Fair Return Policy
 

Asking for opinions:
Because I wouldn't want my pups to end up dumped in a shelter or worse, I plan to ask that the buyers return the pup to me first should they no longer want it/unable to care for it - will return their money..."within reason" This is all based on the pup would be sold in a healthy condition/no issues, etc and is being returned 'just because' (I guess).
Buyers want to know/expect seller to provide vet records that pup is healthy...is it a fair expectation of the seller when offering to return the money that the pup come back healthy also - 'essentially' in the same condition it was sold? ----> so here's my question:
Such as (example purposes only): 2/3 months post sale the new owners are moving (whatever excuse) and decide they can no longer care for pup...but they bring it back infested in fleas...is it a reasonable expectation that the costs to de-louse the pup comes out of the money expected to be returned? (assuming in this example the pup obviously didn't leave the seller to the buyer with fleas) What other things are reasonable? They wanted a vet record pre sale, does it go both ways...the seller should expect a vet record in return?
What types of things/conditions do you place on returning people's money?
I'm thinking they're are more likely to return a pup to the seller if they at least believe they'll get some of their money back.

well I would take the pup no matter what the circumstances but as far as the money back I dont see anything wrong with expecting a vet record thats current and up to date for full money back. If a dog had fleas I dont see anything wrong with taking that out of the refund money. However Im giving a dog owner perspective not a breeder perspective so Ill be interested to see what they say

wow, good question!
 

It took me a while to figure out that once a puppy has been sold and left my home I really can no longer guarantee anything about its health. I think it was on here that I read about a puppy that was returned to the breeder with a devastating head injury that I think was discovered after a refund had been given. When I tried to be a little lenient with a return policy I had a horrible run of people taking puppies home and returning them days to weeks later for allergies and/or crying at night. This was bad for me and my puppies and I had put a stop to it. There are no more full on-the-spot refunds. If someone has to return a puppy I will compensate them whatever amount I can recover by selling the puppy to someone else, minus any direct costs I incur in the process. They will be paid after the puppy has gone to a new home. I've had no returns since putting this into effect and all customers have agreed this is perfectly reasonable.

Thank you all for replies received thus far.
Yes, I was also thinking no 'on-the-spot' refunds...I think these things should be reasonable on both sides. I won't sell you a sick dog, so don't try to "sell" me (back) a sick dog.
Yes, I'd take them back no matter what...the refund portion was what I was trying to make reasonable and where my question(s) were - thus it was never about "would" I take them back rather only about "refund offer fairness/standards to the industry".
I do think it should depend on resaleability - a 3 month puppy would sell easier (I'm sure) than say an 8 month old..., so while trying to resell a person incurs other costs.
I just want to be fair. I realize that just because I'll try to do the right thing doesn't mean everyone will and I don't want to be taken advantage of.

I took back a puppy after a week and another after two weeks...I resold and gave the owner what I got..this was agreement upon when I took the puppy...minus any vet expenses to make sure all was well and I could promise a new owner a healthy puppy.

So, what if someone comes to you four years later and says; well I can't keep the dog any more? Would you still refund that person? I would guess that person should not expect a refund; at least I wouldn't.

I was just curious because my breeder has one of those lifetime return policies . the dog is always to be returned to her in the event I couldn't keep her, etc.

I was wondering the same thing.

Yes (God willing) I would always take back a dog. And I did incorporate that into my agreement (lifetime return - I also said I wouldn't hold them from reselling/giving the pup to another person but I'd need to approve the person, they can't be associated with a kill shelter, broker, pet store, etc, etc --- I thought that fair to them also, maybe one of their relatives fell in love with the pup and after they couldn't care for it that relative wanted it???) but I did limit the time they could receive a portion of their money back...as I thought that was fair. When I sold the one pup and utilized this agreement the buyer thought it was more than fair.

I included that if they sold it they couldn't sell it for more than they paid for it or the extra goes to me --- I think that's fair, hopefully that would keep someone who gets "a good deal" from me from trying to profit/buy/sell. The one boy we currently have I am selling cheaper as I want him to go to a good home while he's young...and I could see, with his bloodlines and quality someone thinking "oh yeah, buy him cheap and then resell him for more"

If anyone would like to see it you can PM me your email and I'll attach a copy of it and then anyone can give me feedback (the good/the bad) - or if you like it use it for your own purposes - I share!:)
It's a full page...possibly a little long and wordy, but I utilized some of my former legal skills to try to make it appropriate.
Thanks for all the input, I truly appreciate it.

