hello just wanted to vent some anger, i'm sure you know the situation by now.
Anyway i provisionally picked a male - bailey.
Only saw the pups for 5 mins on the day they were born obviously didn't get to touch them or have a good look.
had by verbal agreement until today to make a final desision on seeing them tonight. Got a call last night to say they had taken payment on one of the bitches, (my second choice!!).

Anyway all hell broke loose and i decided that i did want the bitch. Went up there, argued the toss etc..... but still really fell in love with the male (so beautiful). so really it has all worked out.

But the bloody cheek!!!!!!

Raffystaffy,

Have I lost the plot somewhere? is this pup from the "accidental" mating in the park???

How many pups did the bitch have then? and how many bitches? Have they "the bitches owners" been under the assumption that you wanted a dog? if so I would assume that's why they have taken a deposit on the bitch.

Did you only decide you wanted the bitch when she was "sold" or had you been in contact with them and said you might after taking a bitch instead of a dog after taking advice from other Staff owners.

Karen

Their bitch, their pups mate. They can do what they like!
And unless you live in Scotland a verbal agreement means jack.

What does a verbal agreement mean in Scotland? The reason I ask is that I live in Scotland and had 2 pups booked from birth and then last week the potential owners suddenly changed their mind as it was getting closer to the visit where they would pay a deposit. I have already got potential owners for the 2 pups again, but was really annoyed that these people backed out, but that's life I suppose and if they change their mind that quick, then they're not suitable for one of my pups.

In Scotland you can in theory make a verbal contract. You make the offer to sell and the purchaser accepts this offer either in writing or verbally thereby creating a contract. Theoretically you could then sue for breach of contract and recoup your loss if either side don't follow through but reallity means that it's hard as obviously you have no substantial proof that all the essential parts of the contract have been agreed upon. Don't know if that makes sense but hope it clears it up. Best to get everything in writing if you want to tie people in but that might work against you when it come to the tricky business of buying and selling in the dog world.

Gee,

This will seem picky but not meant to be :-), when you say >> In Scotland you can in theory make a verbal contract. You make the offer to sell and the purchaser accepts this offer either in writing or verbally thereby creating a contract.<<

This is not quite correct a purchaser makes a offer to buy, the seller accepts the contract is not complete until the SELLER agrees.

The "offer" by the seller is only an invitation to the buyer to make an offer of purchase, once the offer by the purchaser is satisfactory then the seller agrees and accepts this offer thus making a contract.

Simple terms

1. invitation by seller to purchaser to make an offer ( indication of cost and conditions)

2. Offer by purchaser

3. Acceptance by seller

Contract complete. :-)

BFN Pam

Funnily enough Pam I am a trained Scots law lawyer by profession. I was keeping it simple;) The making of the offer and the acceptance is not as straight forward as you are saying. But that is irrelevant as the question was can a contract be made verbally, which it can. Who ends up being the offerer and the acceptor depends on how negotiations are started. Interesting but not what the poster needs to know ;)

Hi Gee, :-)

While I agree that contracts can be complicated the vary basis of the contract is in the eyes of the law exactly how I have said and although I do not want to disagree with you what you said was infact wrong. Maybe it was how you worded it.

You clearly said .>>You make the offer to sell and the purchaser accepts this offer either in writing or verbally thereby creating a contract <<<
and although this is really going off the original post that statement is incorrect. Not wanting to get in a fight about it but I am 100% sure of this.

As you are trained in Law you will know the definative case that the contract is based on "Pharmaceuticals Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists (1953)" or certainly this was the one when I was at Uni..

Regardless of who, how, a contract is started the acceptance is always buy the selling.

BFN

Nice to see another person with legal interest on the board though. There are a few.

I do know Pharmaceutical Society v. Boots [1953] and that is a correct stament of the law to a point . I also know B.R.S. v. Crithchley [1968] which clarifies matters and is also definitive re offerors and acceptors. But I'm sure that this still is irrelevant to the original poster. ;)

LOL Gee, :-)

Think we better leave this one as we are way off the post now BUT LOL I had to do the BUT as I think although I try to avoid legal debate as much as possible on the internet it is important that people do not read a post and then go away thinking the are sure about something when it could be wrong and used to their detriment.

Your case which I know very well also is about terms and conditions under the heading "Whose terms will prevail" This contract is still based on the principle that the Seller makes the acceptance of the offer. This is more to do with ordering ;-) and who's terms and conditions applied when the acceptance was made. It is not about the principle of the making of a contract. ;-)

In practice, it is important that everyone involved understands the basics of how a contract is created and that is The seller inviting, giving indications of price etc, the buyer making the offer and the seller accepting.

