New dog - poorly & prev owners knew -what are my rights?

bexyboo1312

I have offered for the seller to sort out the vets direct, pay them direct, use their own vets etc etc - they won't do this. all they are bothered about is that i have obtained a copy of his records, which they say breaches data protection and getting compensation from the vets because of this! they have not taken my point about him being happily homed in to consideration.

I would ahve thought if i go to small claims, the judge can clearly see that by me agreeing to a refund - this dog would have been rehomed to me (which they found apparently so upsetting but want us to go through the same thing) back to its owners before treatment, and then sold again - how can this be good for a dog who is happy where he is?

I will send a letter by recorded delivery tomorrow, stating our final wishes (which we have stated are open to negotiation - but not to the point where the dog is returned for a simple refund - we have already paid £50 in medical costs for his antibiotics and diagnosis). Then I will have to go through small claims, if i get nowhere then so be it - but atleast at the end of it all my dog will still be happy and settled in a home he is now used to.

Thanks again for your help

Equaliser123

bexyboo1312 wrote: »

I have offered for the seller to sort out the vets direct, pay them direct, use their own vets etc etc - they won't do this. all they are bothered about is that i have obtained a copy of his records, which they say breaches data protection and getting compensation from the vets because of this! they have not taken my point about him being happily homed in to consideration.

I would ahve thought if i go to small claims, the judge can clearly see that by me agreeing to a refund - this dog would have been rehomed to me (which they found apparently so upsetting but want us to go through the same thing) back to its owners before treatment, and then sold again - how can this be good for a dog who is happy where he is?

I will send a letter by recorded delivery tomorrow, stating our final wishes (which we have stated are open to negotiation - but not to the point where the dog is returned for a simple refund - we have already paid £50 in medical costs for his antibiotics and diagnosis). Then I will have to go through small claims, if i get nowhere then so be it - but atleast at the end of it all my dog will still be happy and settled in a home he is now used to.

Thanks again for your help

Couple of things: 1) don't state that it is open to negotiation. Sounds desperate.

2) Provided that you have given them opportunity to arrange medical care direct, that puts you in a good position.

3) What sort of people are they? Large breeders?

Optimist

bexyboo1312 wrote: »

I have offered for the seller to sort out the vets direct, pay them direct, use their own vets etc etc - they won't do this. all they are bothered about is that i have obtained a copy of his records, which they say breaches data protection and getting compensation from the vets because of this! they have not taken my point about him being happily homed in to consideration.

I would ahve thought if i go to small claims, the judge can clearly see that by me agreeing to a refund - this dog would have been rehomed to me (which they found apparently so upsetting but want us to go through the same thing) back to its owners before treatment, and then sold again - how can this be good for a dog who is happy where he is?

I will send a letter by recorded delivery tomorrow, stating our final wishes (which we have stated are open to negotiation - but not to the point where the dog is returned for a simple refund - we have already paid £50 in medical costs for his antibiotics and diagnosis). Then I will have to go through small claims, if i get nowhere then so be it - but atleast at the end of it all my dog will still be happy and settled in a home he is now used to.

Thanks again for your help

I'm assuming this a letter before action in which case you should say and give them a week/fortnight to respond I agree with Equalizer about the open to negotiation part leave it out.

For what it is worth I have heard of a case in small claims where the judge awarded the vets fees to be paid, that was in Wales but that's not to say the judge who gets your case will see it the same way.

Contacting Trading standards might be in order if these people are in a business maybe even the RSPCA it might be a regular occurrence

Good luck

sarahg1969

I'd be interested to know what part of the Data Protection Act they think applies to dogs!

In any event, even if it did apply, you would be entitled to the records, firstly because it's your dog now (so you can see his medical records, yes?), and secondly because they are required to assist in the consideration of court proceedings (against the dog's former owner).

They are just going on the offensive because they know they are very much in the wrong.

Equaliser123

sarahg1969 wrote: »

I'd be interested to know what part of the Data Protection Act they think applies to dogs!

In any event, even if it did apply, you would be entitled to the records, firstly because it's your dog now (so you can see his medical records, yes?), and secondly because they are required to assist in the consideration of court proceedings (against the dog's former owner).

