Guys, some thought please :)
If a puppy is sold abroad & the breeder knows the buyers are keen to show/breed but no written contract is made to say as much, then a few months down the line the puppy develps a problem thought to be hereditary although parents not shown any signs of it & new owners decide to have it PTS (despite fact that surgery would correct it & it would be a fine pet but not a show/breeding prospect) . new owners decide to seek recompense from breeder for cost of puppy/treatment/export costs etc. Would the laws covering this be the ones in the new owners country or the breeders country?

Afraid I ahve no idea but logic would say mthe country of origins laws would apply????

Can't remeber teh name of the champdogger that is in the legal proffesion, hope s/he sees your message.

I think it's Blue, that is the legal eagle around here.

Dawn R.

Boy do we fall into grey areas on this board at times :-)

Right the law technically falls to UK as the sale took place I am presuming when the person paid for the dog. Ie they sent the money to the breeder. If it is a European country the the civil law could be very simliar anyway.

Another thing which hasn't been mention which is a very big and influencial factor in the outcome is how much the puppy cost in relation to what a pet puppy would be (forgetting all export costs as this is nothing to do with the puppy price itself)  For example if it was big bucks 2-3 times the pet price then it would naturally be presumed with or without contract the dog was felt to be of show / breeding quality standard. If it was nearer the pet price it could be seen as a normal dog purchased and that if is was good enough for showing that would be a bonus...

See where I am going here?

To give fair advice you need to see the " whole " picture.

It is not uncommon practice to be honest or from what I have heard others doing and to avoid huge legal and emotion hassle for a replacement puppy being sent at a reduced cost.  Whilst health cannot be guaranteed puppies are sold just like a paid of shoes under The Sale of Goods Act.

People often say " well this is what happened when the samething happened to Mrs ------" but it generally wasn't the exact same. Civil contract law is very very complicated.

Sam feel free to PM and I will give you my e-mail addy  if you like and you can give me more details.

BFN

Something I've wondered about (I need to get out more!) is where a pup is exported as a 'show prospect', but the standards differ between the two countries.

For example, a blue-eyed dalmatian can be shown in the US so could be show quality in its country of origin, but wouldn't be acceptable in the UK - it would be purely-pet quality. The same can arise with mouths - in many European countries the entire dentition is counted and missing pre-molars marked down, but here (in dalmatians anyway) that isn't mentioned in the standard and so isn't taken into consideration.

At which point does the 'show' pup become 'pet', and the purchaser entitled to feel conned?

>At which point does the 'show' pup become 'pet', and the purchaser entitled to feel conned?<

Hi Jeanjenie :-)

I guess it is when they pay over the normal average rate for a puppy.

I would imagine or certainly hope that if someone was wanting a puppy for show with for example a full mouth they would either take the chance and buy it at a pet price or pay a premium for it to be run and so they can ascertain the full mouth.

Occasionally you hear someone grumbling about a puppy the bought even as a pet but they have paid £250 for it from Mrs smith from the local puppy farm..  my answer is you got your £250 worth ;-)

I think Price is really one of the relative factors in it.  That alone without written proof can be a useful factor when finding out what the intention of the purchase was. It would be rare for someone to buy a puppy at £2000  that sells normally for £500 if it was not for a particular reason so the law would proabably favor the buyer but the flip of the coin is , a breeder would hardly sell a dog saying it is going to be a champion or certainly show potential abroad for £500 if the rate should be £2000. ( Honest breeders that is ;-) )

But if the pup would be show quality in the breeder's country, but not the buyer's country, surely the breeder has the right to sell at the normal 'show' price, rather than 'pet' price? Wouldn't this come under 'caveat emptor'?

I hasten to add this is all hypothetical!

It wouldn't matter what country it is going to.. forget all that part of it :-) ..  the point is really what was the " intention of the sale"   Whether going 50 miles down the road or 5000 across the world.. 

However if it was not show quality in one country the people would probably not be buying it anyway , that is why it should be experienced breeders I guess that sell puppies with prospect puppies abroad.

I know where you are coming from with the caveat emptor but it just isn't that simple.   It would never been seen as a private purchase where the onus is on the buyer to make sure it is sound quality etc.  A breeder selling a puppy is sold under the Sale of Goods Act..

If you bought shoes from Clarks for £50 and a pair from Tescos for £10 , the £50 would and should be better quality and if both fell apart in 5 months with general use you would have a come back on the clarks but probably not on the Tescos as quality and price come into it.

I agree with Brainless it is often best to sell puppies as pets with pet contracts and if they are show quality it is a bonus. I think It is a little different when the dogs are older and the quality can  be assessed a bit better .

BFN :-)

I'm sorry, I'm obviously explaining myself very badly! The difference in country is vital to my question! ;)

Say a person in the UK wants to buy a show-prospect puppy from the US - lets say a dalmatian, because I understand them best!.The US standard allows for dals with blue eyes to be shown, so a blue-eyed pup can be a show prospect, can be sold within the US as such, and might be campaigned to Champion.