I never thought of this, but I could see it happening. The contract with my boys' breeder forbids resale or re-homing. If I cannot care for the dogs at any point in their lives, I am obligated to return them to the breeder, no money back (which the way it should be, ideally, but some people need monetary motivation to do what is in the best interests of the dog).

I know I wouldn't expect my money back either, but yeah, that's why I'm including it in the agreement as a monetary incentive for them to do the right thing.
It's not to my advantage, just the puppy's.
For those that have PM'ed me and included their email I will send a copy tonight/this weekend. Please let me know what you think I am requesting the good/bad/ugly -- feel free to tell me what you like about it, what you don't, anything you think I forgot, feel free to trash it altogether (nicely lol)
I'm want to do the best thing for our puppies so I will consider all feedback
Thanks

I will take the dog back at any age..BUT it is agreed upon I will not pay for it. A 4 yr old Yorkie is little monetary value anyway...

Yes, mine was time limited also...as far as money returned.

I don't find that to be true "at all".....especially for a nice-looking yorkie. I've conducted many searches on some of these rescue sites and if the yorkie is a nice looking one, they ask ALOT for a dog of an "uncertain" and "undesirable" background.....and a lot of them have been quite sickly. I wouldn't want to take them on. I've also looked at some breeder sites even some of the "reputable" breeder sites and they want to sell some of their adults yorkies (6-8 years old) with a nice price-tag attached to them..."still". Pretty good business to sell the original puppy for say.....1,800.00-3,000.00 and get it returned later at a "no buy back" from the breeder. Then the breeder re-sells the adult yorkie for another 800.00-1,200 (perhaps more) AGAIN. WOW!!! By the way...you breeders are always complaining that you sell your pups for "barely" any profit to "none at all". So......if you don't get a profit in the first place ( or much to speak of)....where is your reasoning for saying that a four-year-old yorkie is of no value????? I would'nt expect to get anything for my dog Daisy but she is INVALUABLE as far as I'm concerned. Money would NEVER be the object with concern to her. Only the "best" of the "best" of homes, if something horrible were to happen to me.

I think you have fallen for a line by some "master manipulator".

Our breeder cares deeply where her dogs end up. She doesn't want to see her dogs in a rescue or with the wrong owner. She also makes herself available to answer questions at any time. That support is priceless. :)

I agree. I know things happen and situations change. I would much rather have a breeder take the dog back. In fact, if they demand it I would feel better. I agree that it is absolutely depressing that money has to motivate someone to do the right thing.

:thumbup::thumbup: Good for her(your breeder). Speaking as an owner, if the unthinkable happened to me or my family, and I could no longer care for my dogs, it eases my heart immensely to know that my beloved dogs, will be taken back by my breeders, to be loved and to be placed if necessary in a loving home. This is an immense service to me as the owner. I would not expect, nor want any "money" for my dog that I cared for, for "x" number of years. I would want my breeder to do all to place my dog in a preferred home; one that can give/do for my dog(s), all that is required for their health and happiness. And yes that includes financial wherewithal to care for my dogs properly. If in their opinion that includes a selling price that helps weed out those purchasers who are only looking for a "good" deal, then so be it.

Dogs unlike other property purchases are not "investments" I expect to have a monetary return on investment.

Well....I probably shouldn't have said anything to you about this as these things boil down to personal preferences. I can respect your opinion. I don't think dogs should end up in rescues either. I just feel that I can conduct interviews, check references, etc. to rehome my own dog just as well as any breeder can. All this is really hypothetical for me anyway. My entire family has dogs and we have all agreed that if something happens to one of us that a family member will take and care for the dog. I just don't like the idea of someone selling me a pup with lots of strings attached like that (other than spay/neuter/limited registration). To me it's like someone saying "you can buy my dog and basically just keep it at your place as long as all is well. If something happens "I" get it back and get to do what I like with it. You may or may not get anything back for it. That's up to my descretion too.....and I'll make it as difficult and costly to you as possible to boot.

