well im either way, have owned both and do own both

mmmm...maybe its different from breed to breed.I know in our breed pups that are run on and don't make the grade are rehomed usually with a donation required for rescue!
Also with the shiba I had from the same situation I paid a nominal fee to rescue.
Rotties(KC reg...well bred) seem to go for £600-650.IMO £500 for a 8 month old dog with a bad mouth is rediculous.I would expect to pay a nominal fee or IMO a good breeder would be looking for a good home WITHOUT passing on papers.

I disagree. Consider the amount already spend, jabs, food, other health care, [ hopefully ] health tests before the litter was bred, the time spent training, socialising etc etc, cost of registration, not forgetting he still cost as much to rear as a puppy as the rest of the litter.

If the breeder is sure the new owner will adhere to a no breeding clause, why should`nt they pass on the papers ? Papers handed in to rescues are not passed on, which is absolutely fine and totally understandable, but a part of me would very much have liked to have the papers handed in with two of my boys just for reference.

All too often people are told a dog is a full pedigree, registered, and papers will be forwarded - often those papers never arrive because they never existed in the first place.

As far as a nominal fee goes, well yep thats one way for people to get a cut price dog. Some breeds *must* be watched out for extra-carefully to make sure they are not being bought cheap for the wrong reasons, [ or wrong uses more to the point, especially those seen as `hard`...].

People not intending on doing right by a dog prefer to get them as cheap as possible and only ever look for those dogs.
In asking a price as in this case, it will put most such `wrong uns` off straight away and they`ll go back to the cheapie `pedigree` dog ads where everyone else purely wanting a cheap deal tend to look, [ and where the dogs involved wont have been health tested you can bet ].

Rescues which have a standard adoption fee, [ usually somewhere between one and two hundred quid ], will tell you that fee comes nowhere close to covering costs incurred and thats without the health screening before the dogs were born, puppy care, puppy packs, registration fee`s, costs incurred during the dams pregnancy, stud fee`s, and not usually nine months worth of training and socialising.

Anyone who knows me knows I am pro-rescue through and through and have less than glowing comments to make regarding breeding in general but I have to say my gut reation is that this breeder is wanting to get the very best possible home for this boy, and I feel, [ on instinct alone and with only the original post to go on so of course I could be wrong ! ], that the fee for the boy is more to put off the wrong sort of interest than to take as nothing but a bank balance inflater.

Consider as well, some crossbreeds, not health tested and if they are the health tests are possibly not of much use when the results of crossbreeding are varied within a litter and that will include potential health issues, are sold for £1,200 and more, can`t be Shown nor properly registered, should not be bred from, [ I can`t stand the fashion for `designer dog` breeding, rescues are full of crossbreeds of all types and sizes already, no one `needs` to be breeding more on purpose imo ].
Compared to that, £500 for a well bred healthy pedigree dog [ assuming thats the case ], is a snip !

i have not registerd pups in the past,im not a puppy farmer,all my pups are fed top quality food,i health test all my bitches and sires,they go for annual heart checks,for my peace of mind,not anyone elses,i sit with my girls when the go into labour till the last pup is born,and then sleep with them for the first three weeks,its not easy money,as some ppl think it is,the reason some arent registed is occasionally i will have a mismark,they go to good pet homes,i keep in touch with every single new owner,i recieve photos and visits,so not all non-registerd pups was born in a barn with no heat.lamp,no supervision with a dam that is bred on everyseason,no vet visits,and more importantly no health checks,and no love,

I didnt say all people that dont register puppies are puppyfarmers (although a shocking majority are!!) but i still have yet to see one legitimate reason not to register puppies. Because you choose not to.. WHY? I honestly cant understand it. Im not trying to argue here, i am just genuinely baffled. I can see the point of view of working people.. But still, i dont see how registering with the KC has anything to do with showing??? Am i missing something here?

Leo - you didnt really answer why your dogs werent registered. The breeder had apparently done all the health checks relevant to their breed it seems? So why not pay that small fee to register them? I dont understand it. Did you not enquire as to why they chose not to? Even if the dog was just intended as a pet, its always best to make sure. At the very least it would have been advisable (if the parents themselves were registered!!) to try to find out if the health certificates you were shown were infact for the parents. Im not saying in your case they werent, but surely you can see where im coming from? You can only trust people so far when buying a puppy. We went to visit someone when we were looking for our very first lab, she had a lovely house, the bitch was in there with her pups, she showed us her garden which looked very dog friendly, there were kids, other pets etc (ie the kind of house you want your pet to be brought up in!!). We later found out that this breeder was actually a puppy farmer, who brings the bitch and pups out of the sheds they're usually in for potential buyers to see. The litter we were looking at would have been KC registered, but she apparently sells half registered and half not, so she can have twice as many litters from each dog. Shocking, but im sure she's not the only person in this country doing it. You have to be SO careful.

