Hi All,
       Can anyone remember a thread, or does anyone have any knowledge of double signing on a puppy contract ??

I remember seeing something about people getting restrictions lifted by the KC because the contract was only signed at the bottom and not where the bit about restrictions is written.
Does this make sense ? :-) I am sure it has been said somewhere that it is wise to get potential puppy owners to sign at the point of the contract where the restrictions are noted, to say they understand that they are in place and may/may not be lifted (depending on the contract) and then also sign the bottom of the contract to say it has all been understood etc.

I am trying to find out for someone who wants to use my dog at stud and wants to make sure that restrictions cannot be lifted without her say so (as we have seen happen with the KC occasionally in the past). :rolleyes:

Thanks for any help,

Gabrielle x

My contract is two sides of A4 so no problem.

Brainless, is it possible to see a copy of your puppy contract please? It sounds very comprehensive, and may be of help to me.

Thankyou.

I wouldn't say it is comprehensive, but covers the essential points.  I prefer the contract to be basic, and to provide supplementary guidance material that doesn't need to be included in a contract, bearing in mind that any contracts worth is only as an indication of intent and coudl easily be challenged in law.

My contract is two sides of A4 so no problem.

Barbara, mine is 2 sides of A4 too, but it doesn't seem to matter the size. People are still managing to get restrictions lifted on the basis that they only signed the end of the contract and didn't sign at the restrictions bit, to say they understood the restrictions placed where not to be lifted.

Can't remember where I saw this and it is bugging me to bits....

Gabrielle

Can't see how that would be possible as I have never had to sign every clause on any contract just the end, but each sheet if it was on more than one sheet when I was buying a house.

When I've given witness statements to the police I had to sign at the bottom of each page, certainly not each clause. I can't see that there could be anything more 'legal' than that. My will - all umpteen pages of it - only had to be signed at the end.

You wouldn't have to sign each clause, honestly :-) just the pages.

One of the ones i have signed for one of my dogs specifically states .....

I/we confirm that I/we have read and understood the contents of this contract, in particular parts (a) and (b) relating to the fact that the puppy's registration is endorsed not for breeding and the conditions upon which this endorsement may be lifted.

not sure if that is any help, but it would stop the need to sign at each part regarding the fact the registration is endorsed and what needs to be done to have it lifted.

Kate

This is a very useful example Kate one worth people adding at the end :-) 

A double sided contract is 100% fine As it couldn't not have been tampered with. A contract that is written over say 5 pages should be signed fully with address etc on the last page and a quick signature at the bottom of all other pages.  This is to prove that say page 3 hadn't been changed.

Legal documents drawn up and signed in solicitors offices are sometimes a bit different as they are signed and also witnessed and they are undertaken by people who have taken a legal oath.. the original is generally also then not carried home in the bottom of someones handbag :-)

I keep hearing so many people say this has happened and that has happened with the KC but of the 2 cases I have known it was something totally different that they were lifted for. 

>My contract is two sides of A4 so no problem.

Hopefully the endorsements bit (and anything else important) is on the same side as the signature, or you could have photocopied onto the other side after signature. Well, I know you wouldn't, but someone else could!

M.

I have never heard of double signing.

To be extra sure, I have got peopel to sign a 'Deposit Form' which has included on it that puppies papers will be endorsed. Then when they sign the puppy contarct,t hat will also staet the papers/registration docs are endorsed.

When I joined the KCAB scheme they had a good example of a contract which you can ammend for your own use.

i have two contracts......one that covers all the usual about returning the puppy etc (which they sign) and a second one which deals specifically with restrictions.

I have never heard of double signing either, nor of contracts being overturned by the KC due to this.  Would of thought one certain person who this clause may have helped would of looked into that had it been a known fact or is this something recent?

rang the KC today and they have verified that if you state on your contract about the endorsements and the new owner signs at the bottom, top, side or where ever you deem to put it they will honour the endorsements. The buyer has to state that they are fully aware of the implications of endorsement and that they are in possesion of the said registration form. This can be typed at the end with the owners signature and address on.Hope that clears up any confusion

Many thanks for all your replies......
Someone I know has had this happen on a contract where restrictions were lifted by the KC, because owners have said they signed the end of the contract but were not fully told of the restrictions. (they were told in great detail)
The KC told the breeder it could have been avoided if the contract had been signed at the point where the restrictions were mentioned as well as at the end.

I know I have seen it discussed somewhere, just can't remember where

KateM, I think your contract clause seems really sensible, so I will mention doing something like this to the person who wants to use my dog.

Many Thanks again,
Gabrielle

Someone I know has had this happen on a contract where restrictions were lifted by the KC, because owners have said they signed the end of the contract but were not fully told of the restrictions. (they were told in great detail)


Hi Gabrielle, I don't mean to challenge you personally but I really don't see this happening just on this information you have stated above.  There has to be more to this.

If you sigh a contract that is fair in the first place you have entered a legal agreement.

"Ignorantia juris non excusat Latin"     in our terms "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one

On the contract people should write in    " by signing this contract you accept and understand it's full legal contents"  but signing a contract without it still would stand. 

I would be suprised at a contract being over turned that was signed AND even though the KC doesn't follow eveything by point of law , if this happened to me , The kennel club would probably see a civil case out of principle.

