Labradoodle Forums banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
this is getting nutts,,wasnt it something like this they tried to pass in CA or somewhere, MY GOD this is so ridiculous, if you all wouldnt mind emailing to state how nutts this type of bill is,,
this is soooo not fair to good breeders,

NEW LAWS THAT WOULD APPLY TO BREEDERS IN WV , REACT NOW!!!!! THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, THIS IS TO VAGUE. PASS ON TO ALL BREEDERS!! THE DELEGATES THAT IS SPONSORING THIS BILL, THEIR EMAIL ADDRESS IS ON THE LINK, EMAIL THEM, TELL THEM THEY WILL NOT GET YOUR VOTE IF THIS PASSES, THIS IS NOT FAIR TO THE GOOD BREEDERS!!!! "INFECTED" AGAIN, TO VAGUE~~~
THANKS!

GO TO:
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/index.cfm
CLICK ON BILL STATUS TAB;
2869 IN THE BOX FOR SEARCH. THIS IS HB#2869,
YOU WILL SEE THE DELEGATES THAT SPONSORED THIS BILL, EMAIL THEM OR CALL THEM, EACH ONE, THIS IS VERY VERY IMPORTANT. THE BILL IS SO VAGUE, IT WILL NOT WORK FOR ANY OF US!!!

H. B. 2869

(By Delegates Fleischauer, Shaver, Marshall,
Beach, Shook, Longstreth, Hutchins,
Sobonya, Brown and Guthrie)

[Introduced January 9, 2008; referred to the

Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources then the Judiciary.]

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new article, designated §19-20C-1, §19-20C-2, §19-20C-3, §19-20C-4, §19-20C-5, §19-20C-6, §19-20C-7 and §19-20C-8, all relating to protecting consumers against the sale or adoption of sick or underage pets ; providing for penalties for violations of this article.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended by adding thereto a new article, designated §19-20C-1, §19-20C-2, §19-20C-3, §19-20C-4, §19-20C-5, §19-20C-6, §19-20C-7 and §19-20C-8, all to read as follows:

ARTICLE 20. SALE OR ADOPTION OF SICK OR UNDERAGE PETS.

§19-20C-1. Short title.
This article may be cited as the "Pet Welfare Act."
§19-20C-2. Definitions.
As used in this article:
(a) "Pet" means an animal kept by a person for companionship or pleasure rather than for utility; including, but not limited to, dogs and cats.
(b) "Purchase" means and includes, but is not limited to, any transfer of pet ownership or title, whether for money, by adoption, for exchange for other property or services or without any remuneration.
(c) "Seller" means and includes, but is not limited to, all retail stores, private breeders, private rescuers and public agencies that sell or place two litters or twenty-five pets per year.
§19-20C-3. Application.
This article applies to all pet sellers.
§19-20C-4. Infected animals; reimbursement.
(a) Purchasers of a pet have fifteen days from the date of purchase to return the pet to the seller for any reason for full reimbursement.
(b) If a licensed veterinarian diagnoses a pet with an illness within fifteen days of the purchase date, the pet seller will fully reimburse the purchaser and will not require the purchaser to return the pet to the seller.
(c) If a licensed veterinarian diagnoses a pet with an illness within fifteen days of the purchase date, the seller will reimburse the purchaser for any veterinary costs up to the purchase price of the pet or five hundred dollars, whichever is greater.
(d) If a licensed veterinarian diagnoses a pet with a congenital defect within one year of the pet's purchase date, the pet's seller will either fully reimburse the purchaser or replace the pet with another pet that is free of defects and infection.

§19-20C-5. Sale of pets under eight weeks of age; import, export.

(a) No pet under eight weeks of age shall be sold or purchased in the state.
(b) No pet under eight weeks of age shall be imported into the state for sale or purchase.
(c) No pet under eight weeks of age shall be exported out of the state for sale or purchase.
(d) This section does not apply to humane or animal shelters caring for orphaned pets.
§19-20C-6. Health certificates at pet sale or adoption.
At the time of purchase, a pet seller must provide to a purchaser a copy of a certificate verifying the health of the pet and certifying that the required care and vaccinations have been given. The certificate must be signed by a licensed veterinarian or the director of a county or municipal animal or humane shelter for whom the governing body states in writing that the shelter will not pay veterinary bills.
§19-20C-7. Posting of consumer rights and protections.
At the time of purchase, a pet seller must prominently display a 10" x 10" sign at the seller's place of business or furnish the purchaser with a written contract informing consumers of their rights and protections under the law.
§19-20C-8. Violations; penalties.
A person who violates a provision of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than one hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars. Magistrates have concurrent jurisdiction with circuit courts to enforce the provisions of this article.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to protect consumers against the purchase of sick or underage pets
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
There are too many points that there isnt enough time or do i have the energy to go over

One that really sticks my crawl is refunds for disease up to 15days
first off PARVO has a 10day gestation,which means that the pup can be infected AFTER placement and the breeder would be tottally responsible in any case period,
'I do agree with the 8weeks old part reguarding placement of pups, this i had started about a year ago this is for the well being of the animal

