[QUOTE=FalseImpression;8043968]
Keeping half ownership??? does the breeder also pay half the expenses…geez…[/QUOTE]
If I were a breeder, I wouldn’t want my name to stay on the ownership, as I would hate to be added as a party to a lawsuit dealing with the dog, if the dog were to bite someone/cause damage!
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8043826]
Isn’t anything registered supposed to be tattooed or microchipped, though? I’m pretty sure in Canada anything with papers must be permanently identified (although I’ve heard sometimes microchips can “migrate” and get lost, or tattoos fade).[/QUOTE]
The short answer. No. AKC is a dog registry and they do not mandate tattoos or microchips. They simply manage the registry and breed standard.
As I’ve understood the breeder retaining part ownership it is primarily to know if the dog is being bred (or not). I’ve bought both “show” and “pet” pups and the contract wasn’t different and didn’t even specify that the dog had to be shown or neutered.
My current BT is PAL (purebred alternative listing (long story)) registered with AKC. There is provision to achieve AKC performance titles on AKC breeds if you can provide information and photos that document the dog is the breed you believe they are. PAL listed dogs are not eligible conformation (which is just fine with me).
I am a big believer in contracts as they do lay out each party’s responsibilities. Having said that, I’ve read them and signed them and didn’t get overly concerned about the details of what is in them.
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8044141]
And I am ok with the idea of the puppy having a soft place to land if something happens down the road… but legally, dogs are property and expensive dogs surely could be considered assets.
The details of some contracts may not be entirely enforceable, but registered ownership is a different thing!
Bankruptcies and divorces do NOT only happen to “bad” people; so knowing the people/being friends/being very selective doesn’t prevent those problems.[/QUOTE]
It sounds like you might be most comfortable with a contract that is very specific, where you can have lots of input on the specific terms.
[QUOTE=Where’sMyWhite;8044148]
I am a big believer in contracts as they do lay out each party’s responsibilities. Having said that, I’ve read them and signed them and didn’t get overly concerned about the details of what is in them.[/QUOTE]
In my world, people of this mindset are often referred to as “plaintiffs” or “defendants”.
[QUOTE=Houndhill;8044168]
It sounds like you might be most comfortable with a contract that is very specific, where you can have lots of input on the specific terms.[/QUOTE]
I will absolutely need to know that someone can’t take my dog away. That’s all I really need.
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8044178]
I will absolutely need to know that someone can’t take my dog away. That’s all I really need.[/QUOTE]
Well, why on earth would someone want to take your dog away?
[QUOTE=Houndhill;8044189]
Well, why on earth would someone want to take your dog away?[/QUOTE]
Given this thread? As an outsider looking in, I’d be worried too. This thread goes way, way, WAY beyond “responsible steward” into the realm of tinfoil hats. The level of paranoia is truly astonishing, and the desire to control is even more shocking.
I have no objections to breeders wanting to make sure a puppy is an appropriate match, doing background checks, calling references or being extremely selective over where a dog goes. But things like retaining half-ownership? Thinking it’s standard operating procedure that someone drive 8+ hours to be interviewed for a dog that is to be a companion, then chastising them for settling on something closer to home? That’s truly crazy.
That is not a person I would want to do ANY sort of business with. Really. I wouldn’t even want to buy a cupcake from them. Much less a living creature.
The OP is right to go whoa, what happens if you die? Get divorced? Go bankrupt? That dog is an asset! It’s property! And contract aside, the courts would have something to say about the asset in bankruptcy or divorce or what-not. Having your dog tied up in bankruptcy or a nasty divorce or probate court?
We do not expect people looking for a $2,500 pleasure horse to knock around on trails to drive 8 hours for a freaking interview or even for a trial ride, and to get the 9th freaking degree and be grilled left, forward, up or down. We don’t chastise them when they say they settled on something closer to home. If a seller did that we’d be running up and down them on this forums and all agreeing “run. Run far, far away”
OP, don’t get into bed with people who think this sort of behavior and model of business is acceptable. Since you don’t want a show dog I’m sure there are some very responsible breeders with nice dogs and appropriate health certifications that will not want become like an overly involved mother in law.
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8043826]
Isn’t anything registered supposed to be tattooed or microchipped, though? I’m pretty sure in Canada anything with papers must be permanently identified (although I’ve heard sometimes microchips can “migrate” and get lost, or tattoos fade).[/QUOTE]
That is a CKC thing. My understanding is that there are far more regulations/ag rules regarding dog breeding in Canada
All of mine are microchipped before leaving and traceable to me. When dogs land in rescue, if a breeder can be identified they will often go back. We share photos to try to ID. dogs. The folks I hang with would be the car in an instant or booking a flight to get any dog “home” which landed in rescue.
There’s a lot of crazy in the world; I wouldn’t like that kind of ownership either. I’m not sure that it’s appropriate for a pet home. Who knows why someone wouldn’t decide they wanted the dog back? Theirs dies? Someone else wants to breed it? The other owner hears a rumor? This isn’t someone that OP knows very well, this is a “hi, nice to meet you, want to co-own a very expensive dog?”
Clearly, I’m the libertarian of the dog world and a deal like that gives me the vapors. Just, No.
[QUOTE=Houndhill;8044189]
Well, why on earth would someone want to take your dog away?[/QUOTE]
To sell it for money to settle a debt, such as in the case of a divorce, bankruptcy, or estate matter?
Or for some crazy people-emotion reason? People are nuts, I can’t trust someone to that extent!
[QUOTE=cowboymom;8044336]
I’m not sure that it’s appropriate for a pet home. Clearly, I’m the libertarian of the dog world and a deal like that gives me the vapors. Just, No.[/QUOTE]
Most of the breeders I know do not want to co-own “pets”. If they know a puppy would go to a pet home, they would be willing to sell it on a limited registration (means that the puppy can’t be shown or bred) or with a spay/neuter contract rather than co-own. Obviously we know some breeders might still want to co-own, but there are lots of breeders that don’t - even for show quality dogs.
