I wonder if anyone can help me. I bought a puppy from a reputable breeder and paid a lot of money for it. I was given a kennel name that i thought was exclusive. I have since been online and there is another pup from the same litter that is being used for showing and stud with the same name as my dog. The pups were brothers, i remember seeing them both when i went to collect mine.
Im sure this is not allowed but i dont know what to do about it if anything.
Thanks

Registered kennel names are exclusive. Contact the KC with the relevant details; your dog's name and registration number - on the registration document - and what you know of the other dog - details of the address etc - and ask for their help.

Is it EXACTLY the same??? You quite often get littermates with a similar name but spelt differently. If its exactly the same i would get on to the KC because they shouldn't have registered 2 with identical names.
Good luck.

and was it KC registered, as opposed to one of the dodgy alternative registries?:

Is your pup registered? Do you have a registration certificate from the kennel club? It sounds like you may just have been given the pedigree, which has the littermates name on it. I've never understood why (or it's not normally for good reasons) but I know some breeders only register a few pups from the litter, the ones they think are going to go to show homes.

Yes you're right i have only been given the pedigree. I was told if i dont want to breed or show then i dont need the KC certificate, but that i could request it at a later date if i changed my mind. I actually dont want to do either as the dog was bought purely as a pet but i kind of feel slightly cheated. I was charged top pedigree money though due to the breeders reputation and the quality of the dog.

Personally if I am paying for a pedigree KC registered dog then I want all the paperwork to prove that is the case.  If a breeder wants to ensure their stock is not used for haphazard breeding of registered stock then they can endorse the KC registration certificate 'Progeny not eligible for registration', this can be permanent for if the dog turns out well and has it's breed specific health checks then they may remove it at any time in order to allow the owner to bred KC registrable puppies.

I know some breeders withhold the papers from pet quality or non standard pups, but can see no god reason for doing so as endorsement will do the same.  I suspect though that some breeders prefer not to acknowledge the existence of the non standard pups by not registering them.

Unless a breeder sells neutered puppies they have no way of preventing them being bred from whether sold without papers or with endorsed ones, all they can do is prevent the resulting offspring getting the KC reg.

Personally I think all pups of a litter should be registered, and endorsements put on, but many people do only register a couple from each litter. If your dog is well bred, from a reputable breeder and with a good pedigree and you don't want to show him then there's no need to feel cheated. Registration only costs £12 per puppy, the money you paid was for the rearing of the pup and to go towards health tests for parents and time spent campaiging etc.

ditto tigger 2

Registration only costs £12 (when the pup is registered as part of the litter - I think if registered separately the cost is higher) so personally that's what I'd want, not just a pedigree. But the breeder was open with you, not trying to hide the fact that the pup you wanted wasn't registered, so that's a plus. Your pup cost just the same as the others to rear, so theoretically charging the same price is fair.

Yes, but not fair if the other pups have been registered and you are still charged the same price.

When you think about the price of a puppy, what's £12, especially when you've been told that the pup's not registered? If the others were priced substantially higher then that would be a rip-off.

Yes again, but I am getting at the fact that the puppy really should have been registered if you are charging other registered puppies at the same price. I agree entirely with what you are saying. I sell all my puppies at the same price whether show quality or pet quality as the puppies have been reared exactly the same, on the same food and given the same attention. I just think, like in earlier posts, that all the breeder needed to do was endorse the puppy. I endorse all of mine, even if someone is wanting to show. I am happy to lift the endorsement if they can prove that they have had all the relevant health checks done.

I actually sell my mismarks for less than the 'going rate', but all the pups in the litter are registered and endorsed, because I'm willing to lift the endorsements later if the dog proves suitable. It's not unusual for people who buy a pup 'just as a pet' change their minds and fancy having a go at showing, and it'd be a shame if they weren't able to. The mismarks, however, will never have the endorsements lifted.

What, to me, seems odd here is that the OP was told they could have the registration at a later date should they decide to show. Why not just have them all reg'd at the same time? Much easier for everyone involved.

I agree, that's very odd. As has been pointed out, it's not as if it's expensive, or even any more trouble (other than thinking of the actual names) to put 10 puppies on the registration form rather than 5.

It is possible that they have registered all the puppies but have held onto some of the papers or looking at the worst case scenario will be looking to charge for papers at a later date.

I think it very odd and to me a bit concerning.

