A relative of mine has just had her bitch mated but its a very strange agreement to my mind, has anyone ever heard of it?  She had her bitches hip and eye scores done, both returned fine, her bitch came into season so she contacted the stud owner and took her bitch round to be mated,(not sure what day she was on?),  having had her bitch injected with antibiotics in case she carried any infection, at the stud owners request!? my relatives partner held the bitch and the stud owner held the dog and guided him!! All sounds ok, but they don't seem sure if a tie happened? They were charged £110 for this service, offered no return mating and told that the further fee of £55 per puppy would be payable up to 8 pups?  Is this normal, I am most surprised at no return visit.  I Know its her first time mating her bitch and as a novice still myself, (although having had 3 of my pups back for visits was very rewarding!!) I feel I am not really in a position to advise.

The handling procedures for the mating sound normal, but it's generally fairly obvious if a tie happens - the fact that the dog and bitch are incapable of separating is a pretty good give-away! A turn isn't vital, though a lot easier for both dog and bitch if both have all four feet on the ground.

Did they not agree the terms of service in advance? It's unusual to be charged both a service fee and a fee per pup born (does that mean seen on scan; does it include stillbirths or just live births? If live, how long after birth?) Is the dog a proven sire?

The handling is the correct way tfor mating to ensure that both dog and bitch are not injured.

I have heard of those sort of terms with Afghans.  The first stud fee is for the time and efforts of the stud dog owner - usually an hour or so of groping around as well as making coffee :)  The price per puppy is usually for the pups sold.

It is usual for the bitch owner to ask the terms when first making enquiries about the dog and it is then their perogative to either accept the terms offered or choose another stud dog. :)

I think paying for a service fee & then an amount per puppy afterwards is very common practice now & it is what the Europeans use apparantly.

As the breeder, you could be onto a good thing if the bitch only has 1 pup but if she has a litter of 10, then the stud dog owner could be onto a winner.

The person I knows who does it this way, charges £50 service fee & then £150 per puppy after that!

Yeah, I've also heard of this before, in Bulldogs. There was an advert in one of the weekly dog papers a while ago, outlining these terms.

Dawn R.

It's fairly common practice in my breed (vallhunds) as well, and has been for several years - started by a Swedish lady living in the UK at the time.

We charge a handling fee for the bitch  - who would usually come and stay for up to a week.  In addition, there is a charge per live puppy at 3 weeks of age - at which time the green forms are signed.  We wiave the fee per puppy if there is only one in the litter.

If there are no pups then there would be no second mating as in effect the fee for handling at the time of mating is for the service rendered by the dog/owner not for the puppies.

Kate

The only terms like this in bulldogs is a £75 handling fee and £600 on production of live puppies, not per pup :-)

As the breeder, you could be onto a good thing if the bitch only has 1 pup but if she has a litter of 10, then the stud dog owner could be onto a winner.

Even at 10 pups this would only be £660 , if you got 10 pups then that is probably only the price of the pup likely. I personally think this way the breeder not the stud dog owner generally is the one who comes off far better.

I think it is a good system but at the day it all comes down to honesty which I believe is often lacking at times in the dog world.

T

Unfortunately whether your friend or yourself now feel it is right or not the contract has been agreed so it will stand.

I agree, a tie is hardly hard to miss, that is very confusing the return mating should be a natural occurance if the bitch does not take, but it is a moral stance not legal, most breeders will do this for their reputation so again no come back this time it appears if the bitch is not in pup.

We all have months before a bitch is in season to check out suitable studs and their owners practises, it is too late afterwards to think a stud owners agreement not right.

I have never been charged per pup, only a stud fee and have always had the offer of a return, but stud owners will vary from breed to breed and their own personal requirements will be different, your friend must have known this stud owners requirements long before so had the chance to use another stud if not happy.

This is one of the problems with people they don't discuss it fully or ask questions that they want at the time.

