, they are
setting themselves up in a far more liable position even saying these things and knowingly selling unscored puppies when it is obvious they know to hip score.

Pam

I sometimes wonder were people dig these stories up...

It is actually worse in the eyes of the law to not x ray when it is known that there is HD in the breed, than x rays find bad hips,breed, sell the puppies & tell the buyers that the parents have bad hips, as the buyers will know they run the risk of getting a puppy with problems & will not be able to take any legal action if the puppy does have HD

HD can be managed, I know I keep posting this but I have a BC with HD from parents with good hips, who has no problems & is now nearly 11 years old & he has not had any operations etc

Best of luck with your puppy

Ditto Moonmaiden..

Pam

<You are right if people take all reasonable steps to eliminate faults/ilness then the liability is limited>

Are you sure Pam? If so, that's not how some Small Claims Courts are interpreting the S of Goods legislation - there have certainly been reports of cases where breeders have done everything possible to avoid hereditary defects (including hipscoring with good results) & have still been found liable under the law on the basis there is strict liability if there has been a breach of the law. The fact that a breeder has done everything possible might reduce the damages awarded but it doesn't affect liability. There is also a new measure recently introduced whereby if goods are found to be defective within 6 months of sale, then automatically the seller is held to be liable - obviously not all hereditary problems in dogs can be detected by 6 months of age, but some are with obvious implications for dog breeders :-(

Jane,

That is exactly why I said LIMITED Liability not NO liability.. not sure if you thought I meant there is NO liability as I didn't... :-))

This is not meant or directed at any of us but it is very common for out comes of cases to be hazy.. people think for example that someone has be made liable for something and they have not quite 100% understood the decision behind it , the whole case needs looked at. I hear so often people say " he had to pay £-- because of blah blah" when in fact it was on a totally different point of Law it was awarded.

The Sale of Goods acts covers dog sales yes, but when a judge has to make a decision he looks at the who thing.. Liability amounts are measured on what the judge would see as a correct amount.

Whilst the Sale of Goods Act covers the purchases like a pair of shoes , animals are living creatures and as long as all reasonable steps are taken to ensure a sound animal the liability is definately limited.. depending on the problem , depends on any award. Generally the resolution is for the puppy/dog to be returned and a refund of part or all the purchase price.

There is also another way it is looked at, and why most breeders do have contracts, is to prove that they have made purchasers aware that although they have taken all steps (tests , history of lines etc) to ensure that puppy is as far as they are possibly aware fit and healthy that, that particular breed is know to have a particular % of problems and the buyer knows this and agrees to buy knowing this.

Hope this is clear..

Pam

Forgot to say Jane that the 6 month thing you mention, not sure exactly where this is from but you have always been covered for that period and more depending on the item and value.. fit for purpose section..

IE if you pay £300 for a jaguar Tyre you should get a lot more miles that a remould at £25

The 1 year Maufacturers warranty is something companies came up with it is not a legal decision it is to convince people buying that when the year is up they have no come back and that is rubbish..

If you have a TV at £1500 and the manufacturer says is it is covered for 1 year compared to other tvs if this one is far more expensive then you as a purchaser would be intitled to expect it to last longer and if you can prove the fault is not caused by you they will have to fix your TV...

The debate on small claims is one that can go on for days and days that is why the sheriff courts are full of them day in day out..

I sat in the court 1 day a week for 4 years and was entertained no end by some of the cases.
One that sticks in my head is a guy ( with a lawyer I may add) raised a small claims case of £1500 against a man who he had bought a mini bus off. Although the seller did have a bus business he was not a business of selling buses just driving them . He sold the mini bus to the gentleman and when he got to the end of the street with it the bus blew up. Now most people would jump up and down and say that seller should take the bus back. Morally yes but not legally..

I remember clearly the judge saying "and what do you want me to do about it" it was a legal private sale... bought with no guarantee... Caveat Emptor..