I would like to add something to what I just said and couldn't figure out how to edit. If a breeder "offered to take by a dog" instead of "making" you bring it back, I would not be bothered by that but to "make" that a condition.....personally, I don't care for that. That's just MY feelings on the situation.

As a buyer, I agree with you, that was one of the things that bothered me the most about buying a Yorkie (conditions placed on the sale, which I refused) --- however, having since brought puppies into the world --- wow, much different feeling; however, that being said...in the end we all know we can't really make someone return a dog to us, but I wanted to offer their money back (within reason) should they simply up and tire of the pup/whatever their reason might be...sudden illness etc, etc. Knowing that I felt it wasn't realistic to expect them to do that without a monetary incentive. Expecting them to pay for what they brought upon the dog only seems fair - I used the example of "fleas" ---anyone can pick that up from a dog visiting their house, doesn't say the person is unclean, etc...but I'm selling someone a "flea-free" dog and "for example" they bring it back two weeks later infested and it costs me say $35 to de-louse it, why shouldn't I take that out of their "refund"? It's a matter of fairness. They don't get the pup their shots on time, expose the dog to a canine disease...bring it back...again...shouldn't the cost to return that dog to its disease free state be borne by them? I like to think of it on both sides of the coin. If I sold a pup with a preventable disease and the issues of that disease cropped up post sale the buyer would have the right to expect me to pay for it...wouldn't they? At least that's what buyers on YT are always saying they expect from their breeder. Doesn't the responsibility for proper care go both ways? For the record, no I'm not selling sick, flea-infested dogs...just using that as example.
As far as other things go, I would try to sell as I would buy...some things are beyond the scope of fairness ... in my opinion. Once someone sells someone something (sorry, a dog in the eyes of the law is a "thing", like it or not) it is no longer theirs to dictate how/what the new owner does with it.
Legal contracts have to be fair to both sides. You can have people sign all sorts of things, but if it isn't an enforceable contract it's not worth anything, that's something people have a hard time comprehending. The first thing a judge is going to look at is: Is it fair? Is it practical? Judges are always leaning toward the side of the buyer, so ANY improprieties in a contract will always come back and bite the Seller.
I can't make someone return a dog to me...however I can encourage it by offering them some sort of compensation. Giving money back is rarely to the benefit of the seller, it is for the sake of the puppy only. I'm not making people sign my agreement, only if they want the option to get their money back.
To those that requested a copy I have sent it - if you haven't received it, email me again. For those that responded with some great suggestions thank you so much.

My father is co-owner of the dogs, so he could keep them if something happened to me. I wouldn't want anyone else in my family to take these dogs. Our breeder would take them and care for them until she found a suitable home. I appreciate that service and I think it would be more of an imposition to her than to me in any case.

I respect your opinion, but there are many people who also don't believe in the spay/neuter portion of contracts. When people approached me about studding my dogs out, they were shocked when I told them that I was obligated to neuter.

To me, my pet contract is no different than the co-ownership that most show dogs are purchased under.

All of this is more reason to choose your breeder wisely. :)

I think there is a reason breeders make it so incredibly hard. If I was a breeder, I would make buyers jump through hoops. Not because I'm a snobby elitist, but because these are living breathing creatures we are talking about. I would be 100% responsible for each and every life *I* allow to come to this earth. I will be responsible if it had genetic defects, if it is abused by it's adopted family, if it ever goes hungry, or if it lives a happy life with it's new family. That's a heck of a lot responsibility don't you think? The contract is only as good as those people who are willing to live by it. It's gotten to the point where breeders simply can't trust buyers anymore. It's so sad we don't have faith in each other anymore. Strong contracts are made, and gone over with by lawyers just to show us buyers how serious breeders take their craft. They genuinely care about this little life they brought into this world and are trying to cover their bases.

I have no contract, and I have no intention on ever letting Kaji leave my side. I have a verbal agreement in place that my little brother will care for him if anything were to happen to me. But what if he doesn't? I'm gone, Kaji's neurotic behaviors cramp his style, or he gets married and his wife doesn't want Kaji around, then what? He can get tossed in the pound and his breeder may never know just what happened to Kaji. I don't keep in contact with her, and I am not obligated to give updates, or return him if he ever needs a new home.

Excellent post.

