MyFairLacy | 03-14-2008 10:50 AM | Quote:
Originally Posted by Ladyhawk
(Post 1848224)
I'm not sure I agree with the buyer having all of the options. Why does the seller not get to make a decision? If one of my pups is suspected of having a congental problem I would rather refund the money and take my baby back and have his care given by a vet that I trust under my supervision. I don't want to be forced to pay the vet bills of someone that I don't know who may be doing unnecessary tests or work and may be overcharging me as well. If I am to flip the bill than I should be able to make the decisions. I also feel that 15 days is a bit long to document contagious or infectious disease. If something like parvo shows up 14 days after that pup leaves my home it was not contracted here. It just seems to leave the door open to some crafty scammers. I understand consumers wanting to be protected but breeders need to be protected now days as well, everyone is looking to get something for nothing. | But most buyers get very attached to their dogs. Even if they've only had them for 3 months or so, they probably already love them and consider them their babies. They don't just want to give their baby back.
I think that if a puppy has a defect or health problem covered by the health guarantee, the breeder should pay the vet bills UP TO the amount of the purchase price. So for ex. if the puppy cost $1500 and has a defect that cost $800 in vet bills, the breeder would pay for that $800. But if that $1500 puppy had a $3000 vet bill, the breeder would just be obligated to return the $1500. Anything above that would be nice, but not necessary. I think it's good to give the option of taking the puppy back, but most people won't want to do that because they already love the dog.
I don't like the idea of a replacement puppy..if you already bought one defective dog from a breeder, why would you want another one? |