I don't personally think it is a bad deal at all and certainly good for the breeds that have quite a number of pups.

My breed has small amounts and often from one extreme to the other although the KC average is 4.

Our stud fees are approx half the price of a puppy.

>If there are no pups then there would be no second mating as in effect the fee for handling at the time of mating is for the service rendered by the dog/owner not for the puppies.

I think this is the point the OP was querying.  In theory the practice of charging for "service" and then for pups sounds fine but what if the dog has not performed satisfactorily through no fault of the bitch?  Surely a return visit would be a fair assumption or money  back because the dog didn't carry out the service?

Stud dog terms are only ok if people stick to them
My sister took her bitch for mating to a dog that had not been used before, after it was agreed by the breeder that the endorsments would be lifted before the mating ( on the dog ) the breeder wanted £150 for handeling the dog and £1000 stud fee. She did not handle anything as she was usless so my sister and her husband did the honours.
After the matings she asked for her money , which she was payed ( under duress ) and stud fee was paid.
The bitch was scanned and contacted the stud dog owner for the KC papers so everything was ready for the puppies to be registered when they were born.
The stud dog owner said that she had not lifted the restrictions as it is now common practice to charge another £1000 to lift the endorsments.
As you can imagine my sister has hit the roof.
Now the breeder in question has had the breed 40 years , she is a CC giving judge who is very well respected in the breed .
Well you may think to yourselves contact the KC, so she did, they told her that only the breeder can lift the endorsments and if she charges for it that is up to her and my sister has to pay.
So she could end up with a litter that she cannot register and there is nothing she can do about it!!

Peanuts

My god Peanut i wouldnt have been happy at all i cant give any advice all i can say is i make sure 100 per cent the bitch the comes to my stud  the owners know everything about the agreement contract drawn up and it is signed before any mating is taken place

I know, for the whole 8 months that this was planned for , not once was this ever mentioned, the breeder insists that everyone does it now and she wants to do the same.

Personally i have never heard of it, but there you are nothing can be done, KC not interested and leagally nothing either!!

so thats that!!
She will have to pay!!

Peanuts

Totally disgusting!  Obviously someone who is in it for the money.  I don't believe anything can be done but I think a letter to the breed clubs that she is a member of asking what they think of this practice.  There will be nothing they can actually do about it however the damage to her reputation would be in order.

I wouldn't give this woman one penny more. Are both parents top quality show dogs? If not then I would simply sell the pups as pet only with no papers and have done with it. If the parents are both succesful show dogs, I would take the woman to court for breach of contract.

Agree with chaumsong.  I do hate people who extract the urine and not mentioning the fee for lifting endorsements is disgusting.  Thank goodness I'm not into breeding with this sort of thing going on or else I would have burst a blood vessel by now. I wouldn't give the stud owner another penny, surely without papers the puppies will sell well to pet owners. 

I also wouldn't give her any more money.

I assume this has been covered, as your friend has spoken to the KC, but did your friend sign to say she agreed to the endorsements when she bought the bitch?

M.

The dog is a champion and well worthy , the bitch is on 2 CC's , my sister bred to keep for herself to carry on the lines in the ring.
She does not want to sell them as pets she wants her new show dogs which she is entitiled to as i am sure you would agree.
Nothing was mentioned about paying for the endorsments in the whole eight months this was being planned , only handerling fee and stud fee which has been payed.( have receipts )
Both dog and bitch have all tests done and bitch swabbed and clear.
But when she did mention it after the matings, she said that most of the breeders ( in this breed ) are doing it and as she is a top person she should too.
My sister has asked around as have i ( just enquireys ) and no-one i or my sister has spoken to knows anything about it , but my sisters husband is not beaten yet, he plans to put all this in the breeds notes , dog press ( front page ) and court, so you may all get to hear about it anyway, if she does not lift the endorsments.

