Seller's responsibility (NA)

Ken Ibold

Ken Ibold

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
5,889
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Display Name
Ken Ibold
Home Airfield
CRG
Not Aviation. No airplanes involved.

Just want to get some opinions on a situation that has developed, and some of you folks are excellent devil's advocates.

We had a litter of six champion-blood Samoyed puppies to sell. All six seemd like they could be top quality show dogs. All were seen by our vet three times, had proper shots, worming, examinations, paperwork and a clean bill of health. Our sales contract outlines many issues, including language to the effect that the puppy is healthy to the best of our knowledge. We guarantee against the genetic defects of hip displasia and a particular ophthalmologic condition some Sammies have, in which case we will either take the dog back and give a refund or allow the buyer to keep the dog, have it neutered, and then we will give them half the money back. No other genetic or congenital conditions are mentioned by contract.

So one of the owners takes the 8 week old puppy to the vet and the vet gives it medication (frontline and heartworm) we specifically told them twice in writing and twice verbally not to give the dog until at least six months old. Within 3 hours it was severely distressed. I'll spare the details, but within 3 days the puppy was put down. The vet who gave the medication insists it was a congenital liver shunt condition. Our vet (and several others) say the medication killed its liver and the liver dysfunction mimicked the symptoms of the liver shunt condition. We paid for a necropsy, which was inconclusive, as in no shunt was found but the liver, kidneys and brain showed indications similar to what a shunt (or poisoned liver) would have caused.

The buyer wants us to return his purchase price or give him another puppy, plus pay the vet bills, because we "sold him a sick puppy." Our position is that his vet is responsible for poisoning the puppy. In order to try to reach a "fair" settlement, we have thought about offering him his money back even though we do not believe we are contractually obligated to do so. The buyer is sticking to his guns that we need to write him a check for the vet bills as well.

Cathy being a lawyer, we're pretty sure what the "legal" thing to do is, but what's the "right" thing to do?
 
They (and their vet) poisoned their puppy. No way would I let them have another dog. Since Cathy's a lawyer, maybe she could file a lawsuit against their vet for negligence, but I don't know that you would have any standing to bring that suit. Do not reward them for failing to observe your recommendations, resulting in the death of the innocent puppy.
 
Is it known and considered bad practice to give such a puppy those meds at that age? If that is known to kill them -- then -- well it's hard to say any of that is your fault.
 
Are there guidelines for dosing and age on the medications as there are for human medications? If the medications are not recommended for young puppies I would say it's the vet's fault.
 
Did the buyer select the puppy or was it the only one left? If he had a choice, why didn't he select one of the others that have proven to be healthy? If it had been a handshake deal with shady healthcare for the pups, he might have a better argument, but I think he's just trying to work you for the money and the pup.

Is your vet willing to back your position regarding the meds that were prescribed by his vet? Are any vet publications available with specific warnings regarding using the med with Sammies? Any Sammie club documents to that effect? If the other seven are thriving and heeded your admonitions regarding medication, doesn't that validate your position?
 
Ken,

I am really sorry to hear about the experience.

I agree with Cathy on the legal thing, but avoiding litigation is worth something, too. In my business I can't count the number of times I have paid out money I did not think I owed just to resolve matters.

If it were me, I would probably refund the money for the puppy and tell the buyer that even if it was a "sick" puppy, you could not and do not warranty that all of the puppies will be free from any illness. As such, you cannot be responsible for the vet fees.

Also, I would make sure that the customer knows that, should they choose to pursue it further, I would immediately file a cross-claim against his vet. I hope that they aren't close friends!

Let me know what happens and give my best to everyone.

Abram
 
If you told them verbally as well as in writing not to give that medicine and they did anyway, I say screw em.:nono: BUT, I think you did the right thing offering their money back, they saw it as an admission of guilt and now are going for more. :mad2:
 
Is the "twice in writing" signed by the buyer and is it "part of the contract?"
 
Twice in writing and twice verbally is pretty strong admonition NOT to do something...

Me? I would, at most, give them their money back but under NO circumstances would they EVER get another puppy from my house...



N747JB said:
If you told them verbally as well as in writing not to give that medicine and they did anyway, I say screw em.:nono: BUT, I think you did the right thing offering their money back, they saw it as an admission of guilt and now are going for more. :mad2:
Click to expand...

bbchien said:
Is the "twice in writing" signed by the buyer and is it "part of the contract?"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Additional details:

The "twice in writing" is not in the sales contract (well, it is NOW), but is part of a package that we give to buyers that includes shot records, future shot schedule, a CD of calm music we acclimate the puppies to in order to help the transition, a small "pillow" stuffed with the *****'s fur, a stuffed animal, a leash, and a week's supply of the food we've been giving them.