Im sure if you cared to read it and disect it you could answer your own question

Im too sick rite now to go into it with you
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,203 Posts
ok there are a few points i myself don't like as all breeder would have to rewrite their health guarantees as many breeders state you have 24 to 72hours on average to bring a puppy to a vet

NOW in many states breeders are allowed to give wormings and vacinations to the puppies with some stapling the package to a paper dating when given.
if i read this bill correctly that no longer is the case

in essence i dont' agree with the WHOLE BILL and see it as a way
that would also cause breeders having to raise their prices to covering additional vet bills along with possibly refundings.

i do NOT like purchaser for any reason can return puppy for refund
i see too many loopholes with this...also the purchaser is not required to return the puppy to seller if vet diagnoses a pet with an illness?!?

again too many loopholes as the type of illness is not stated
so let's say a puppy gets roundworms totally normal does that mean a purchaser can get a full refund and not return puppy to seller?
and then what? they can sell the puppy or give it to a shelter?

I am in AGREEMENT with the age of 8 weeks to be sold to anyone
but for me .....that bill needs soem WORK and clearly stated facts laid out

or i see more problems developing
and breeders having a hard time offering a health guarantee

to me 15days is a long time........now in someone's case like MTD who raced his dog to a vet the moment it arrived at the airport i see him being protected
HOWEVER what if someone takes their puppy to dog park, petsmart, or who knows ,that isn't fully vacinnated yet due to age requirements and yes it gets parvo which can have a 3 to 10day incubation period
then possibly the breeder is going to be held responsible when the fact may be the puppy got it elsewhere especially if the breeders other puppies dont' have it at all. and the breeder on top of full refund would also have to pay up to $500 in vet bills?

maybe i am being to technical in some areas? then again i would want the type of diseases diagnosed by a vet spelled out in the bill
and does this also negate a breeder askign for a 2nd opinon?

i too say the bill is vague in ways that needs MORE SPECIFICS laid out

i also see it as a way of people giving up breeding and/or raising prices
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
Having been on the other side of the coin I think this is A GOOD FIRST STEP in taking control of unscrupulous people who call themselves dog breeders. All breeders should support this bill, that is, if they have nothing to hide! Falsifying the documents should be punished as well. Sorry Nancy I can only go by my own experience with the Guelph, Ontario Puppy Mill that cheated me on the exchange rate and shipped me a sick puppy. It cost me over $600 in Vet bills which I'll never collect from those thieves. We need to be protected from the likes of them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,918 Posts
As a buyer, I can see some parts of this bill being good (i.e. the not letting a puppy less than 8 weeks old go home) and I think some protection against illness would be great, however like Annmarie said, I think 15 days is too long (what if you took the puppy somewhere he/she shouldn't have gone). What about shortening it to something like 3 days (many contracts state this anyway, right?)?

Just my thoughts (I'm sure if I were a breeder and had experience with this I may have a different opinion).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
lmtoth2 said:
As a buyer, I can see some parts of this bill being good (i.e. the not letting a puppy less than 8 weeks old go home) and I think some protection against illness would be great, however like Annmarie said, I think 15 days is too long (what if you took the puppy somewhere he/she shouldn't have gone). What about shortening it to something like 3 days (many contracts state this anyway, right?)?

Just my thoughts (I'm sure if I were a breeder and had experience with this I may have a different opinion).
I agree with this, making 8 weeks the law is good, 1 yr on congenetial disorders is good, proof of a 1st vet visit and shots is good. I definately wouldn't describe it as nuts, although a do see the point about parvo, but thats only one issue is an overall pretty good bill for puppy health.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,203 Posts
Todd since you're in Canada how do your laws mirror ours?
does your government in anyway enforce anything like this bill is suggesting for a particular state.


the bill in a positive light:

while I believe in protecting the buyer i also believe in spelling out which diseases are meant by it i do see it as a way of trying to affect and hopefully discourage backyard breeders...aid in stopping puppy mills/retail puppy buyers
and hopefully encourages MORE BREEDERS to TEST their dogs BEFORE breeding in order to reduce chances of having unhealthy pupppies
along with keeping sanitary kennel conditions.


Negative:
and i was wondering, many stores have a refund policy and while we do have things like lemon laws....this proposed law dictates the refund policy for all breeders rather than being a guide/aid. possibly giving the state too much say?

I am still a BUYER myself but i do try to look at both sides of the coin
as well as subsequent affects down the line.
where does such affect puppy end up if the purchaser doesn't want it but doesn't have to bring it back to seller ?
and how many times have we had vets differ to if a puppy is ill and with what?

me, i'd want things more spelled out in detail as it affects both buyer and seller
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Exactly Anne Marie
there are some good points in this bill but it is too vague

A Example a friend gave me a few years back
you can go to walmart buy a tv , take it out to the car drop it ,is walmart gonna refund you your money?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
Canadian laws concern health and welfare of animals, and is basically a food, water, shelter, safety law and thats it. Nothing for breeding, except to advertise as "pure bred" it has to be regestered with AKC or CKC. Ontario has a soceity that looks into puppy mills, and so do most provinces, but Quebec doesnt have ANY laws for animals at all. Dogs are bred like pigs. It's really very sad and embarrasing. They ship dogs in trucks to all other provinces to sell in pet stores and its all legal. They have 30 different breeds and hundreds and hundreds or puppies a year on a single farm. I would welcome a law like VA is proposing to stop them.