Zoeybeau - Do you mean that only the mismarked dogs aren't registered? I suppose i can understand that, although if it were me i would register them with restrictions and explain to the new owners that the dog must not be bred from. Of course, you cant stop people breeding them, and you will get unscrupulous people who will (and sell them on unregistered), but i would prefer, if i had a puppy with a fault, to have it registered with the KC so it is at least to some degree traceable.

Just to add this almost relevant point... In our last litter of labs we sadly had one beautiful little boy born with a hole in his diaphragm. He had surgery (which we paid for) at 5 weeks and thankfully he pulled through that and recovered well, although it took some months. That little puppy we gave away to friends to ensure we could keep an eye on him as he grew. We requested that they take him to the vet that did the surgery for at least annual check ups and that they keep us updated with his progress. We made them aware of his fault, which should not cause any long term problems at all but did not expect any money for him, the most important thing was a good, loving home where we could keep in touch with him.

He went to them fully KC registered with endorsements.

I'm coming at this from a similar position to Patch (the pro-rescue - my family only have rescues dogs, as there are just too many out there crying out for loving homes for us to ever consider going to a breeder again.) So, not surprisingly, I am thoroughly agreed that this breeder seems to be just interested in finding a good home for the dog. If they were trying to recoup costs, well after 8 months it would be a lost cause anyway, but they could definitely get more money by advertising without mentioning the fault, and find some clueless buyer, who may likely not be a responsible owner, and the dog might end in rescue like so many others. It is surely down to what this person feels it is worth to her to have a lovely pet, who may not be perfect, but who has had good socialisation, and probably some training too, and if it is a good breeder, some future backup from them too, if any behavioural problems occur.

i have a lot of people just looking pet puppies the fact i have kc papers on the parents dont matter to alot of ppl,as long as the parents are health tested and pups are tested and vaccinated before they go to new homes are the only thing that appeals to them,i dont know why some people arent botherd by kc papers as long as there pup is healthy,if i was trying to re-home a 8 mth old and i never have but hypothetically,a good home would be all i would be looking for,even if id health checked and vaccinated him,iv read the origanal post,and id have kept the pup,hoping hed be something he,d not turned out to be,i dont think the money would be important,if its good home your looking for,iv also had ppl looking just pets and want to check over all my paper work to make sure its un to scratch,but its only been a handfull iv not registerd and that was because they didnt want them done,

i understand them trying to recoprate costs back,but I would be looking for just a good home.

Zoeybeau - Do you mean that only the mismarked dogs aren't registered? I suppose i can understand that, although if it were me i would register them with restrictions and explain to the new owners that the dog must not be bred from. Of course, you cant stop people breeding them, and you will get unscrupulous people who will (and sell them on unregistered), but i would prefer, if i had a puppy with a fault, to have it registered with the KC so it is at least to some degree traceable.


i keep in touch with ALL pups not just the few un registered,iwill explain that they are mismarked and the ppl i have chose for this puppy didnt want them registerd,a few years back a lady tried to sell me a puppy anything she was saying didnt add up,she claimed shed bred the litter i asked to see here paperwork she showed me the papers didnt add up i reconised the dams name as being one id seen before ,yep i had,on a friends bitches pedigree i dint buy the pup and done some digging when i got home only to realise the btch was now dead.stolen papers.

Oh, one thing I would add, just realised you haven't said anywhere that they got the boy neutered. If they don't want him ever to be bred, there is no reason they wouldn't have gotten this done. That is something that would ring alarm bells. Someone could still buy him and use him for a puppy farm, as they tend to use spurious papers anyway.

I would personally ask them why they haven't had this done, and maybe make it a condition before buying him that they do. From your point of view, it would make him easier to train, apart from anything else.

Just found this thread, all my pups went for £700 each the breed average for a Welshie up here, they were all sold as pets with no guarantees and were all endorsed not to be breed from or exported but I did explain I'd lift the restrictions subject to health checks and the final choice of partner. I was offered £1000 by someone who wanted a solid red bitch (which I didnt have left) for my 9 month old girl. Shes not good enought to show (at the moment hoping a season might help) but i still turned them down.
With Labradoodles changing hands for up wards of £1000 i think youmight find that unless you settle for a older dog throught rescue (and i would seriously consider this if it was you) you might have to bite the bullet and pay the price.
Also it might be worth bearing in mind that I've know idea what the bite of the puppies I've sold and kept will be like at 8 weeks, it really his a lucky guess same with the males and testicles. which is why a lot of older pups find there way back on the market at 6-8 months