Even if you are the type that doesn't want to hand over papers for whatever reason (all be it either a bit strange or a bit too controlling IMHO) the litter should have all at least been registered and the papers kept back and filed by the breeder.  

Not saying this is the case here but could it be because some breeders breed quite high numbers and are being careful for tax possibly or avoidance of breeders licencing etc.

"I actually sell my mismarks for less than the 'going rate" we did the same with a wee boy with a slightly crooked tail. All the other pups the owners had good potential to show, he never would have been able to. (he's running around a lovely moor now being spoiled rotten)

you wouldnt catch me paying the same price for a pet quality puppy and a show quality puppy

Other than mismarks and deformities, how do you prove show quality or otherwise at the age pups leave??   If the litter is well bred then they will be like peas in a pod and difficult to tell apart.  Even an experienced breeder is taking a chance on keeping one to show, there are no guarantees and often promising pups do not fulfil a breeders hopes, so why should they be different prices when they've all got the same genes and have all had the same time, money and commitment??

>they've all got the same genes

Not exactly - no more than you and your brothers and sisters (if you have any) have got exactly the same genes. Similar, but they all inherit a slightly different combination of the parents' genes. If they all had exactly the same genes they'd all be identical twins/ triplets/ quads (depending on litter size) - clones. But I understand your point.

Sorry JG didn't put it that very well did I ?

That's what I meant tho, all pups in the litter have the same breeding (unless the bitch mismated) the genes are in their background - regardless of whether they express them ;)

As some of you may know, I used to breed and show Burmese, I could spot a good kitten a mile off and was rarely wrong.  My litters were always really even and healthy and choosing a show kitten was really nit picking.  So why was it that the kitten I kept as a show prospect (basically pick of the litter), while gorgeous, just wasn't as good when adult as the ones I let go?   Now they were truely stunning as adults -awsome  while the one I kept was merely very good!!   Sods law really :rolleyes:

i think i took the pet quality part wrong i didnt mean well bred pet quality i meant only a couple of champs in pedigree, medi ocre(?) looking dog and bitch, thats what i call pet quality not puppys that have say 20 champs in 5 generations, i just bought a new pup and when i was looking for a new pup i phoned about a litter that were for sale in the area i live the sire had 2 champs in 5 generations and the mother had none they had been reared on bakers complete and the bitch wasnt great looking and the price of the pups was £500. i didnt buy one of these pups as they werent what i was looking for plus too much money for what they were IMO. i bought a pup for the same price the sire has 18 champions in 5 generations and between 2006 and 2007 won 60 first prizes out of 63 shows and the mother is well bred too and a cracking looking bitch and i traveled 550 mile round trip to get him. i wouldnt call that pet quality

TBH hayley123, regardless of how many or how few red lines are in a pedigree it goes for nowt unless both sides are well matched for pheno and geno type.

I can think of 2 record holding DCC winners in their breeds (just off the top of my head! doubtless across so many breeds and groups these could be well into double figures +) that were *very* rarely used at stud because despite their very high profile successes they were not producers - unless a breeder knows what they are doing then looking for multi champions as the main criteria (whether as breeder or prospective exhibitor) is in all honesty neither here nor there.

I've also seen more than a few examples which, if going by pedigree colour alone appear to be "bred in the purple" but oh how their breeders cringe when they show up in the ring ;)

I hope your youngster turns out to be a star, in and out of the ring.

regards, Teri

I was typing at the same time (and with the same thoughts) as you Teri, but as usual you've managed to phrase it better :)

Now't wrong with your phrasing T2 :)

both sides are matched pheno and geno typically they are from the same breeding not too close though and are the same height, build, color etc

Well that's always a good start :)  Fingers crossed.

>i wouldnt call that pet quality  

I had to laugh at this Hayley...the number of champions in a pedigree does not mean the pup is or isn't pet quality - if only it were that simple :D  Yes, it may be from good lines, but even a champion has faults and the breeder has to know each dog in the last 3 generations at least and know all their good and bad points to know which dog and bitch complement each other. Even then there's no guarantee that every pup will be show quality, in fact that would be quite rare :)

It is almost like saying every pup in a litter from 2 champions will be "Top drawer"  show quality. If you get one top drawer most are happy.

Hayley,

You have it all wrong I am afraid. I know this will sound awful and I mean it kindly but that is a very novice way to look at dogs and pedigrees.

