[LEFT]In November 2013 we purchased a wheaten Scottish terrier “inoculated, registered and chipped" from a breeder
I already have two other Scottish terriers (7 and 6 years old) and know very well what a Scotties should look like.
She was the last puppy and already 13 weeks old - before buying the dog I asked the breeder why this is the last puppy from the litter and what he thinks may be the reason she was not sold - he responded it just worked out that
way. The other puppies were sold for R6500 each and this one for R4600 - but he stated she is getting older and for every week passing price will be reduced in an attempt to sell the puppy.
The dog seemed well upon first sight, thus we purchased the dog and took her home (we also had a look at the breeding pair) – however a shock followed.
Upon our first visit to our veterinary (the first inoculation we were responsible for) he noted that it appears the puppy has never been inoculated by a veterinary (as there are no vet’s details).
We were informed by the veterinary that the dog has serious problems with her bite / teeth composition – already visible in her milk teeth (which have since been replaced with equally problematic permanent teeth).
These problems should’ve been picked up by a veterinary upon the puppies visit to the vet (for inoculations received whilst with breeder).
We contacted the breeder via e-mail – he didn’t reply upon phoning him he commented “the matter is with an attorney”
Fact of matter is:The breeder gained financially from this purchase
We are incurring extra cost as a result of having a dog with a defect which requires surgery.
The breeder is not responding to the request to transfer the chip of the dog, into our names.
I've phoned the company and they stated they can only assist if a vet confirms that the dog is now in our possession and if we write them a letter applicable to the matter.
It puzzles me that he didn’t even respond to our mail – and upon phoning him he was immediately on the back foot.
I want to warn other people to be cautious upon supporting him – but don’t want to be involved in any slander of defamation matters…[/LEFT]
I already have two other Scottish terriers (7 and 6 years old) and know very well what a Scotties should look like.
She was the last puppy and already 13 weeks old - before buying the dog I asked the breeder why this is the last puppy from the litter and what he thinks may be the reason she was not sold - he responded it just worked out that
way. The other puppies were sold for R6500 each and this one for R4600 - but he stated she is getting older and for every week passing price will be reduced in an attempt to sell the puppy.
The dog seemed well upon first sight, thus we purchased the dog and took her home (we also had a look at the breeding pair) – however a shock followed.
Upon our first visit to our veterinary (the first inoculation we were responsible for) he noted that it appears the puppy has never been inoculated by a veterinary (as there are no vet’s details).
We were informed by the veterinary that the dog has serious problems with her bite / teeth composition – already visible in her milk teeth (which have since been replaced with equally problematic permanent teeth).
These problems should’ve been picked up by a veterinary upon the puppies visit to the vet (for inoculations received whilst with breeder).
We contacted the breeder via e-mail – he didn’t reply upon phoning him he commented “the matter is with an attorney”
Fact of matter is:The breeder gained financially from this purchase
We are incurring extra cost as a result of having a dog with a defect which requires surgery.
The breeder is not responding to the request to transfer the chip of the dog, into our names.
I've phoned the company and they stated they can only assist if a vet confirms that the dog is now in our possession and if we write them a letter applicable to the matter.
It puzzles me that he didn’t even respond to our mail – and upon phoning him he was immediately on the back foot.
I want to warn other people to be cautious upon supporting him – but don’t want to be involved in any slander of defamation matters…[/LEFT]
