My daughter, 8 weeks ago bought a lovely puppy from a breeder who was recommended to her. She is a top breeder in this rare-ish line. Shows with good results.

The KC paperwork was not available at the time of pick up. She said she would send it on along with copies of health tests and full invoice.

My daughter paid by bank transfer prior to picking up the puppy - she had seen it some 3 weeks previously and left a small deposit, the receipt for which was sent to her mobile. She

The KC have now arrived and the breeder is not showing as the breeder. Some other persons name at a different address although in the same city. There was no copy of health tests as promised and no receipt. The microchip paperwork was not registered by the breeder but given to my daughter for her to register herself.

My daughter has twice requested the receipt and health test copies, and queried why the 'breeder' 'seller' of the puppy is not showing as the named breeder with that particular breeders Affix, at that address.

She will no longer response to my daughters emails, calls regarding the clarity of the breeder or request for the promised receipt and paperwork.

Help me out here, someone, if you can. Is this a normal practice to be sold a puppy from whom you thought was the breeder with that breeders affix, only to find that the paperwork shows someone else as the breeder with no affix, at a different address and none of the parentage leading back to that particular breeder. Is something rather fishy?

> The microchip paperwork was not registered by the breeder but given to my daughter for her to register herself

The first person to be on the microchip is supposed to be the breeder

I have to say with all you have written in the post...alarm bells are ringing very loud to me

Whoever chipped the puppy MUST register the chip to the breeder before sale & copies of the chip registration can be downloaded at the time of registration. I believe Petlog no longer send out registration certificates if an E mail is included in the registration.

Did your daughter see the whole litter with the mother ? Could her puppy be a stud fee puppy ?

It would be interesting if the breeder listed on the KC paperwork was contacted to see what their response is

All sounds dodgy. You can look up health test results on the KC website.

Looked on KC and doesn't specify what health test results.

My daughter registered the puppy to herself with the chip paperwork with Pet Log. The breeder did not register the puppy first.

Was just going to wait until anyone one here could shed some light on this practice.

Now going to write to the name and address of the breeder on the paperwork and see what they have to say before contacting the KC.

I wonder if it is to avoid tax as my daughter paid bank transfer with just the account number and sort code. Forgot to mention, that she did also request the name of the holder of this bank account.

Yes she did see the puppy with the litter - but there again, it now comes to light that she had 3 further litters of this breed and one of another one - all nearly the same age.

She has now sold the mother -I wonder, now thinking about it, if this mother is the actual mother on the paperwork and if she already had whelped too many litters to register. Wow, is my mind running overtime.

So many alarm bells...all extremely dodgy

Sadly, all sounding very dodgy.  You could try talking to Trading Standards, assuming you have kept all correspondence.

It really is time some of these unscrupulous breeders were bought to task

Saying that, I hope everything can be sorted out asap

We are now going to contact the person on the KC documents to ask for an explanation. Depending upon the outcome, we will speak to KC first and take it from there

The only good thing is that the puppy is fine - healthy and happy.

As an aside: this person is a retired police officer., ex prison officer. (well if this is also to be believed)

I think that no matter which way you look at this, it's fraud. I hope you get some satisfactory answers from the breeder listed on the KC registration papers but it all sounds very dodgy indeed.

I think that no matter which way you look at this, it's fraud.

There would have to be some kind of hard copy evidence or maybe some kind of audio recording with a statement before any discussion took place that the conversation was being recorded, the way the poster has written it's not clear at all if anything other than phone calls or possible person to person recommendations/suggestions have taken place.

> Looked on KC and doesn't specify what health test results.

What breed is it?
If the parents are health tested for something the KC records it will be on mykc, eye tests in some breeds will say the dog is tested and results with the owner rather that the results of the test though.

> but there again, it now comes to light that she had 3 further litters of this breed and one of another one - all nearly the same age.

So that's 5 litters around the same time. Are they a council licenced breeder? If not that could explain why this pups litter registration is in another's name and adress so they can get around needing a lience once you breed enough litters to require one.

Tommy
Whoever chipped the puppy MUST register the chip to the breeder before sale & copies of the chip registration can be downloaded at the time of registration
|
But what about European imports which would only fall under any laws (if any) their particular homeland had, would the dogs be illegal here in some way?

> But what about European imports which would only fall under any laws (if any) their particular homeland had, would the dogs be illegal here in some way?

No why would they as their breeder is not in the UK so as you say are not bound by our laws. So their breeders are free to not chip into their name if their laws allow.

The reason UK breeders must is because a dog can't be transferred to a new keepership untill it is microchipped. The chip needs to be registered in the current keepers name (keeper does not mean owner) so as the breeder needs to chip before the pup can leave, they are then the current keeper so they must be on the chip.

All dogs entering the UK should have a passport so would all ready be microchipped . .

All dogs entering the UK should have a passport

Yes, got that thanks

Jo Stocksbridge,

Sorry for late response, had no wi fi for two days. Will message you.

There were telephone calls, texts and emails along with obviously personal visits.

We will ring the relevant council tomorrow to see if she is registered as you make a good point, one that I had overlooked.

Again, regarding chipping. She chipped the puppy in front of my daughter and just gave the paperwork to my daughter to fill in and post to petiole. My daughter is the first named on the microchip.

