Oooh Kennel Club makes me frustrated!

Frugalista

katy721 wrote: »

This is my point. It seems daft the KC having the information but not being able to pass it on to the person who may need it!

Some good ideas there for other detectivey points to try though!

But you won't need it because you can't breed from him as he is not registered in your name. Also you won't be breeding from him as he has been neutered. Who had him neutered by the way? Further, you wouldn't breed from him because of his behavioural issues (you are a responsible person, after all) which would preclude him as a suitable breeding prospect.

The original owner seems to have had her reasons for not handing over his documents to the second owner - that was her perogative. The second owner could have refused to take him under those terms - but she took him anyway without any signed paperwork.

The second owner seems to have passed him on to you without informing the original owner and without any signed paperwork or other information about his origins. You took him anyway. If the original owner had promised the second owner his paperwork then it is up to the second owner to persue it.

You took him knowing the score and are now (in my personal opinion) running scared in case the original owner may suddenly want him back. I believe that the second owner knows more than she has told you and is the one who has acted a bit shady over his re-homing.

Again, the KC have acted correctly and will happily transfer him into your name on receipt of the signed paperwork. It's up to you to chase it up.

In your previous thread you said someone had told you his pedigree name - who was that and can you not ask them again?

Wellyboots6

I think I am maybe not explaining myself very well, and also thinking too much about hypothetical situations rather than concentrating on my original reason for wanting to register him!

I'm not saying I would ever have considered breeding him (avid rescue supporter so not much in to that side of things!), just that it didn't make much sense to me to withhold potentially crucial health information.

He was neutered by the first owner, had a passport sorted and was chipped and vaccinated (so very well looked after physically).

It was the second owner that told me his name, although she can't remember now what it was and has no paperwork with it on.

The original owner would not want him back now, as far as I am aware she has at least one new dog and appears to have moved away.

Frugalista

katy721 wrote: »

I'm not saying I would ever have considered breeding him (avid rescue supporter so not much in to that side of things!), just that it didn't make much sense to me to withhold potentially crucial health information.

But they are not wilfully withholding it - it is there for anyone who knows his pedigree name (or his parents pedigree details). It is not the KC's fault that you don't have all the relevant information is it?

I am interested in what you think is "crucial" health information. The KC would only have data on hip/elbow scores and eye tests - if he had even been tested in the first place - and the breed club would possibly have information on haemophilia screening. I'm not sure what you think could be being "witheld" from you?

Going back to the original owner, presumably you have her name from the passport, etc. Could you try googling her or even the dreaded facebook? Was she a friend of the second owner? Maybe they have mutual friends who would know where she had moved to. It just seems a bit odd that she has totally disappeared.

MrsAtobe

Frugalista, 'crucial health information' is entirely breed dependant, with my last dog it would have been hip/elbow scores, with the current one we have that plus epilepsy and entropion. They are both spaniel breeds, similar size, so you can see that the specific breed needs specific information.

Frugalista

MrsAtobe wrote: »

Frugalista, 'crucial health information' is entirely breed dependant, with my last dog it would have been hip/elbow scores, with the current one we have that plus epilepsy and entropion. They are both spaniel breeds, similar size, so you can see that the specific breed needs specific information.

Yes, I am fully aware of that ....

Frugalista wrote: »

That said, there are only certain health test results (in any given breed) that are logged

... however, the KC doesn't have individual data on things like epilepsy (although some breed clubs may try to compile a list of dogs affected) as there is no test available. I don't know about entropion - although I seem to think that a vet is supposed to inform the KC if they operate on a dog to "sort" the entropion? Any vets out there who could clarify this?

Regardless, there is only a limited amount of info available from the KC on health screening results and I'm still not sure what katy721 believes is "crucial".

Any of the current health schemes applicable to the GSD can be run again on her dog if she felt it that important. There is nothing to stop her doing them for her own peace of mind - though I am unconvinved that any of the results are "crucial".