Some of the top dogs in the country come from pedigrees not bright red but of a pedgree full of quality , healthy dogs. You have to remember that even with a "in the red" pedigree a crap dog bred to a crap bitch statistically with produce crap pups.  ( Sorry if I am not allow to use that terminology)

You have to look at two things, the dogs in the pedigree regardless of status baring in mind it is very very hard to make a UK champion up and also the quality of the dog and the dogs behind that dog.   Some breeds have top winning dogs that take the cream of the CC's for 5-7 years preventing some equally good dogs from being made up.

If you came to my house right now and looked at 3 generations of bitches and then looked at their pedgrees the youngest with the least red in the pedigree is by far the better example of the breed. In both quality, breed type and temperament.  She is 3rd generation of select breeding of type and quality not red pedigrees.  There are a lot of quality dogs around without titles BUT what you have to look closely and have understanding of the lines in your pedigree. Nobody wants a pediree full of " lucky lass" & " hopeful Henry"  , I am certainly not saying this is acceptable, that is entirely different to a pedigree full of quality dogs whether titled or not.  People can't show all their stock.

I remember someone saying to a freind of mine after she had went unplaced at a show for say the 4th time.

"she has a fantastic pedigree though",    My freind replied, " well take the pedigree in next time". 

I always thought it was a very good example.

And you wouldn't catch me charging differently :) 

They all cost the same to breed, rear and socialise - and, apart from in breeds where there are obvious mismarks (very unlikely in my own), if it's a well thought out litter and gone to plan (Mother Nature can throw spanners in the works of the best laid ones of course :rolleyes: ) then there should be a fair bit of nit-picking between the best pups as show prospects :)  Even then, there are no guarantees so the other side of the coin is that it is hardly fair to charge a premium for a show quality puppy when for eg the bite could go at a much later date ......

regards, Teri

Not every dog/bitch worthy of CH status becomes a champion :rolleyes: it also depends on how often/long they are shown (very expensive business) and how many other dogs/bitches are competing with them.  Sometimes it might be only one dog or bitch taking all the available CCs for quite some time - the breed record holder, which might mean a lot of good dogs get passed over.  A bitch especially, will have fewer occasions to be made up simply because of her seasons and time out for a litter :rolleyes: - doesn't mean she's no good ;)   On a pedigree cert there may be a few dogs/Bs with multiple RCCs - but these will never show up as they don't count towards a title, despite having the same wording as the CC - considered worthy of being a champion ;)  

One of my dogs took reserve BIS at a breed club ch show and only had the RBCC - she beat the DCC winner!  but it won't show up as a red line on her pedigree cert ;) and still doesn't count towards a CC ;)

Very true Dill :)

Equally some breeds may only have had CC status for a relatively short period compared to others so not much opportunity to have a written pedigree ablaze with red! 

Over and above which those breeders wishing to retain the older, original lines in some breeds may have pedigrees which indeed contain top winning dogs of yester-year that would have easily been Champs had tickets been around in their hay day so even in the 3rd and possibly 2nd generation there could be a low number of names in red to impress the uninitiated ;)

If selection for top show and breeding specimens was so straightforward we'd all have the dog game sussed :P

regards, Teri

If selection for top show and breeding specimens was so straightforward we'd all have the dog game sussed
and plenty of red pedigrees :-D

Well they cost the same to rear and any breeder charging more for show potential is daft as it can't be guaranteed at all. 

All my pups are sold as companions first and foremost, and some of the most promising have never been shown despite loads of promise, another never intended to show and went on to make up a champion. 

My first champion was the pick of her litter but sold as a Pet, I had her back and showed her.

I can understand a slight reduction for non standard colours or mis marks, but to be honest as most of the correctly marked ones will also never be shown or bred from and be pets the same I don't see why really.

The top stud dog in my breed ( indeed top six in his group) is not a champion nor are his parents. He didn't do great things in the show ring either.

I too sell all my puppies for the same price.......... as Brainless said, they are sold as companions first and foremost

I can think of a good producing boxer just now that has produced some very good stuff and I am sure he isn't titled.

And he's Scottish!!!

Thats the one I am thinking off  ( I think) :-D

Love them ( A little off topic I know) but can't bare them with tails. :-)  just me I guess.