When you say 'have receipts' do you mean receipts or do they have the signed KC registration form? If not, why not, as they've paid the stud fee?

Can I ask again whether the person who sold the puppy explained the endorsements and asked them to sign to agree that they knew of and understood them? Breeder doesn't sound professional elsewhere, so I would be hoping that she hasn't done this.

M.

Think you've slightly misunderstood M as its the stud dog that still has endorsements on, which I presume was breed by his owner and she won't lift them till a further fee is paid :(

Eek, you're right Gillian - I'm confused.

Who has the stud fee been paid to then? I'd be asking for that back until they could provide a registration form for an unendorsed dog!

M.

I would take her to court she's taken a stud fee and handling charge for a dog that is endorsed. It's her dog - if she is letting people use him at stud of course she has to lift the endorsement - all very bizarre!

So would I! I've read it again, and I still don't 'get' it. From re-reading, is the situation that the person who owns the stud dog is also his breeder, and wants to charge a random bitch owner £1000 to lift endorsements on her own dog?

I'm very confused!

M.

I wonder if the laws of extortion would have a bearing on this, perhaps one of our legal eagles would know?

It certainly sounds like extortion/blackmail to me.

If the dog is endorsed that means nobody else has used him and registered puppies from him which seems strange to me if the dog is in the least desirable

The owner of the stud I used on my girl chooses this method and although he is a CH. dog, has excellent health results (hips,eyes,elbows),has produced winning prodgeny etc. the handling fee was almost half that which your relative had to pay and the price per live pup @ 2 wks old  was the same as the the h/fee , I think the stud owner is really pushing their luck here, is he really THAT good a dog?

ok let me start from the begining.
The dog in question is a lovley dog and a worthy champion, but the owner has never let him be used so far because she has never deemed any of the bitches that had applied good enough.
Then up pops my sister with a lovely bitch and is told yes this would be a lovely match.
My sister is told of the stud fee and handerling fee which she agrees to , the owner states that the dog is endorsed and they will be lifted before any mating takes place.
So my sister presumes this has been done as this disscusion about the endorsmants was 8 months ago.
She goes to the dog mating takes place hands over the stud fee and handerling fee for which she gets receipts.
Then after the scanning she asks for the KC form so that everything is in place for babies, then she is told that the endorments will not be lifted unless she pays another £1000 for them to be lifted.

She asks the KC for help and they tell her that endorsments can only be lifted by the breeder and if the breeder is asking for payment then my sister will have to pay to register the puppies or have a non registered litter and to be sold as pets.

Does this clear it up a bit?
And thanks to Jeangenie, sounds very much like blackmail and i know that the laws are very strict on this!!
Peanuts

It does not cost anything to lift an endorsment, just a letter to the k.c. and thats it done. I think this breeder is being very greedy, and ive never heard of anyone asking to pay for an endorsment to be lifted, especially if it is the breeder of the dog,

She should really have had the form filled in AT the time of mating. It is what the KC recommends. I always bring one with me for the stud owner to fill in. Might have saved some hassle later on. Unbelievably greedy stud dog owner!

if they had a verbal contract stating the endorsement would be lifted before any mating then i would take her to the small claims court, she doesnt have a leg to stand on. you cant suddenly say oh by the way i want another £1000 to lift endorsements unless it was agreed before hand. a verbal agreement is binding in court.

Can you just confirm that the owner of the dog is also the breeder of the dog.  If she isn't, then I would be making a phone call to the breeder of the dog and letting them know what is happening.  I cannot understand why she would put a restriction on her own dog (if she was the breeder).  I always decide which name I personally want registering and then put restrictions on the others, then decide which puppy I am keeping.  I would certainly go down the route of court action, dog press, breed clubs etc.  Do you think that maybe she is after pushing your sister in a corner about taking a puppy instead of the endorsement fee? and this is her sneaky way of not paying for a puppy and still getting her stud fee! or am I being cynical!

