What would happen if a pup which is endorsed meets all the criteria set out by the breeder and the breeder still refuses to lift the endorsements.

Not much. Either you abide by the endorsements, or you don't. Is it the progeny not for registration one?

Dawn R.

Depends if you have an agreement in writing, as my puppy owners do. If you've met all the criteria & can prove it, I would think you might be able to persuade the KC to lift the endorsement.

ASSUMING it's a fair contract that sets out the criteria and what is deemed to be acceptable results (in which case the OP sounds as if they are being responsible), I would appeal to the KC - for example, if the contract states that endorsements will be lifted on proof of a hip score below the average for the breed, and that is in order, and there are no other stipulations for the endorsement.

In my opinion, all contracts for endorsements should state the circumstances under which they will be lifted, or whether they won't ever be lifted.  We never know when we're going to be run over by the proverbial bus, do we?

M.

I take it you have contacted the breeder and they have given you a reason why they won't lift the restriction??  Maybe a health problem has cropped up within that litter which is why the restriction won't be lifted?

Unfortuantely this does happen where dogs meet the criteria and better.  How sad that if they do that they cannot be used.  Not sure what the KC would do but I'd go to them if this happened to me, but you would need something in writing to prove the criteria that the breeder said was needed.

I hopr the KC would not lift an endorsement explained in writing and signed, on appeal. My written reasons for lifting endorsements involve health, the quality of the grown dog and the owners having fully educated themselves in what they are taking on by breeding. I can imagine circumstances where the dog has turned out to be a nice, healthy breed specimen suitable for breeding but where the owners do not meet my criteria as breeders (though they may well meet their own). I'd hate to think the KC would lift the endorsement in those circumstances. What's the point in endorsements if they do?

Well that is very simple Jas you sell the puppy as a pet only stipulating that the endorsements remain for life.

You have no idea the amount of contracts Ihave read recently that do nothing but complicate things.

dont every sell with the potential breeding clause if you think there is a change you won't be happy.

"Well that is very simple Jas you sell the puppy as a pet only stipulating that the endorsements remain for life."

Not at all. I've lifted endorsements when I was happy the pup had turned into a good example of the breed and was happy the owner knew exactly what they were getting themselves into by breeding.

But all things being equal I'd much rather lift an endorsement on a dog/bitch that wasn't a particularly good breed specimen than lift an endorsement when the owners won't/can't put the required financial and personal effort into the breeding or won't/can't place the pups well or won't/can't take the pups back at any stage if it becomes nescessary.

I think you have missed my point Jas completely , My point was I would't be sitting this that position anyway and you wouldn't if you did the same as my contracts are pet only contracts full stop.  If someone came to me down the line then it would be on my discretion and the contract could not have been misinterpretated in anyway. Why complicated things with terms and conditions that could be challenged.

To be honest all being equal I wouldn't for either option  but as I say I dont do complicated contracts.  If you even at the slightest mention potential breeding it can be challenged  and it does happen.

Think I get you now.

Jas,

I can see your point, and am not particularly arguing with it.  However, personally, I wouldn't buy a puppy that was endorsed under terms which are open to such different interpretations.

Entirely understand that in those circumstances you just wouldn't sell me a puppy - your prerogative - but I think that endorsements should either be for life or based upon non-discretionary terms, in fairness to the puppy buyer.

Your pups, your choice though, so as I say I'm not arguing.  Have just seen too many people fall foul of bad breeders (not putting you in that pigeonhole) to actually be keen on too many terms & conditions.

M.

Meeting health tests alone may not be the criteria  , maybe the quality isn't there. 

To me reasonably quality has to be in the contract also.

It's unfair if you put endorsement on a contract just because you have fell out with the person, dont get me wrong i can understand why there but to use it has a weapon when the person is doing all the right things, health tests ect and the dog does meet the criteria thats not fair on the person who has bought the dog.  Jas you have said, that if the owner doesn't meet the criteria to breed but why sell them one of your dogs anyway if you dont trust them with one of your dogs.  I'm not being argumentive but i can see wholes in what you've said and i wouldn't image it's fair on the other half of the party, i do agree with endorsements when there used in the right way, concerning any health problems, the dog not being a good example of the breed or the person not taking time out to do research on the correct match for the dam but it should never be used as a weapon and all contracts should be fair and explained to the new owner right at the beinging so there can't be any mishaps regarding the contract.