Like I said....if a breeder "offers" to take back the dog then, I have no problem with the whole thing. I wouldn't expect them to reimburse me "anything" for the dog either. I don't think they necessarily should either. I would just find comfort in the fact that, at a last ditch effort, my dog would have a safe home to go to until something else came along. I would actually be impressed by "that". But, if they are going to "MAKE" someone (or try to enforce something like that) then, by golly, they should give you a full refund for the dog minus anything due to bad ownership (like fleas, heartworms) you know, preventable health issues and a vet check by the breeders vet and upon receipt of a health record from the previous owners vet. But not for feeding the dog or anything that comes up after the date of surrender. Afterall, they demanded the dog be returned.

I understand everything you are saying and totally respect it. It's all a very complicated situation. And you are absolutely correct when you say breeders really don't have any control over what happens to their pups when they leave the breeder. For example..my next door neighbor has a yorkie, Toto is his name. He "used to be a nice-looking little boy" but isn't anymore. He is matted and has stickers all over his body because she takes him out to potty on a leash where there are all these stickers. She is too lazy to go to an area that is sticker free. You would think this woman would be a fantastic owner because she is a high school principal and in addition, she has inherited quite a lot from her parents who were wealthy. She has PLENTY of money to take her little dog to the groomers on a regular basis. But, instead, complains how much they charge her for the service. She has even "hit me up" to groom her dog for her because I take such good care of my dog's coat and grooming needs. As a matter a fact, about two months ago she banged on my door all frantic because Toto was choking. I took her to the emergency vet not ten minutes from our homes. The were agast at the dog's appearance and when the vet tech tried to insert a thermometer in Toto's rectum, he couldn't. It was blocked off completely with matted hair and dried fecal matter. But she is VERY PROUD of the fact that she paid several thousand dollars for him and the he, as she puts it, "came from the best breeder in Texas" and that she was questioned like nobody's business and can't breed him (by the way, he is not neutered, she wouldn't pay the money for it) sell him, etc. I can tell she is looking to see if I'm impressed by all of this but.......I'm just not. I think she's an idiot.

I think it's this type of owner that makes breeders cringe. I feel so bad for the poor pup. The contract is just an attempt to avoid this kind of person. I'm sure, as in this case, it doesn't always work.

That's so heart breaking. :( My mom is so torn about the way I care for Kaji. She knows he makes me happy, and I do my best to make him happy too. She'll sigh and say, "you know, there are kids in this world that would kill for the kind of love, attention, and dedication you give a dog."

I think the way you, I, and a lot of the people here on Yorkie Talk care for our dogs is the way dogs (and any animal) should be cared for and loved. Too bad there are so many out there in the world that have the mindset that animals don't have needs or feelings very similar to us humans.

No, I'm not "making/demanding" someone return the pup to me, I'm encouraging it in hopes to protect the pup, in the event they cannot find an acceptable home for it. I do feel a strong responsibility for the pups I 'chose' to bring into the world. At the same time I don't think they should profit from the dog insomuch as allowing that to happen simply encourages people buying up pups and reselling them to God knows who. I even state they can give it to someone else as long as that person is not, or is not associated with a pet store, etc., etc., I'm not unreasonable. It's their dog, they bought and paid for it. Maybe Aunt Millie fell in love with the dog and wants it because they can no longer care for it, IMO, why shouldn't Aunt Millie get the dog (as long as she's not going to dump it off, etc) --- And no I don't think it reasonable to charge someone for feeding the dog after they brought it back. I already used examples of them allowing the dog, no matter how accidently, get "fleas" They get their money when the pup is resold...the sooner the dog is back to salable condition the sooner they get their money back.
I don't think anyone would want to bring the pups back, they are high quality, healthy pups, and I do my best to make sure the fit is right/good pet owners, so far the new owners are absolutely thrilled with the pups bought...but yes, circumstances can change and it is for those types of situations I am looking out for the best interest of the pups. Hopefully, it'll never be utilized...it's for the "what if"/special circumstances situation I'm thinking of.
Again, it's a good deal for them...gives them some buyer protection. And if it turns out they need to relinquish the pup quickly, knowing they can bring it back to me, hopefully will prevent a 'dump off'
As I stated, I'm trying to think like a buyer as well as a seller. Would I agree to what I've put down in writing? Yes, then it's acceptable to me.

OK....now I understand completely and think it's a fantastic plan. I would go for that for sure Kendra.:) I'm happy now!!!:D