Forgot to mention: She also boards dogs - don't think she has a license but does charge. Weekly or day rate if just for the day. I cannot see how she would pass the council inspection or requirements. Think I will ask the council about this at the same time.

You can easily look this up on line. Go to the relevant local authority web page and you will find a list of licenced  breeders. then you will be armed with more information.

I have tried. The facility does not appear to be available.

The only facility, is a mix of all licenses and when I put in the address it brings up every page - over 8000 of them.

I'm just going to initially email the address given and ask about license for the breeders address - including home boarding, and license for the address on the KC papers.

In terms of microchipping, the breeder MUST be the first named owner on the puppy's chip registration - that's the law.  (I'm an accredited microchipper.) 

So you can report her in terms of that alone...

It might be worth giving Trevor Cooper of Dog Law a call and paying for a phone consult - it sounds like a complex case with many different factors involved. 

Also have in mind what outcome you want:  Is your daughter bonded to the puppy, or would she be happy to return the puppy for a full refund?  What outcome does she want to achieve?  Or is it to make sure that similar fraudulent stuff doesn't keep happening by this breeder?

Thanks onetwothreefour,

Daughter is very much bonded to the puppy and does not want a refund. She is committed.

What she wants is quite simple really: A receipt/invoice for the amount she paid for the puppy..read too may stories that microchip is not proof of ownership. And this is also required for Insurance purposes if there is a problem.

A copy of the test results (have now found that the parents were only eye tested, but as the results are with the 'breeder', this does not mean they were normal) No other tests were carried out.

Quote from her website: XXXXX Kennels is the first in the UK to continually health screen all our dogs whether they are for show, pleasure or breeding. With our dogs you can rest assured you are getting the best bred and healthiest dogs in the United Kingdom and the World.

We test for: Eyes (all disorders) Hearing - UK standard hearing test. Bones: All disorders (hips/elbows/knees.

                : Heart (ECG test on all dogs from birth) Liver - function and haemophilia, Coats, Genetic for curly, straight and colour.

We want confirmation of who bred the puppy. Mind is whizzing..are the KC papers forged. Could puppy be result of breeding between another sire and dam.. Could the breeder on the paperwork register the puppy to his sire and dam and puppy been bred from supposed breeders sire and dam.

If she would just respond to my daughter, then maybe there is just a simple and genuine explanation. The fact that she won't is what is causing the suspicion.

And yes, seeming as there is something not quite right, I would seriously want to prevent her from carrying on this practice.

She also runs as admin 3 different Facebook groups relating to doggy stuff, mainly breeding (did not know about these sites previously to getting the puppy) and her personal Facebook group she quotes: 'Life is about integrity, not about screwing your dogs because they bring undeclared income'...

>We test for: .......... Hearing - UK standard hearing test ...........

If she means BAER why not put that? Her wording suggests she's just dropping a saucepan to see if a pup reacts!

Wow.....

I just copied and pasted the quote from "breeders" website into google and it came up with two kennels. Upon further investigation, they seem to be partnered with each other, with one stating "AXXXX HXXXX follow the same health testing procedure as our parent kennel, VXXXX Kennels."

Now I'm assuming your daughter bought her puppy from kennel "V" but it seems to have come from kennel "A" instead? I'm not a breeder so I don't know if this is a common thing or dodgy, although as a buyer I would expect to have it explained to me where my puppy was coming from

I also googled the quote from the breeder's website.

The following quotes from the website of V state:

ALWAYS check that the dog has GENUINE health certificates. Many 'shady' breeders have been known to use photo editing software to forge authenticity.

NEVER buy a puppy or dog without looking at the home of the breeder.
ALWAYS check that it is the breeder's home.

ASK how many times your chosen breeder breeds each bitch (or dog). Check with the Kennel Clubs to verify how many litters have been registered per bitch. Too often it turns out that many show exhibitors are well known puppy farmers (run puppy mills)..

If this is the same breeder where your daughter's pup came from, and they don't supply you with the correct paperwork, then I think Trading Standards will have a field day.

There's a lot of discrepancies here, which could be legitimate - if only the breeder responded to questions.
A really good, dedicated and caring breeder would be available at all times, especially with such a very young pup, for any and all worries/concerns/whatever as they'd be worried about their babies - mine is and I've read enough from breeders on here to know how much so many breeders on here do.
Unfortunately, some people are expert at marketing themselves (often belittling others)

I wouldn't worry about ownership - possession being 9/10 .. microchipping doesn't prove ownership but who the pup is registered to by the KC may count- as would vet registration.

I really feel for you all ,as you've tried to get the best and do the right thing but now don't know exactly what you've got

I'm glad you're enjoying the pup

#*ETA# I think that payment by bank transfer has safeguards built in is proof of purchase

Ownership is not proved by KC registration. It is the person who paid for the dog who is the owner. I know because I took legal advice on a similar thing some years ago.

It is the person who paid for the dog who is the owner.

Unless that person gives it to somebody else -the moment they do, they relinquish ownership. So you could buy a dog as a gift for somebody and you'd not be the owner even though you paid for it. (My legal advice on that was obtained 3 weeks ago. ) Not that it is relevant in this case, in this case the OP has no need to worry about ownership, like you say.

Curious to know what, if any, the outcome has been with regard to the puppy.

Will update you at a future time as things 'are being investigated' by several agencies, along with the KC.

When one keeps digging, a lot of muck is revealed.