The problem lies with the purchaser do they have the time, resources to raise a claim as it is a pain in the butt and for a small amount of money it is generally not worth it.. Worse if the person you sue as no money even if a decree is granted, try and get that money...

All makes fun discussion though :-)

BFN Pam

Hi Pam

I have checked & liability under the S of Goods Act is strict in the legal sense - if a seller has breached the implied conditions, then they are liable for that breach ie they are either liable or they're not, there is no provision for limited liability depending on the facts of the case. You are talking about what might be awarded to a buyer which is a different matter to the question of liability is it not? If you have found any case relating to the sale of a dog where the breeder's good practices (participation in health schemes etc) has resulted in a decision of limited liability, then I would be grateful if you'd send me details. It would help balance up the other cases where good breeders have been held fully liable despite doing everything in their power to avoid problems (one of which is a High Court case rather than the usual Small Claims fun & games) I will be updating an article I wrote on this subject soon so if you have found some cases where breeders' good practices have been taken into account by the courts, they would be more than helpful.

The new measure I mentioned can be found in the Supply and Sale of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 which came into force in March 2003 [$ have been widely publicised so I'm assuming they are regarded as significant ]-) If "goods" are found to be defective within 6 months of sale, then that defect is presumed to have existed at the time of sale unless the seller can prove otherwise - it's a reversal of the usual burden of proof. Yes I know the fitness for purpose condition would cover most significant defects (but not all defects) found after sale but this new regulation makes things much easier for buyers & tougher for sellers which presumably is the aim or it would not have been introduced :-)

Not sure I'd agree that making a Small Claims action is too much bother for most people to pursue as they seem to be making a big effort to make it as easy as possible. You can now raise a simple money claim with a click of your mouse - will be interesting to see how that develops ;-)

Hi Jane,

I can see where you and I's wires are crossed :-), My use of the wording Limited liability was used in the sense of limited amounts not in the legal definition or legal point of Limited Liability as most of the readers would need to go read up on the differences.

I was trying to keep it more simple in terms by saying that the amount they would need to pay would be limited. I should maybe not have used that wording with another legal eagle on the board :-). Yes of course if something is sold faulty then there is liability but the amount of compensation is not limitless. A good example is if a breeder does offer to take a puppy back and refund the cost plus any reasonable costs going to court would not get the buyer anymore money. It would not stop the breeder breeding puppies neither as you know. :-) if only.

Raising small claims I think regardless of how easy they make it is a stress I think that most people do not want to get into unless there is a lot of money at stake and it is and can be stressful unless of course you let someone else do it for you such as CAB or a solicitor but that is just my opinion really. I have spoken to many a person who won their case but still wished that had not bothered. That is why "WE" as people must try to get it right at the beginning to cover our butts.

I personally think people should use it if they have been wronged , sometimes it is the fact that people have be misled and not the amounts in question that led them to raising SCA's. I personally would like to see a little bit more legal assistance for people to point them in the right direction and give them support. I know there is some avaliable but not enough IMHO.

I have seen the Supply and Sale of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 , I think you are right it is there and certainly in more clearer terms for the buyer but still think it was all covered by the Sale of Goods Act but I think possibly sellers where squirming their way out through small loop holes or people could not see fully where they actually had a case so hopefully this new regulation with tighten things up.

I would love to see the article you are working on when it is avaliable for view.. I am not involved at all now with legal cases of the day to day world well in people terms (touch wood) well apart from the odd buying and selling of property.. but love a good read of the outcomes, I now deal with the preperation of commercial business contracts for a large private company as part of Project Management. Luckily so far the figures are so huge none of my co's have wanted to cross the line.. Rowland v Divall is never far from my mind though ;-)

BFN Pam

I would also say that is why get insurance !!

I wouldn't dream of taking the breeders of my baby with HD as they have done everything possible to avaid HD but nature is nature !! What good will it do to sue ? It won't give my girl good hips and what will money do to help her ??