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8044517]To sell it for money to settle a debt, such as in the case of a divorce, bankruptcy, or estate matter?
Or for some crazy people-emotion reason? People are nuts, I can’t trust someone to that extent![/QUOTE]
I think the biggest “concern” you would have would be if YOU wanted to sell it or re-home it - the breeder would have a right to take it back instead. Which…most people would consider a good thing…but, in theory…maybe not everyone would. That’s why a lot of breeders do retain co-ownership – for exactly the reasons you mentioned – divorce, bankruptcy, etc… – but that you would list it on Craigslist to cover YOUR debt, not the other way around.
[QUOTE=S1969;8044532]
Most of the breeders I know do not want to co-own “pets”. If they know a puppy would go to a pet home, they would be willing to sell it on a limited registration (means that the puppy can’t be shown or bred) or with a spay/neuter contract rather than co-own. Obviously we know some breeders might still want to co-own, but there are lots of breeders that don’t - even for show quality dogs.
I think the biggest “concern” you would have would be if YOU wanted to sell it or re-home it - the breeder would have a right to take it back instead. Which…most people would consider a good thing…but, in theory…maybe not everyone would. That’s why a lot of breeders do retain co-ownership – for exactly the reasons you mentioned – divorce, bankruptcy, etc… – but that you would list it on Craigslist to cover YOUR debt, not the other way around.[/QUOTE]
That doesn’t really solve my problem, though. I mean, if I purchase a dog for $2500, and the breeder retains 50% interest, could a creditor not value the breeder’s interest at $2500 also?
Edit: re: pets - I’m totally willing to do the limited registration, since I don’t plan on breeding or showing. So that’s no problem.
[QUOTE=saultgirl;8044538]
That doesn’t really solve my problem, though. I mean, if I purchase a dog for $2500, and the breeder retains 50% interest, could a creditor not value the breeder’s interest at $2500 also?
Edit: re: pets - I’m totally willing to do the limited registration, since I don’t plan on breeding or showing. So that’s no problem.[/QUOTE]
Every co-ownership agreement is different, so you would spell it out. Personally, I can’t imagine a spayed or neutered dog ever being considered an asset by anyone…creditor or otherwise. A breeding animal - possibly. But not an altered dog.
But again, a co-ownership agreement could spell out things like show expenses, breeding rights, etc. or not – some breeders have no interest in anything but protecting their breeding interest. So maybe worth asking other breeders for details about “co-ownership agreements”.
[QUOTE=S1969;8044542]
Every co-ownership agreement is different, so you would spell it out. Personally, I can’t imagine a spayed or neutered dog ever being considered an asset by anyone…creditor or otherwise. A breeding animal - possibly. But not an altered dog.[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t apply in this case but sporting dogs that actually go hunting would be worth $$, neutered or not if they are good at their job. Possibly also service dogs.
I must be sheltered 
So much angst over a contract Yes, I read (or try to anyway) anything I sign. I just never gave much thought to the ones I’ve signed with co-ownership (and I think there may have been one or two that were).
When I did get divorced, I didn’t tell the breeder. I told the BTX the dogs were mine and it was written so in the decree.
Are there that many incidents where breeder purchase contracts end up in court with a dispute over dog ownership?
[QUOTE=Where’sMyWhite;8044626]
Are there that many incidents where breeder purchase contracts end up in court with a dispute over dog ownership?[/QUOTE]
I agree that people are nuts, and while there have been cases of disputes between co-owners (though much more likely in breeding/show dogs, not so much in neutered/pets) that has not been my experience at all. I have co-owned many many dogs over 45 years, in many states and Canada, and the majority of those were without any contract at all! People died, got divorced, etc…we have never had any problems. They are the norm in my breed.
However, since the OP is planning to spay her bitch, I would think it should be possible to find a breeder willing to sell a puppy on full ownership, either initially, or after spaying the bitch if the idea of co-ownership is so objectionable.
[QUOTE=Where’sMyWhite;8044626]
Doesn’t apply in this case but sporting dogs that actually go hunting would be worth $$, neutered or not if they are good at their job. Possibly also service dogs.[/QUOTE]
Well, I know a lot of hunting dogs, and I still don’t think they would be considered an asset. The primary value is in the breeding potential, even if they are a good hunting dog. They still might be worth $1500+ as a hunting dog, but I would think that most people would still consider them a financial liability because they require feeding and vet care for life. One good hunting accident costs far more than the value of the dog.
[QUOTE=Houndhill;8044651]
I agree that people are nuts, and while there have been cases of disputes between co-owners (though much more likely in breeding/show dogs, not so much in neutered/pets) that has not been my experience at all. I have co-owned many many dogs over 45 years, in many states and Canada, and the majority of those were without any contract at all! People died, got divorced, etc…we have never had any problems. They are the norm in my breed.[/QUOTE]
Interesting as my total experience has been as a buyer of purebred puppies (not as a breeder). I know people are nuts (that movie Best In Show
has much truth in it 
). Dog people are a different type of nuts than horse people but yes, nuts abound in both
I guess one of the differences perhaps is that when I’ve gotten a puppy I’ve ether known the breeder for years or breeder was a reference from someone in the breed that I’ve known for years (exceptions being my first Bouvier and my first BT).
So, does having personal knowledge and experience save you from having issues with someone you’ve signed a contract with, no. But, I think knowing the person your working with does help when accepting a contract that might have objectionable language if you didn’t know the person you were dealing with (and I don’t count a 2-3 hour conversation “knowing”).
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
