Rescue dog! Big let down!

Fire_Fox

I have to say I think the OP has handled all the questions and criticisms very well. £175 is a lot of money to some of us, and I'd probably want it returned under the circumstances.

mrcol1000

jimmyjimsgin wrote: »

all my previous labs and retrievers bought from reputable breeders insisted on returning them if things didnt work out.

I expected them to have the dog back as it says on the form they will have the dog back at any given time and that we would not pass it on to anybody else.

I think the point your missing and regardless of what the charity home did and the rights and wrongs, they did not sell you the dog but let you rehome the dog in return for a charity donation. You can not ask for a donation back. The best they could have offered is another dog to adopt without any further donation but I can fully understand why you would not want another dog from them.

Katie-Kat-Kins

consultant31 wrote: »

I think the sentence in bold red above was the bit that made the other poster say your post was disgusting. There was no need for a sarcastic reply at all.

Equally, she didn't want to return the dog because "she didn't like it after a couple of weeks". It had attacked another animal with no provocation and caused severe wounds! With a child in the house, OP would have been very irresponsible to have kept it?

I wasn't being sarcastic, and to be honest I think it is pretty disgusting that someone would seek to take back a DONATION they have made to charity - That was my point.

I know the OP wasn't exchanging the dog because he didn't like it, I was saying that he had additional protection because he had got the dog from a charity rather than buying it from a breeder.

I remain of the view that by taking back and rehoming the dog the charity have done their bit and should not be obliged to return the donation.

For all we know the assessment was entirely thorough and reasonable and this incident was completely unforseeable. Maybe it wasn't as thorough as it could be but the fact that the dog was fine for four days suggests that they didn't do too badly. Dogs are afterall unpredictable animals with personalities and minds of their own.

killywillykaz

Well said Suki1964.

Bobl

I hope this does not put people off rehoming rescue dogs. We have two, one we have had for 9 years (Collie cross), and one we got only a year ago (Collie). We did all the research we could about the breed and read dog phsycology books, but we still had 'issues', including aggresive tendencies towards our old dog, but mostly food related. A year on we have a lovely relaxed dog that is a real pleasure, and both dogs get on really well, in fact the older dog (Male) is very protective of his new girlfriend.

The OP has had a bad experience, but not all rescue dogs are bad, they just need careful handling, love and understanding - most are just scared after a bad start in life.

Dancing_Shoes

I don't think you will get anything from the "charity" and I use that term loosely as any charity i have known would have been mortified and refunded the deposit. Interesting that they would be prepared to risk bad press;) I would write a strongly worded letter and inform them that you will be writing to all the local and national newspapers regarding their treatment (nationals probably won't be interested) and see if they are then happy to refund;)

ihatecaptcha

Bobl wrote: »

The OP has had a bad experience, but not all rescue dogs are bad, they just need careful handling, love and understanding - most are just scared after a bad start in life.

This rescue dog wasn't "bad" either. He was just expressing his animal nature.

I've read through both these threads and it doesn't make sense to me. The OP states they have worked in a rescue home, so they should have been aware of the risks involved in rehoming a rescue dog. I don't think rescue centres should have to refund a donation because a rehoming doesn't work out. Taking on a rescue dog is not something people should do lightly, thinking that it's the same as a buying a TV and they can bring it back and get their money back or exchange it for another. The rescue centre was right to refuse to provide a puppy. How long before the puppy would have been brought back on the grounds that it was peeing on the carpet?

Dogs are not commodities.

Dancing_Shoes

ihatecaptcha wrote: »

This rescue dog wasn't "bad" either. He was just expressing his animal nature.

I've read through both these threads and it doesn't make sense to me. The OP states they have worked in a rescue home, so they should have been aware of the risks involved in rehoming a rescue dog. I don't think rescue centres should have to refund a donation because a rehoming doesn't work out. Taking on a rescue dog is not something people should do lightly, thinking that it's the same as a buying a TV and they can bring it back and get their money back or exchange it for another. The rescue centre was right to refuse to provide a puppy. How long before the puppy would have been brought back on the grounds that it was peeing on the carpet?

Dogs are not commodities.

I have worked with 3 rescue centres (one being very well known) and if this situation had occured although it is normal policy not to refund they would have refunded in this situation. You are correct, taking on a rescue animal is a very serious committment and I am sure the op was aware of this (they already have a dog so the usual excuses don't apply). The rescue centre have managed to rehome this animal therefore the usual "we are a charity" doesn't apply as they have had their money back for the dog already
The op isn't talking about a dog urinating in the house they are talking about a very serious incident which could have been soooo much worse. We had lots of people who changed their minds and wanted a refund but the ops vet has spoken to them so they are aware that this isn't an excuse. The op doesn't need to be preached about the rights and wrongs of pet ownership, he was already an owner and still is an owner:rolleyes:, what happened would be what we would have advised (returning the dog) we would not have advised that they "see how it goes", the op's original dog could have been killed...how many people would have said that he was then an irresponsible owner for keeping the rescue dog:rolleyes:

jimmyjimsgin

I thank you for your comments, I do not intend to put people off rehoming rescue dogs, that is not my aim at all. I merely have had a bad experience however feel that I do not want this experience with this particular rescue home to occur again to anybody else. If I did not have a child and a dog I may have indeed tried again with this rescue dog, however in my circumstaances I feel that I had to act responsibily and take advice from professionals such as my vet. I am disgusted how it has been handled and do feel that they could have of refunded the donation or part of; Im glad your situation has worked out, we love dogs and would have loved to have been able to keep the little rescue dog as we all grew so fond of him over the 4 days. Just a shame it was such a vicious and unprovoked attack.

Bobl wrote: »

I hope this does not put people off rehoming rescue dogs. We have two, one we have had for 9 years (Collie cross), and one we got only a year ago (Collie). We did all the research we could about the breed and read dog phsycology books, but we still had 'issues', including aggresive tendencies towards our old dog, but mostly food related. A year on we have a lovely relaxed dog that is a real pleasure, and both dogs get on really well, in fact the older dog (Male) is very protective of his new girlfriend.

The OP has had a bad experience, but not all rescue dogs are bad, they just need careful handling, love and understanding - most are just scared after a bad start in life.

jimmyjimsgin

The rescue home that I worked in was extremely thorough in its assessments and placements, I used a local rescue centre as i felt that local would be better when I looked to get a dog myself. My family and I contimplated getting a rescue dog for one year, looking into mainly thing s to do with it. I trusted the charity's advice totally and now realise that I shouldnt have. The situation should and could have been handled alot better. I would NEVER return a dog for something minor like peeing on the carpet, yoiu are implying that I am extremely shallow when it comes to having a dog. The chairman mentioned a puppy to me saying that it may be safer after thinking upon it as the puppy would be "a clean slate" it ws he who suggested a puppy and it was I that considered one instead of the refund that is all. I dont think it was wrong to get another dog free of charge considering our experience.

ihatecaptcha wrote: »

This rescue dog wasn't "bad" either. He was just expressing his animal nature.

I've read through both these threads and it doesn't make sense to me. The OP states they have worked in a rescue home, so they should have been aware of the risks involved in rehoming a rescue dog. I don't think rescue centres should have to refund a donation because a rehoming doesn't work out. Taking on a rescue dog is not something people should do lightly, thinking that it's the same as a buying a TV and they can bring it back and get their money back or exchange it for another. The rescue centre was right to refuse to provide a puppy. How long before the puppy would have been brought back on the grounds that it was peeing on the carpet?

Dogs are not commodities.