However, blue eyes are not acceptable in the UK standard, so that same pup that's genuinely a show prospect in the US is no such thing when imported into the UK, because it has a major fault according to the standard here. If imported it would merely be a pet-quality pup.

If the buyer had asked the US breeder for a show-prospect pup, by which criteria should the pup's quality be determined - that of the country of origin or the purchaser's country?

LOL ..  the thing I see with this is and hopefully these things would be discussed.

If you say as a Dally breeder sold a puppy to somewhere were the eyes were a requirement then hopefully and technically you should know this.

If the person asked for a show prospect puppy to the USA standard and paid a good price to have it , then that is what they should get... I don't mean a champion guaranteed  but something that is obviously not right such as eye colour shouldn't be sent as a show quality. These are the things that could get argued round and round..

THis is where and why these types of transaction have to be done very very carefully and written down fully and agreed by both parties.

Now just because we know this doesn't mean that every case of it's kind would have the same outcome it depends how obvious the intention was .. does that make sense.

When contracts are looked at the whole intention of the transaction is looked at. Some are obvious without much need for any evidence and others are not and you need to prove it.

I personally think unless were are talking thousands of pounds it is best all round to come to an amicable agreement.

Life isn't that easy sometimes eh?

A bit like the full dentition issue, where in Europe a dog without all 42 teeth woudl be highly unlikely to do anything whereas here with the odd missing premolar a dog could still be a top winner.

This is why I and al the breeders I know of in my breed that pups are all the same price be they pet or show quality.  After all the show prospect may end up never being shown and the one bought purely as a pet ends up a champion because it was a nice pup. 

All mine go as companions first and foremost, though anyone hoping to show would be guided to the pup or pups with most promise and I would tend to try and keep back the most promising pup with a show home in mind, but often it doesn't tirn out that way.

This problem arises when what's considered a mismark in one country is within the standard in another ...

Hi Sam

didn't the breeders have written in their puppy contract that if the owners wanted to relinquish the dog that it should go back to them, in which case they've broken the contract with the breeder? I know technically that puppy contracts aren't legally binding, but I would try and make out it was. I expect the breeders are horrified that this poor dog has been PTS without consulting them.

Husky, unfotunately the blood test level (rabies) is not right for him to be able to come back to uk. Otherwise breeder would be there like a shot to collect him. Seems this chap will die next week despite totally operable simple surgery. I am fuming.

Blue
The Sale of Goods Act would only apply if the seller of the puppy was a trader (business).  By this I mean a trader that is licensed as a dog breeder or a pet shop by their local Council. If they were not licensed, then they would not be classified as a trader (business) but a private individual and the Sale of Goods Act would not apply in this instance. It would be a case of buyer beware.

Pat,

I bet every breeder in the UK would be glad if it was that simple. :-)

Yes if only it was that simple ......sadly I can think of several small claims cases involving hobby breeders (one or two litters a year) who have been held to be selling puppies "in the course of a business" for the purposes of the Sale of Goods Act.

Jane

Hi,
After reading all this above I don't think I would sell puppies abroad.
At least in British Is. It would be a lot easier to get your pup back
and just replace it!!!
Regards
Denese

Personally, for a pup in the UK,  I wouldn't want to replace it even if I had enough litters to be able to (which I don't).  

If the new owners found the pup lacking in any respect, I would come to an arrangement re cost, and have the pup back for re-homing.    Depending on the attitude of the owners, it could well be that I would be wary of letting them have them another pup.

Very awkward if the pup is abroad, though.    Still think that you could write into a contract that the pup must come back if found unsuitable, after a satisfactory examination as a baby pup.   Then have two witnesses sign the contract.  

Would this be legal, Blue?

Jo and the Casblaidd Flatcoats

Hi Joflatcoat,
I agree with you, But its a bit awfull for the breeder to be told it had been PTS.
It just makes you wonder how bad it was?
And!! if it warranted being PTS. If it was mine, I would wont a letter of the Vet concerned ect;.
I also agree with Brainless, I think you choose a good price for your breed, that covers
a good pedigree for pets, but, some of the litter could be champs,
That's a great bonus.
Regards
Denese

denise. xrays have been seen by breeders vet & all agreed that simple op would be fine & puppy could have good life as pet.

Doesn't the law require the buyer to relinquish the property (puppy) to the seller in order to get their money back ?
I seem to remember seeing something like this before where someone had bought a puppy which turned out not to be suitable for the purpose they purchased it for, they wanted their money back and to keep the dog, the ruling was that they could only have one or other ?
I do know in shops that they usually demand the goods and receipt before you get a refund.

There have been several cases under the Sale of Goods Act where the courts have allowed a family to keep their dog/puppy as well as receive a full refund from the seller, recognising the emotional attachment people develop for their pets. One of these cases was heard in the High Court as far as I remember so the decision will stand as precedent for similar cases.

Jane