|
Location: Co. Durham, UK
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,213
|
|
Originally Posted by
morganstar
Whos judging you and do they have a minor puppy class.
Gracies 20 days too young, and we have a mp class not fair ;D
It's Trudy Topliss (Beresford) and yes it would be MP.
Originally Posted by
mo
I havent read all the post, sorry, but I find it strange that a breeder would try and prevent a dog from their breeding being shown, if there wasnt a reason for it? ie bite incorrect, very poor front, bad feet, pasterns, overangulated incorrect coat, to me the dog looks fine but I dont know the breed standard. and I am presuming the breeder does? I just dont get the "jealous" angle, and that they sold the wrong pup and have sour grapes? I am guessing there is a fault that has not been noticed by the owner because they adore thier dog, it is ALWAYS difficult to critique your own dog. I guess the only way you are going to find out for definate is by showing the dog and seeing if he is faulted for anything or if he takes the ring by storm lol
Mo
I'll take him to Ringcraft first and see what they think of him, always a good way to get an idea of any major faults, although the only reason they're stating he isn't for the show ring was because he was the quiet one of the litter up to 8 weeks old?
Originally Posted by
JoedeeUK
I know the people who bred your parents puppy & TBH I'm not surprised at their attitude. Nothing to do with you, but they aren't(being PC here)not the best of losers in show competitions, as I have witnessed first hand over the years-including hearing some very unpleasant remarks about a dog that beat theirs in the ring(the other dog went on to get made up into a full champion & it wasn't the same breed as theirs).
If you want to show him & there's nothing to stop you-go for it is my advice, there's nothing they can do to stop you. I would love to see what reason they could give a court for selling a puppy at full price & then trying to stop it being shown because they don't want it to be !!!
I will take him to a few shows, see how he gets on. I don't like going against their wishes, but if they can't give me a good reason why I can't show him then I'll go ahead and take him.
Originally Posted by
Anne-Marie
Well, I've never heard the like of that before!
How utterly bizarre?
You'd think they would be actively encouraging their puppy buyers to show if the dog has enough promise, not demanding them not to.
It does make you wonder what their motives are for stating this. I have to say it isn't unheard of for people to be funny about what competition they have in the ring, perhaps they think they are increasing their chances of winning by not allowing promising progency to be against them? (I'd be the opposite and be proud that someone wanted to show my dogs offspring!!!)
I'd ignore it as it sounds un-enforcable and go ahead with showing. I mean, what harm are you doing, enjoying a hobby for heavens sake.
It is bizarre and tbh I'm very disappointed they've still said no with such an irrelevant reason. Like people have said, you'd think they'd be happy he's more confident now!
Originally Posted by
spot
Regardless of the buyers accepting the contract as it was written? Your right they probably couldn’t stop it – but does not make it morally right to go against a contract you signed and accepted the terms.
Obviously I can see the difference between breeding and showing! But how can you advise someone to ignore one part of the contract but adhere to another?
As I said Rips is responsible and Im sure wouldn’t consider breeding anyway but there are those that will and having read some of the responses on here will think its fine to just chuck the contract away.
If someone wants to breed the dog then as you say they can – could they not then put restrictions on the pups saying that they are to be pets only and so will not register the pups?
I just don’t understand how people can advise someone to ignore the breeders wishes on one part, yet say its wrong on another part whether it be showing, breeding, selling on or moving abroad, or even returning the dog. Surely we should be encouraging people to adhere to what breeders, such as you, want for their pups and not saying stuff the contract and show them anyway?
If you had restrictions on one of your pups that you did not feel was a good enough example to show would you advise your owners to ignore that bit?
Surely if someone signs a contract having read it they have accepted the restrictions on it?
As has been said, it was stated they wanted this dog as a pet, not for showing and so the breeders sold them the dog in good faith that they were not going to show. Is not the onus on the buyers to be more clear with their intentions?
How would you feel if someone advised the buyers to sign the dog over to someone so that any and all of the restrictions were no longer enforceable anyway
This thread isn't about breeding, it's about showing. If you wish to debate breeding restrictions then please start a thread about it.
Although I'd not normally go against a persons wishes, in this instance I did the right thing and contacted the breeder to explain the wish to show the pup. The reason they came back with why I couldn't just doesn't make sense, so morality doesn't come into it for me. Had they given a justified reason why not then fair enough, but to say he isn't confident enough is rubbish. They haven't seen him since he was 8 weeks old, how on earth can they know what his character is like. As it happens since my parents took him on he's never been quiet!
So we could sue for mis selling!
Originally Posted by
Shona
double dare ya....go on go on go on
Ha ha, you just wanna see me with egg on me face don't ya?
Originally Posted by
mo
I have contracts with my pup owners, as well as the KC papers, the dogs I bred that were pet quality, I had it written in my contract that they are pet quality and the owners were advised they are not for showing, included in my contract it is explained that the pups ASLO have restrictions on their KC registration papers, and that they are not to be bred from, I would like to think that the owners respect my contract as well as the KC registration restrictions in all areas. thankfully the reason they are pet quality is their coats are incorrect and it is a very noticeable fault, and they have now been neutered and/spayed. I think if a breeder has made the effort to have a contract put together, then we should not be advising anyone to break that contract(if a contract was made that is).
Mo
But this is it, if it was because of a fault etc then fair enough, but saying that it's because he wasn't confident enough at 8 weeks old just doesn't make sense to me.
I certainly don't like the idea of breaking the agreement, but their reasoning just doesn't make sense to me. Showing him will only be a fun activity for him, if it isn't he won't go - simple as that.