Think he's just got made up. No I don't think I will breed another boxer because I don't personally like them with tails either.May have to stick to just my little 'uns now.:D

LOL You know I had a quick look last night after the post and thought " Oh he has been made up".. It didn't come quick and easy though as he seems to have been around for ever :-)  Some lovely off spring.

Can't remember what others you had , I think you told me but I am forgetful :-) 

most people who want a dog as a companion cant afford to pay such high prices for a pet, havent you ever sold a good quality puppy at a knocked down price or even given away a good quality puppy to some one who desperately wanted one, would give a good home etc but just couldnt afford to pay loads for a pup?

hayley, that's a tricky question. After all, how does a breeder know that the truth is being told? Soemone could say that they are on benefits, but have a really well paid job, so they expect to get a decent dog at a reduced price. You will always get someone trying to pull the wool over your eyes. If, on the other hand, you know the person quite well, and know that the home would be a good one, then there are ways of getting around it. Joint ownership could be a way. On the whole though, I don't think many breeders would. If you can't afford to pay for the dog, can you afford the vet's bill when needed? Generalising here, but if you can't save up to pay the full price, are you likely to pay the insurance premium every month? So what happens when the dog gets ill?

I don't believe my breed is overpriced.  A pup is £550 - £600 which many people will pay for a new TV set or stereo.  They would pay that for a couple of the latest games consoles or mobile phones for that matter.  For me the price is the price, and anyone who attempted to haggle (as mentioned in a recent post) would be sent packing.

As I would expect most of my puppy buyers to ahve reserached and contacted me before or just after a bitch is amted they ahve months in which to save the purchase price.

Even as a single parent I saved up for my puppy, which cost in real terms the same money as they do now.  My pups cost about 60% of my 20 year old daughters take home salary.

My first dog in 1988 cost me a larger proportion of mine.

havent you ever sold a good quality puppy at a knocked down price or even given away a good quality puppy to some one who desperately wanted one, would give a good home etc but just couldnt afford to pay loads for a pup?

Yes, once, and it was an accidental crossbreed so not even a pedigree dog (but still a wellreared pup!). The buyer explained in detail about her situation, how she had made sure she could afford vet fees, food etc, but could not afford a purchase price at that moment in time. I was taken in by all of it. She was so convincing, speaking of her elderly dog that had just died, all she did for it etc. She took the pup, then sold it on for a profit and I have never managed to find out where my pup went. Turned out she did this more or less for a LIVING! I was neither the first nor last to fall for her story.

Anyone wanting a pup can have one simply by saving up -even if it takes years. I saved up for 2 years to get a Papillon bitch that was not just a pet. I had a kitten buyer once that saved up for months to be able to afford a pedigree kitten. She did so by giving up smoking. The kitten ended up being called -Ciggy! There are always ways, and I don't see why anyone HAS to have a pup INSTANTLY.

>havent you ever sold a good quality puppy at a knocked down price or even given away a good quality puppy to some one who desperately wanted one

Only if the new owner was a personal friend who I knew wasn't spinning me a line, whose circumstances I knew. Don't get me wrong, I do all the vetting of prospective owners that I can, and if they live far afield then fellow club members in their area will go and check further if I have doubts (which has proved useful). But if I badly want something then I save up, therefore I know that other people can too.

Nobody needs (they may want one, but that's not the same thing) a puppy at all, let alone one now.

As has been said previously, a TV etc will cost about the same price as a puppy. If the initial cost is a problem, how does a breeder know the new owner will be able to afford the upkeep of the puppy?

Hi

I bought a miniature long dachsund from a reputable breeder who is a judge and i didnt get any KC papers. I can have them if i want them but i dont need them. She keeps them on file and has offered me them. My baby was bought purely as a pet and i have no want to show her. I was going to breed (hence why i needed the papers back) but im not experienced enough so after a chat with her breeder i have changed my mind.
On the subject of price.....if somebody wants a "pedigree" puppy then i think they should pay "pedigree" prices. I agree that all the pups from the same litter have been raised the same, therefore should be priced the same or similar regardless of whether they are potential champions or not. Sometimes people want a pedigree puppy just because of the fashion or snobbery. I wanted mine because its the only breed i know anything about as ive had them since childhood. I paid £600 and am going to pay around that maybe more for another one from the same breeder when our older girl is with us no more. If someone cant afford to pay then they should either save or not get a pedigree pup.
This is just my opinion.
Kim xx