Yes the owner is the breeder, as far as i know she was going to sell the dog as a pup but kept him insead so i presume thats why he had endorsments,
I was confused as you lot to start with!!

Peanuts

If you contact a good solicitor a doggie or equine specialist they can sort this matter out in court, my friend is having problems on breeding terms with a breach of contract by the other party.  The solicitors today have told her that they will deal with the contract issue but will also take the matter further in relation to other issues/losses that have arisen because of the breach of contract.

I endorse all the pups including the one I keep as at the time of registration I won't know which one I will keep. 

In this instance I have no doubt if it is exactly as described then you sister would be entitled to ALL of her money back.

She paid a stud fee which is either equal or more than the going rate for a KC reg stud fee. This isn't what she has gotten or agreed to.

I would certainly take legal advice on this with the view to recover the costs. I would also write to the breed club.

peanuts after reading this thread, I am pretty sure what this woman has done is illegal.

A)  Lifting the endorsement was spoken of well before breeding,
B)  Your sister was lead to believe that she was breeding her bitch to a stud that would allow her to have KC reg pups,
C)  Although a very good dog, there is no way your sister would have bred with this (unproven) stud otherwise,
D)  An endorsment is to be lifted by the breeder only
E)  Why would your sister pay for a stud to have it's endorsment lifted, to then perhaps be used by other breeders without this charge? Why would only your sister have this £1,000 endorsement bill yet no other post-breeding bitches would have. (As it would already be lifted)
F)  Your sister has now been conned into breeding her bitch to an unproven and unviable stud, and left with no KC reg'd pups.

She must not pay this ridiculous fee, I would do as advised and take her to court and demand back all monies, or the breeder must lift the endorsement immediately (and personally I would want some compensation for all the stress she has caused too.)

Forgot to add:

G)  The breeder can never say that the £1,000 (extortion) endorsement fee was pre-arranged as it would have been paid for beforehand, with the stud and handling fee.

H)  And any good breeder would have lifted this before mating.

I)  She was either out to blackmail from the very beginning, or planning on conning her in only having pet pups from the very start. Both are perfectly good reasons to seek a solicitor.

I would be very interested in the outcome of this, this sort of practise can not continue and needs stamping on quickly.

This situation has been resolved and the endorsements lifted Here

:rolleyes: Doh! Yes, now I remember that thread, but did not associate it with peanuts, (thanks. :-) ) just noticed the date too.:rolleyes: double:rolleyes:

Hello to all,
well i have been reading through the posts and taking in all the information and views of others. So i thought what the heck i'll join in!
There are some breeders of cats who do the handling charge and then charge per kitten born alive. My personal view on this is i totally disagree with it. I owned a stud cat and queens so i base my views accordingly.
I feel by charging people per animal born or even animal alive at 3 weeks you could be incouraging less knowledgable people to go out and buy their own. This could be totally detrementle not only to the breed but to the animals involved.
Lets say Joe bloggs gets a dog which has 10 pups and is charged by a reputable breeder £150 handling and then an extra £150 per pup making a total of £1650. Now in his mind he might think stuff that i'll got to a less reputable place and buy my own dog for £750 he then saves a himself lot of money. Then every time josie comes into season fido gets put in the shed for 4 weeks till she finished. Also lets say a puppy at two weeks is starting fade they could thinkto them selves stuff paying to get this pup right i'll only have to pay the stud owner too, "let it die it'll save on money"
My feelings are plain and simple when it comes to charging per alive animal, it is wrong.
Charge per mating and always throw in a free bee if she don't take. I have always done that.

I am not really for or against it BUT I don't think this method encourages new stud dog owners at all, at the end of the day people will hopefully still seek out a good dog. ( most people) so there canbe as many studs dogs as people like if there is no demand then it won't be any good.