All I am going to do is enjoy her and make sure she has the best life which is what I think the original poster should do as well ! ;)

Lucy

You are right Lucy , your MB and insurance problem made me check my insurance on my lot.. :-)

Hopefully people will read these posts and learn from them. Your case was unavoidable as the breeder did do the tests but for so many they buy without these tests being done. :-(

BFN Pam

Liability is not a lot of help if you find yourself living with a dog that has epilepsy or one of the other long term problems that require constant and expensive medication. Yes, the breeder should not breed from dogs when they have not made a study of the health situation of their background or checked the compatibility. There are many inherited health problems HD being only one of them and one that can be dealt with other conditions are more difficult.

In this case the breeder told the buyer that they had taken no care in the breeding of this pup and the purchaser decided to buy anyway, if I were the judge I think I would wonder if the 2 parties were not equally responsible for any problems that may ensue.

Ditto Jackie,

Really my point in a round about way... people need to get it right at the beginning.

Even with the purchases price back and a modest amount to cover any non exagerated costs you still at the end of the day have a dog to take care of unless you are able to give it back but I think most animal lovers couldn't

Sad world we really live in.

Pam

I too am buying an unregistered black lab pup. (Different circumstances as to why though, which appears genuine). How much should I be paying? Breeder wants £300, is this on the high side. The pedigree is excellent, having seen the papers and spoken with the kennel club. Sire and Dam have been hip scored, both under 10.

Hi,
What reason have you been given for the litter not being registered?
:)

Hi Jeangenie

The sire is co-owned by 2 people. One of the owners has signed the paperwork, the other, apparently, is refusing to sign as they 'have fallen out'. I believe the breeder has done all she can to register the litter and she showed me the KC paperwork with one signature on it.

Whilst I've got you here!! Did you buy a dog crate from Ebay, only I saw your name on the feedback. The one I have seen is from a guy in Bolton, Lancs. The picture has a brown cocker sat it it! If so, is it ok? Has anyone else got one of these?

Yes, I can believe that happens. :( Co-ownership can be very problematical, and it's such a shame. I must admit our old lab was unregistered, purely kept as a pet (though I would have loved a litter from her) and literally never had a day's illness until a few weeks before she died at the age of 13. So if you just want a pet, this litter could be a good bet. The breeder seems to be up-front with you, which is always an advantage!

As for crates on Ebay... no, it's not me - I've never bought a thing from Ebay!! Perhaps I have a doppleganger!!!! :D

Well what do you know, 2 Jeangenies, what are the chances of that! Do you think £300 is a fair price?

What for a crate???????????????

bigD,

If you want a pet, are happy with the reasons, will never show or breed the dog then I guess it is OK.

I will say though I know a good lab in Scotland can be bought KC registered from Show parents for about £400.

If it was me I would go for the later but as I say that is me and my opinion.

I know there are genuine reasons for a pup not to be KC registered but for me I see and hear too many tricks and stories that I could not

or would not recommend it.

Good luck whatever you decide...

Pam

Hi bigD

Just to butt into your conversation, I`ve just bought a crate from that site.

Hilary

Thanks everyone. Jackie, the crate is £45, the dog is £300, at least I think its' that way round! Pam, the pedigree is good, the woman at the KC said it was such a pity the litter couldn't be registered because of the pedigree. The sire has drakeshead lines and is a FTW. Most of its' ancestry are FTCH. The dam comes from Show champions and FTCH. Another big factor is that we have seen the dam twice now and the pups are only 3 weeks old. She has an excellent temperament and is a gorgeous dog. The breeder has invited us back every week to let our children watch the pups development. I know what you mean about stories and tricks, however, I just have a gut feeling she is being honest with me, I hope I am right!