I would be suprised at a contract being over turned that was signed AND even though the KC doesn't follow eveything by point of law , if this happened to me , The kennel club would probably see a civil case out of principle.

This is an excellent point Blue, i thnk perhaps people don't realise that they can challenge a decision made by the Kc in a civil case regarding this, possibly by not knowing they actually can!

I think too many people are chancing it with The Kennel club now and the Kennel club are genuinely trying to be fair.

Hopefully most reading this will add a paragraph just to cover themselves. Nobody really wants to get into this mess so better to be over cautious.

I know of a case that the new owner is saying they didn't sign anything and were not aware or any such endorsements. The contract wasn't written entirely as I would have but the kennel club has no lifted them.  They have actually advised the people that is is now a civil matter. 

I think the Kennel club are genuinely struggling with this.

The other thing is people have different reasons when and where they would lift endorsements and I think they make problems at times for themselves with far too many ifs in the contract.

Mine basically says I dont' sell dogs for breeding, the endorsements will never ever be lifted  .. I don't do the ifs or buts on contracts.  It is what suits me.  I know there is no loop holes. 

I certainly agree, the Kc are walking a tight rope with contracts. What was and wasnt said, shown, put in a way the new owner totally understood... dreadful for them to have to decide on. Like you, I would say in a contract the less said the better, rather than all the if's and maybes. There is no doubt that, should someone have one from you thats done well in all respects the owner will know what they are doing, and may well then ask if it is possible to use your puppy (now adult ;) ) in a breeding program. Special circumstances, but at least everyone who has a puppy from you has no doubt in their mind that breeding is and never will be on with one of yours right from the start.

Thats just it, for me and probably a lot of peole with commerically popular breeds, I feel I need and would want to know in years to come when the time would be right that the person has been the owner I had hoped them to be and that the dog turned out what I would deem suitable for breeding.  A lot would say it is controlling but in today's society trust is such a scarce thing at times. I feel the need to have that control sadly.  When the special circumstances come along I would be happy to oblige. :-)

My breed is big with the puppy farmers and more so with the people at home ticking along a few pet litters a year for pocket money sadly.

That actually meant to say it WAS NOT written as I would have written it, meaning it was quite poorly written BUT the KC have stood by it.

Being honest I have not heard a genuine case where they have lifted the endorsements against the breeders wishes where there was a genuine agreement.

Just wanted to add that the kennel club have it clearly written in the year book( red book) . Pages 3.25 and 3.26 section 12.

Also it is on the puppy registration form that the endorsements must be properly placed and a signature obtained signifying that the new owner are aware.

When it first started a separate slip was sent o you with your registration forms to point this out so I am surprised any breeder could be unaware of the requirement.

but I still often hear people saying neutered dogs and bitches can't be shown, and that hasn't been the case as long as I have been in dogs, and when I first showed the rule was that they had registered offspring, then changed to informing the kennel club of the neuter status.  It is there on every show schedule.

I noticed on the newer registration that it draws your attention to the section in the hand book. They are probably up to their neck in it at times with people.. :rolleyes:

I can assure you Blue it is just as I said...... :rolleyes:

Thanks for the input everyone, I will make sure the breeder contacts the KC for advice. :)

Gabrielle

Hi there

This is a very interesting thread.  I have looked at my contract and it says that the bitch cannot be bred from before her second season and I should consult the breeders (who knew nothing!!!) about the suitability of a stud dog before breeding.  The contract also doesnt have the dog's name on it!!! However, the registration was endorsed but they later sent a letter to the KC to say the endorsement should be lifted.  I dont think that the KC could refuse to lift the endorsement in this case, do you?  There is absolutely no mention of endorsements only what I have said above.

From what I understand from the contract, as long as I waited until her second season and spoke to the breeder and told them who I was going to use as stud, the KC couldnt refuse to lift an endorsement.  This worries me because there were some puppies in the litter that had defects that shouldnt be bred from and they would have signed the same contract.  There is also no mention of health tests etc.,  While I would never breed from a dog with any health issues, I am sure there are plenty of people who would.  My breed is selling for £1000 a puppy now and if the dogs get into the wrong hands, all sorts could happen.

Would welcome your thoughts.

Kind regards
Annie

I've just had a look at mine with Dorain - endorsement is alone on one sheet of paper, signed directly underneath, to say I understand re: endorsement - progeny not eligible for registration.

Apparently the condition of lifting is if the breeder thinks the animal has matured to true standard of the breed - which is a bit subjective and I expect open to challenge if she said he wasn't & someone else in the breed said he was (not in the least relevant as I'm not breeding from him). It might be better if it mentioned satisfactory health test\ show results, but I think the having it on its own as something to be signed would avoid any arguments over it not having been understood - if that makes sense.

Apparently the condition of lifting is if the breeder thinks the animal has matured to true standard of the breed - which is a bit subjective and I expect open to challenge if she said he wasn't & someone else in the breed said he was (not in the least relevant as I'm not breeding from him). It might be better if it mentioned satisfactory health test\ show results, but I think the having it on its own as something to be signed would avoid any arguments over it not having been understood - if that makes sense.

That is why I wouldn't have any of the ifs and buts on the puppy contract. IF and hopefully not someone wanted to be ackward they can pull most overly and poorly written contracts to bits.

The Kennel club should perhaps provide a template for those who are unsure how to do it.