Quote:
Originally Posted by puppypaws  I am opening up the other side of the story...because all that was posted on this site was this lady's side and a lot of sympathy postings. There are bad buyers as well as bad breeders out there. Leslee is not out the $200 because the lady's attorney told her to pay up...he knew she would lose in court. Leslee is not out the $ but out the slam to her reputation....which is one complaint (unjustified) in 7 years as a quality breeder. Leslee did offer to replace the puppy per her contract with the lady, she wanted no part of it. Leslee was acting responsibly. She threatened to sue Leslee before anything else happened. I think Leslee has a right to defend herself and I have the right to voice my opinion just like this lady does. This opinion will be validated even further when this lady's vet report is posted later today.
I don't need a valium, I have a Yorkie to love me~!
I just want Leslee to have a fair shake.
Without my postings you would have nothing else to balance out what she has said. Until you are attacked I guess you will not know how she has felt.
The marble castle refers to someone off out of the situation with no connection to what has happened.....not that you are a well to do lawdy daw southern belle or anything like that! |
The problem isn't you trying to bring someone else's "side" to light.. it's the way you do it. You are flat out attacking someone else. Not just explaining facts. That's the problem. You're not making much of a case when you do that. I, for one, don't want to listen to you after reading all that simply because even though you're "not directly involved," you are so heated about this, name-calling and saying things like "get your pocketbook ready."
It's wrong. I don't care how this truly played out, or whether it was the buyer/breeders "fault."