I must not let my husband read this!! He is dying for a black Drakeshead bitch .... he even knows what she's going to be called ..... to be honest, that price sounds fair.
:)

Maybe if the breeder and co owner get themselves sorted out you could get the puppy registered at a later date.

Fingers crossed.. :-)

bfn Pam

Pam,

Going off what has been said already, I'm not sure if that is possible. It has to be the breeder that does it. As good as she is, once we have bought the pup, there is no benefit in her chasing the signature, especially as she has lost £150 x 9 pups!! Having read your comments again, its not the breeder who has fallen out with the sire's owner, the joint owners aren't on speaking terms with each other and really using the dog as a weapon against each other like married couples would their children.

Hi,
A breeder can register a 'pup' of their breeding at whatever age, even if it's no longer in their ownership. It costs a lot more (I think £60 as opposed to £12), and it will be registered to the breeder and the actual owner will then have to pay the usual transfer fee, but it can be done. Nil desperandum!
:)

Thanx everyone for the replies!!! sooo many!!!

I get the vibe that I need to speak too the breeder and get them to register my pup.

Dont know how far i'll get though....the people seemed nice enough at the time but were quite untidy and from a very poor area.....Probably tell me to clear off but i'll give it a go!!!

Im very happy with my little Lab and she is gorgeous......very pretty!!!

if I dont get anywhere then never mind.......I paid £200 for her aswel which was quite cheap considering.

Thanks Again everyone ;)

:)

It's worth asking, Martin, and offer to pay for the registration. But £200 isn't OTT for a purebred, albeit unregistered, pup.

Good luck!
:)

I don't understand why people pay £200 for an unregistered pup when there are plenty in rescue. I would have got another rescue but I wanted a KC reg pup becaus I want to try my hand at showing, I was offered a pup at £200 non-registered which would have saved me £200 but I may as well have got one from a rescue centre if I had wanted it non-registered.
gina

Agree entirely, and if more people thought like us there would only be registered pups, or older rescues. Also if the KC would only register from parnets with appropriate Health checks then one would know that KC registered meant the dog was bred properly.

Yes when I was looking for my pup my mum couldn't beleive that dogs could be registered without having had tests for different things, she just assumed the KC only registered dogs that had been tested and cleared. Sometimes I wonder wether the KC care about dogs welfare or are they just in it for the money. If they really cared, like you say they wouldn't accept a dog to be KC reg. if they hadn't been tested and cleared.
Gina

I think part of the problem might be the legality of compulsory tests, but I still think that they should be done, and in case of an accidental litter then the registrations cannot be done until the parents have been tested, if they were not at the time of mating/whelping.

Ginauk84

Are you saying you can find an 8 week old pedigree pup, where you have seen the dam and know who the sire is, all for no cost? Give me the address and I'll be round there straight away!!! Seriously though, I presume you are refering to 'illigitimate' pups from unwanted matings. You will have no idea of pedigree or temperament. Not an option for me with small children about. Pedigree pups surely aren't readily available in all rescue centres? or am I missing something?

Hiya
Just because the temperament of the mother and father are good doesn't mean the pup's going to be the same, a friend of mine has a pup who is very agressive yet the mother and father are soft as a brush and the rest of the family and she socialised it well. Yes breed rescue do have pups in, border collie rescue had 7, 8 week old pups in when I went to get Cas, if you gave lab rescue a ring they would probably have something in under a year. I have met loads of labs from rescue and they have all been soft, never met an agressive one once.

I was just pointing out that by getting a pup that was non-reg and hadn't had any health tests then you may as well go to a rescue, as the background is exactly the smae, you don't know anything. I am sure most people here with dogs would have got one KC reg and have passed tests.
Gina

What are you talking about???......I spent months looking for a Lab pup phoning various homes and had no joy whatsoever lots of 2-3 year olds but no Pups......when you have a dog from a home you dont know what you are taking on and what history the poor creature has had!! Could be big trouble...........When you have a pup your starting from a clean slate.