Regards Susan

As you say, Susan, sadly, people can and do fall out.   A difference of opinion can become an argument, with both sides taking entrenched views, people get offended, and say, and do things that later they may regret - but cannot find a way back to say "I might have been wrong in this instance".  

Its human nature, I'm sorry to say

"Jas you have said, that if the owner doesn't meet the criteria to breed but why sell them one of your dogs anyway if you dont trust them with one of your dogs"

Being confident that an owner will give a pup an excellent home is not the same as being confident the same owner has the knowledge and resources to breed a litter.

I can think of several owners who adore their dog and provide it with a first class home but who just don't have the time / space / money / knowledge to breed a litter.

"i wouldn't image it's fair on the other half of the party"

What is unfair if everything is spelled out to the prospective owner verbally well in advance, and in writing when they collect the pup? They are free to go elsewhere.

I think what has confused everyone Jas is when you said that later on if you felt they didn't meet in your opinion the critieria as people to breed from the dog.   If you said to someone I will sell the dog and you can breed from it AS long as you meet my criteria at a later date then this would and could be unfair and misleading. You criteria may be set too high in some peoples eyes . THey could also argue you misled them into buying it.  Not that I think you would   just that you know people..

This is why I want to reiterate the reason I said don't sell to someone who may want to breed unless you are 100% sure at the sale it will only lead to complications.  I personally think this is what the other posters mean.

Hey don't get me wrong I am not arguing with you honestly just trying to get across to you and anyone reading to be super careful how you word things.

"If you said to someone I will sell the dog and you can breed from it AS long as you meet my criteria at a later date then this would and could be unfair and misleading."

That's more or less what I do say. I don't think its misleading because I tell the prospective owner what my criteria will be (they aren't extreme). I'm not talking about people who are already breeders here. If I didn't like the way a breeder manages their own litters they wouldn't get a pup. I'm talking about the people who initially say the dog will be a pet, but later want to take a litter.

To give real examples: One couple got a bitch pup, adamant that they didn't want to show and she'd 'only' be a pet. They came to a puppy reunion the same weekend as out local Ch show and entered her in Puppy 'for fun'. She won her class and they were bitten by the bug. Two years later they had a couple of RCCs, the owners had learned a good bit about the breed and they had thought out having a litter very carefully. So we were happy to lift the endorsement and they went on to produce a nice line. Another couple got a dog pup, and again it was 'only' going to be a pet. Then they entered him for a coursing meet, he ran like the wind and they became addicted. The man also got interested in the breed and became something of a breed historian. Unfortunately they never showed him as he was rather nice. They took their responsibilitises seriously and when they wanted to use the dog at stud, again we were happy to lift the endorsement.

The people I want to stop breeding are the ones who come along when a bitch is the right age having suddenly thought it would be nice to have a litter and keep one, without thinking through what they would be taking on. I have been asked about the endorsement in those circumstances but by the time I've finished my potted lecture on just what is involved with a giant breed that can have very big litters, the endorsement has been the least of the owner's reason for buying in another pup instead.

" THey could also argue you misled them into buying it.

I hope not as I make it very clear that the endorsement may never be lifted both verbally and in writing.

Even Jas:-) Typed a biggy out earlier on and I lost it.. laptops flaming nightmare sometimes.

I know you are 100% thoughtful breeder and really my reason for coming back to reply well 2 reasons.

1) I think it is important for readers following this thread to realise that if they decide to use endorsements and puppy contacts they have to really be sure they are right or they are a waste of time.

2)  I do see what you are trying to achieve BUT sadly this is the real world and " Hoping" things go as per your example everytime over a lot of years is risky. Your contract if it is how you say it is would certainly have a grey area IMHO..