The heartworm medication is routinely given to many dogs at 8 weeks without harm. However, most long-hair dogs, including Samoyeds, are very susceptible to it due to a particular gene, and should not get it until they're more developed. This is the first Sammie puppy this vet has ever treated, and likely did not know that. It's in the veterinary literature. Keep in mind heartworm medicaiton is a systemic poison that kills the parasites if they're present, and this was given by injection. Frontline is also a systemic poison. The two of them together, in our opinion, is what caused the reaction.

Rant: One of the things I hate about modern vets is their eagerness to use systemic poisons to kill things that may or may not even be there. The lifecycle of a heartworm takes almost a year for it to be a hazard. Why are they in such a freakin hurry?

We have not yet offered to refund their money. We are waiting to get the last of the lab tests into our vet's hands so we can make as good a determination as the medical records allow. This guy is a bully who is calling my wife's mom, even, and ranting at her, wanting to be "made whole." So relations are deteriorating somewhat. I don't want to turn this into a legal case, as the dollar value doesn't make it worth it.
 
I belive you should have come to Diana's farm.
Your offer is stellar; but nothing you do is going to satisfy this guy. Let him transgress and make the errors.
 
Medication dosage is based on weight of the animal and it's age. The vet probably followed the pharmaceutical company's suggested age and weight limitations for these medications, which were less than the 6 months suggested in writing by the breeder. The buyer may not have shared the breeder's recommendation with the vet. If the buyer did share the info with the vet, the vet may be to blame. It seems to me that the buyer, by ignoring the advice of the breeder, did forfeit any right to compensation from the breeder. This is very unfortunate.
 
Last edited:
Kelvin said:
Me? I would, at most, give them their money back but under NO circumstances would they EVER get another puppy from my house...
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same. Mainly to avoid the hassle of dealing with them down the road. I've done it several times since the loss of the sale dollars can be way less than the lost time and blood pressure to continuing to deal with them.

I would also advise all the other breeders you can reach out to about these folks. I wouldn't want another pup to shudder the same consequences.
 
If the buyer is being that abusive to you and your family, I wonder how well he would have treated the dog?
 
Ken Ibold said:
...
We have not yet offered to refund their money. We are waiting to get the last of the lab tests into our vet's hands so we can make as good a determination as the medical records allow. This guy is a bully who is calling my wife's mom, even, and ranting at her, wanting to be "made whole." So relations are deteriorating somewhat. I don't want to turn this into a legal case, as the dollar value doesn't make it worth it.
Click to expand...

Ken:

1) It would appear that the death of the pup is the fault of the buyer's vet and possibly the buyer if they knew that the vet had intended to . Obviously the Vet had no experience with Sammies but I'd still think that he should know what might kill a certain breed or not so I'd venture the its at least the vets fault. I'd wait for Dave Taylor to chime in here and would defer to him.

2) While I think you stand on solid legal ground as I'm sure your wife has told you I can totally understand why you would offer the money back.

3) The fact that he is harassing your wife's mom makes me want to tell you to go Frack himself and let him take you to court. If he does I would surely join his Vet as an additional defendant, after which I would think his vet would eat his bill just to get out of it.

4) In short I think you have been generous in your offer and if the tests do not indicate a liver shunt then you owe him nothing.
 
Another angle is contact his vet after you get the test results, find out what he told the vet, tell the vet what info the buyer had and further explain the vet will be involved in any litigation involving his fees. I bet the vet after he or she does a little research will gladly forgo their fees in this case.;) I doubt they want to be involved in this, and they already know what kind of an ass the buyer appears to be.:mad2:
 
I don't respond well when dealing with asshoies, especially those who think they can intimidate me. "Where the sun don't shine" sometimes creeps into the conversation and strong letter follows.

There's no question about the outcome, the only question is who caused it. Tell him to pound sand.
 
It is so sad when a puppy looses their life due to stupid vets and owners who can't understand plane english instructions.

you had no control over the dog after it left your house and the new owner took control, and you certainly had no control over it being treaded is a foolish manor. so, why should you return any money? you should report the vet for having no knowledge of the breeds special needs.

Stupidly should not be rewarded.
 
What implied warranties are customary with a puppy/foal/calf or the little chicklets you can buy by the bucket at the farm supply store ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top