No ifs about it. It is drummed into your brain when doing Law.

I do not for one minute question your knowledge at all but you have to agree that in error or not the statement I quoted from your earlier post was indeed worded incorrectly and is not the real basis of an contract. ;-)

Right nough said :-)) Take care.

P.

You booked a male as far as the breeder was concerned they've upheld that agreement with you! If I was the breeder you would not be getting one of my puppies end of story. They have taken bookings on gender from the remaining pup/s you want to change your mind tough you have no right to kick up a stink with them about it.

I think booking a puppy is fine but how can you possibly tell what the form is like at only a few days,we take bookings for puppies but won't define the sex and won't let others choose until I've seen puppies up to 6-7 weeks and had my choice first,selfish I know but that's our rules.

Considering you still want to introduce another male dog into your house, surely the pups are to young yet to select from. What about their differing personality traits as they develop, the puppy you choose now could be a right handful six weeks down the line and unsuitable to introduce into your "pack", there again the otherside of the coin, you could get lucky, but its a gamble. Looks are a bonus but temprement is everything. Watch the puppies develop and select a bitch with the personality to suit your set up, if it is not in this litter then be patient and find another one...much safer option than rehoming a puppy or young dog further down the line :( I do not understand your problem with the breeder, at least they had the decency to telephone you about the bitch?

raffystaffy's dog is the father to these pups so surely it gives her the right to choose wether she wants a bitch or dog :)

Only if she has it in writing, I'm afraid!
:)

Yes but unless it's in writing and you have a copy it's not binding.

Karen

I'm confused too - you asked about two males together in a recent post and everyone semed to say it wasnt a good idea so you chose a female and thats sold so now you are having a male again .???
I wouldnt even have one from this idiot breeder - sorry for sounding harsh but the bitches owner is a fool due to the way she /he mated
Lel

Hi All,
What a pickle this lot seems to be is this the dog that got loose if my memory serves me right, and had it away with some dog in the park or field, so i take it you tracked the owner of the other dog down then ...well done!!!
but the fact that there allowing you pick in the first place seems pretty good of them they could have said here's £50 or even told you to sling your hook!!!! so take yer pick and STICK to it????????????????

obviously i didn't make the post clear.....
i saw pups fro 5 mns on the eve they were born, obviously you cannot base a decision on this.
yes, once we tracked down the owner of the bitch. i went up weekly to see how she was doing.
after much discussion between yself my partner and the owners we dicided that we would have one of the pups, andwe would have first pick.
Pups were born, i saw three that i liked the look of- markings wise. Provisionallysaid i would chose one of these three.
She said no one else will see them for two weeks come back in two weeks time with a decision. then we will let others have a look once you have decided.
I was toying with male / female. Asked you guys. and also vets and breeders.
basically the outcome was that my existing male could take an equal dislike to a female also. it depends on his nature, i took him to see my own vet and asked his advice. He said that as long as the pup was well socialised and under good control and i NEVER let them eat out of each others bowls plus lots more advice to much to write down - having a male would be the same as having a femlae. should any problems arise which i doubt- knowing both parents natures having them both castrated may help....
however my point being that she phoned me before our agreed two week desision date to say that she had taken a deposit on one of the females - one of the provisional three...

my point being that it peeved me because they went back on their original word, and let others in to see them before talking to us. You cannot possibly decide after 5 minuites on day one... i agree temperament is much more important than markings, and two weeks is still too early to know of their temperament.

Anyway after discussion and extensive inspection of all the of the provisional ones i chose i came away with the male - Bailey.

I have been up twice weekly to check on him and his BROTHER and SEVEN sisters.. all doing well. Each time i go to see them i let my existing dog rub around my top and hold bailey to it so he gets used to his smell, and equally when i get home taz has a good sniff at my top and is getting used to baileys smell too. I have given the owner a fleece blanket which is in with all pups, so that when bailey comes home the blanket will smell of them and he will not fret. Also i have left a smaller blanket in with them that i will bring home a few days before to give to taz so he will get used to baileys smell before he arrives.

And it looks up to yet that i was lucky with baileys temperament so far, he is so much like taz when he was baileys age!!

I honestly think that all will be well......

Well Said of course it gives her the rights, atleast someone understands its obvious that if that was the deal the stud dog owner gets pick of the litter before you can sell on to anyone else.

yes i'm aware of this, all i'm trying to say is, this was an accidental mating, if i am remembering right!!!!!
and not a pre aranged mating?????? where etherything is disscussed and both parties agree terms, before the mating takes place.....savyy!!!!