They are just going on the offensive because they know they are very much in the wrong.

Very good point. DPA is a total red herring.

I_know_my_ABC_and_my_CMYK

Proc wrote: »

Another Pug sold to another trend-follower with no interest in the dog's well-being. I feel sorry for the dog already.

You say the most important thing is getting the money? It's not. The most important thing is getting the dog into good health, and giving him a loving & caring family that aren't going to turn their back on it the moment it starts costing money.

This got me thinking about when I first got my Springer Spaniel. He was about 8-12 weeks old. Took him to the vet and he was actually in quite poor health. Had terrible skin rash, some kind of lice, plus a few other small problems. It only cost about £350 to fix, but the last thing on my mind was "Oh yeh this is faulty goods I'm going to pursue the seller". It was more "Well I thank god he's healthy and happy again".

You wouldn't act this way with an adopted child, so why do it with a dog?

And if you can't afford the £800 fees? Well maybe you shouldn't be getting a dog in the first place.

Legally, I'm not sure where you stand. However, I do get the impression that the money is more important than the dog's welfare.

I totally understand your sentiments. Funnily enough my dog was in a bad way too when i bought her. I diddn't even know I could ask for a refund or partial refund.

sometimes you can have too much info.

sp1987

I think mitigation could be a problem where applying for his fees to be paid are concerned. They will say you don't have to pay for repairs, we will repair/refund/exchange.

Maybe asking for a partial refund on the dog is the easiest way to get some of your £800 back which you can then use for your vet fees. After all, you paid £800 for a ''fit and healthy'' dog. Should your ''unhealthy'' (I could not pluck up the courage to write faulty bless him!) dog not attract a lower price due to the ''repairs'' needed? A discount for false advertising.

I think as emotive as it is you need to in a legal sense consider your dog a product for which you paid full price and received 'half' service, with the seller knowing they were not giving you what they advertised. I am an animal lover myself and would no way want to part with it, so asking for the full money back implies returning both parties to their position before the contract = no dog.

If I were you go for 50% refund. You say your dog was £800 so £400 potentially back and his op is £250?

Make direct written offers to settle out of court on the basis that the offer and it's payment must be made within x days, ''negotiations'' just gets you messed around by idiots who want to keep you out of court and not pay you a penny.

I do not think the owners morals toward the dog are a problem here, he is getting 'fixed' whatever happens. The people who sold him, however attracted an extra price because they misdescribed him. I would certainly pursue the money myself, though it would make no odds to the care the dog received. I pick up varying stray animals from car parks, roads, you name it. Humans however do not attract a free ride as far as I am concerned.

bexyboo1312

thank you every one for your help, i really appreciate this. they replied last night saying take it to courts cos they have offered a refund and stop quoting sales of goods act as they are private sellers not business (not sure when they qualify as a business as they breed dogs often). They had the cheek to say we are not the people they thought - errrrr we are not the ones selling an unhealthy dog.
I feel sorry for my poor boy that he has suffered this long and hope he recovers quickly after his treatment next week. will contact consumer direct etc in regards to procedures i need to follow to take it to small claims.
i know we could be on shakey ground but i am hoping (!!) the judge will see that returning a dog would mean he would have been rehomed 3 times and that we don't believe this is in his best interest given that he is settled and we dont know if they will actually give him the medical treatment.
the owner still has failed to pinpoint exactly what was incorrect in the vet report by emial -so i am guessing nothing was wrong and if she lied in writing she knows it would look even worse. I am really stuck on what to ask for, as yes he wouldn';t have been worth £800 if he was advertised as being ill.....i will work out a figure - please can someone help me with this - a total figure?

thanks again i will keep you updated.

MFWannabe

I haven't a clue what total costs to ask for. I just wanted to say that you now clearly love this dog and as a fellow dog lover please don't let him even have the slightest chance of being returned to these awful people.

I_know_my_ABC_and_my_CMYK

It does sound as if the sellers are puppy farming. Puppy farmers don't always look after the dogs for breeding as they are only interested in making money.

My brother came accross something similar when they were looking to buy their dogs and reported it to the RSPCA who looked into it and dealt with it.