(aside, Nancy, how many puppies do you sell in a year and how many get parvo after they leave you? do you have any stats on that at all. I suspect not many do, since you educate your new puppy parents well).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I have never had a pup with parvo come from my kennel,
and yes im sure its due to the education i provide my families
that is not to say that it couldnt happen, people always want somthing for nothing, this type of bill is not fair to reputable breeders and is too vague to be
 
G

·
We have a fairly strong law in NJ...if a sold pet is 'defective' the consumer is entitled to reimbursement of vet bills up to TWO times the cost of the pet.
http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stus ... _92_97.htm

This New Jersey Act protects pet purchasers who receive "defective" companion animals. A purchaser of a defective pet must have his or her pet examined by a veterinarian within 14 days of purchase to receive a refund or exchange. Alternatively, a buyer may retain the pet and be reimbursed for veterinary bills up to two times the cost of the dog or cat.
 
G

·
Nancy, you are a reputable breeder. Don't worry yourself about this law. I am sure if it passes you would not encounter a problem.
I personally think most people are 'good' BUT if someone is looking to get something for nothing, they would be better off purchasing in NJ where they can get reimbursed DOUBLE the cost of the pup! :wink:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,918 Posts
We have a fairly strong law in NJ...if a sold pet is 'defective' the consumer is entitled to reimbursement of vet bills up to TWO times the cost of the pet.
you learn something new everyday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
Kingston,
Ontario has a soceity that looks into puppy mills, and so do most provinces,

I have a problem in Ontario! Can you tell me who to contact to complain about the folks that shipped me a sick puppy? I've tried online with no success...m
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
what did your sick puppy have? if you suspect you bought from a puppy mill in disguise or a cruel BYB i would contact the SPCA (http://ontariospca.ca/1.shtml). We only have laws about the humane treatment of animals, not against shipping/selling a sick puppy. But if they sent a sick one to you I would want to send the SPCA all over their operation to make sure the mom and other pups are ok. They could be charged up to 10k and 5 yrs in jail occording to legeslation Bill C-22, they are guilty of "Failing to provide adequate care". (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublica...ill&doc=C-22&parl=37&ses=3&language=E&File=16)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
I'm not sure about covering congenital defects in a contract. Congenital defects are not necessarily hereditary. I think covering hereditary defects is something that should definitely be covered. But a congenital defect, can just be a freak thing, and those are usually noticed before the puppy goes to their new home. A congenital disorder is usually present at birth. As where a hereditary disease may not be seen until the puppy is older and already in their new home. I agree that some congenital defects are hereditary, but then their are congenital defects, which is uncontrollable and tests are not out there to rule them to be hereditary or just a freak thing. I guess maybe it's all in the way we word our contracts, thus should be specific in what diseases that we will actually take responsibility for.

Trina
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Linda said:
Nancy, you are a reputable breeder. Don't worry yourself about this law. I am sure if it passes you would not encounter a problem.
I personally think most people are 'good' BUT if someone is looking to get something for nothing, they would be better off purchasing in NJ where they can get reimbursed DOUBLE the cost of the pup! :wink:
Thanks Linda, wow, now that law really needs to be changed!!! YIKERS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
gsmagoo2 said:
I'm not sure about covering congenital defects in a contract. Congenital defects are not necessarily hereditary. I think covering hereditary defects is something that should definitely be covered. But a congenital defect, can just be a freak thing, and those are usually noticed before the puppy goes to their new home. A congenital disorder is usually present at birth. As where a hereditary disease may not be seen until the puppy is older and already in their new home. I agree that some congenital defects are hereditary, but then their are congenital defects, which is uncontrollable and tests are not out there to rule them to be hereditary or just a freak thing. I guess maybe it's all in the way we word our contracts, thus should be specific in what diseases that we will actually take responsibility for.

Trina
AMEN!!!!! Thank you so much for saying that so many people feel like just because a dog is tested to the hilt that gurantees there wont be a problem
IT DOES NOT!!!
It is all up to the good lord as to where the genes fall and what happens to each and every life on this earth, we are breeders not god, we cant guarantee how things happen we all just do the very very best we can
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
KingstonTodd said:
what did your sick puppy have? if you suspect you bought from a puppy mill in disguise or a cruel BYB i would contact the SPCA (http://ontariospca.ca/1.shtml). We only have laws about the humane treatment of animals, not against shipping/selling a sick puppy. But if they sent a sick one to you I would want to send the SPCA all over their operation to make sure the mom and other pups are ok. They could be charged up to 10k and 5 yrs in jail occording to legeslation Bill C-22, they are guilty of "Failing to provide adequate care". (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublica...ill&doc=C-22&parl=37&ses=3&language=E&File=16)
Thanks for the Info I'll contact those folks first thing tomorrow!
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top