You example of the money to be gained is perhaps a little exagerated. The Handling fee is normally very low certainly lower than the £150 in your example , the price per pup is generally also a lot lower. In the agreements I have seen they have all basically almost equated to the price of a puppy. I hardly think people are going to agree of £1650. Not anyone I know anyway. I also don't  think someone would let a puppy die to save £150 when the puppy would be worth anywhere in the region of £500 plus!!!

As I said, I am not for or against it.  Each to their own.

I also don't  think someone would let a puppy die to save £150 when the puppy would be worth anywhere in the region of £500 plus!!!

Hiya,
As i said i refer back to my cat breeding days, where a stud cat can be worth anything from £900 upwards and Queens £750 upwards
and i am afraid to say that i have known "breeders" to let a kitten fade as it was going to cost too much to "put right" and thats without thinking that if it survived that would have to pay the stud owner money on top.
I used to live in a world that i thought everyone was like me and no matter what the cost or time you gave it your all, but now reality bite me in the bum and as they say i have seen the nature of the beast.
I know 90% of breeders are like me but there is always that 10% isn't there that we are all trying to irradicate from breeding

and i am afraid to say that i have known "breeders" to let a kitten fade as it was going to cost too much to "put right" and thats without thinking that if it survived that would have to pay the stud owner money on top.
Exactly, this isn't that uncommon BUT as you say that is before they even think about the price they have to give to the stud. SO having a price per off spring would make no difference to them.

People who think like that will always think like that regardless of the terms. Some people believe nature should takes it's course also and won't intervien regardless what it costs.

I've NEVER heard of a fee per kitten being charged, and I've been breeding cats for 17 years. These days it is in fact very uncommon for anybody to have a public stud, everyone has private studs only, and therefore breeders no longer have much of a choice and even novices HAVE to go out and buy their own stud cat as they cannot find stud owners willing to let their stud mate other people's queens. (I was desperate for a stud to mate one of my Champion queens, who had had all her pre mating blood testing as well as being FAB PKD neg and nobody would even accept a fully health tested Champion to stud!) That's changed a lot in the time I've been in the cat fancy, before the unwritten rule was that you bred regularly for 5 years before embarking on owning your own stud. But as somebody who has lost a stud due to being infected with disease by a visiting queen I understand the reasoning and certainly my studs are all private use only these days. Only trouble is when it's impossible to go out to stud you need new blood now and then and so I currently find myself with no less than 7 stud boys.......

In Persians & Exotics breeding quality cats usually go for four figures now.

In cats I always, always do all I can to save a kitten no matter how small or weak and they almost always do pull through -BUT many a time I have regretted it when the kitten has grown into a sickly adult who died young instead, and it would have been better to let nature take its course and not fight at the start.......

I am suprised you being a LH breeder as it is appearing all the time in the coons, i suppose maybe it is because of the European influence.
If you look to the smaller breeds in the foreign section the majority are at open stud unless the breeder as used those everfaithfull restrictions! As we both know though there are differences in the cats rstrictions as to dogs and slightly more control too.
I never sold a cat for breeding restricted if i didn't like the people and they were not up to speed ect ect i just didn't let them have one.
All of my cats were spayed,castrated too before they went to pet homes, no way of people doing what they are not supposed too.
i am talking of a smaller gene pool of cats too.
We can only do what we think is best and EVERY ONE is entitled to their own opinion and i feel sometimes people take an opinion to heart.
i never wish to offend anybody, it is just my personal view.

>All of my cats were spayed,castrated too before they went to pet homes

I spayed any of my adult LHs that left me, after two unsuccessful attempts at breeding - but I would never have considered spaying 13 week old kittens.

Margot

so I currently find myself with no less than 7 stud boys....... Gosh how do you keep them in queens. Cats aint like dogs.. I can't imagine how hard that is..

Thankfully they vary a lot and most of them are quite content spending their time with neutered girls, and I also have some (3) girls that are very, very difficult to get pregnant so can live with boys all the time and it still takes 2 years to get pregnant. :)