Using a pet contract only would give you the exact same opportunity as you had in your example but what it would give you is life without the need for painkillers or potential personal fights.

What would happen if someone challenged you on it? You thought they were unsuitable and they thought they were perfectly suitable. You would have to justify why you thought them unsuitable..now this could be difficult and also be very personal.. Not something I would want to be in the middle of for sure. Jas it does happen.

If you had sold the puppy as pet only and you were confronted with the same request you wouldn't have to justify any decision if you felt they were unsuitable in your eyes, without any personal reasons you can merely say the puppy was sold as a pet and you don't do it any other way  sorry. The buyer knew this at the time of say. No ifs or buts or grey areas to be challenged.

I know you know where I am coming from I just think it is important for readers not to read this and think they can sell a puppy with potential breeding rights and have unrealistic criteria. Although I 100% think your criterial is bang on I wouldn't bet much money on it being 100% water tight.

As I say just wanted to reiterate for any readers to be on the ball.

Hi Blue, I do take the point you are making. I may be wrong but at present I don't know of endorsements that have been lifted on a appeal to the KC as long as the new owner has signed an explanation of the endorsement at the time they collect the pup. If a case like that did win an appeal I'd probably do as you suggest and sell on a 'pet only' agreement. The trouble with that - as I see it anyway - is that I would not be being as honest as possible with the new owners, in that I will lift endorsements in the right circumstances. (I endorse everything even the pup(s) I'm keeping myself). If I had said that the pups in the two examples I gave were to be 'pet only' and that the breeding endorsement would never be lifted, I suspect that the owners involved would have taken me at my word.

I'm aware that the whole business of Sales Agreements and to some extent endorsements is a minefield and I know well that my Sales Agreement in particular is not worth the paper it is written on in legal terms. But I still produce one, hoping to concentrate the minds of the new owners by getting them to sign something even if I know it is not legally enforceable. And I was pleasantly surprised a couple of months ago when I was visiting one of my, now grown up, pups. In casual conversation I mentioned something in the Sales Agreement ... and the owner instantly lept up and produced her copy out of a top drawer, along with all the well thumbed breed and 'taking care of your pup' bumph I'd given her. All the stuff you carefully type, copy and bind before selling pups may go over some heads but it was nice to find someone who had read it all carefully.

Anyway, to come back to the point I see where you are coming from and I agree that things could go pear shaped with an awkward owner. So far I've been fortunate to have friendly long term relationships with all of my puppy people - but that is probably more good luck than good judgement.

Hi Susan

>It's unfair if you put endorsement on a contract just because you have fell out with the person,<

Susan you have completely confused me with this one.  Nobody is going to do this because endorsements are done at time of registration or before the puppy is sold. Have you gotten confused what and how the endorsements are for.  You can't add endorsements once the puppy has been sold.

I assumed she meant that it was unfair to refuse to lift an endorsement because you have fallen out with someone - not put one on :p

I know that isn't what is written though

Now that may make more sense

Hi guys, yes i did mean that Ice Cosmos, i know they can't be put on once the dog has been sold.  I'm abit tired to be honest.  I know what your saying Jas but here's another thing, when you sell a puppy shouldn't you make sure they have the resources to take good care of the puppy, also you as a breeder should pass your knowledge to them, so they can rear a litter and they have someone who is experienced behind them for support, so they can go and produce good quality puppies who's parents have been researched, plus their faults and good points combat each others weak points.  That way they wouldn't have to make the mistakes the breeder has done along time ago because they can do it from someone elses knowledge and experience.

Regards Susan

I do try my level best to ensure that any puppy I sell will have a good, permenant home where it will be loved and cared for. But, as I said, being able to give a pup a first class home is not at all the same as having the resources to breed, rear and place a litter.

Of course if I do lift the 'progeny not for registration' endorsement I give the owners involved as much help as possible. But no amount of help from me is going to make a dozen 10 week old giant breed pups manageable in a tiny house with no facilities for pups. And no amount of advice is going to help someone with a limited disposable income get set up properly for a first litter, which is a very expensive undertaking even if all goes well.