# Breeders with out Guarantees



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

I read an interesting thread on another board and was curious what you guys think.

The thought process is that as a breeder all you can do is health checks and then make the best guess for pairing of a sire and dam. If you have OFA'd your dogs (and any other breed specific health check) and that have come out clear and you make that info available to the potential buyers then why should you guarantee health?

Basically it's not your fault if the dog develops hip dysplasia. You checked your dogs and the dogs in the ped. The buyer new the same info as you. Why would you replace a puppy when you did everything you could?


----------



## CainGSD (Nov 15, 2003)

As an addition to the OP question/statement. I have read on some breeder's websites that pups are priced at a lower rate without an guarantee and higher with a guarantee.

I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind this policy. Same pairing, same pups, same enviroment presumably so why see at a lower price wihout a guarantee?


----------



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

Higher risk means more cost.

I'm starting to lean more towards no guarantee. How do I know you dogs hips aren't all screwed up because you were doing the "A" frame at 5 months and running 10 miles at time at 7 months. Or that you fed table scraps his whole life and he was 30lbs overweight?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

How does agility and running cause hip dysplasia? While that could irritate the HD, it doesn't cause it. It doesn't cause a hip socket to be shallow.

One thing I wondered about on a breeders website was they have in the guarantee that the buyers have to feed a food with certain requirements, provide proof and they have to feed a specific supplement that the breeder sells. While I agree with feeding certain foods and supplementing, I didn't like the supplements themselves and don't feed kibble.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

CainGSD said:


> I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind this policy. Same pairing, same pups, same enviroment presumably so why see at a lower price wihout a guarantee?


Depends on what the guarantee is. Are they paying for surgery? Taking the dog with health problems back and then have to treat them? Are they giving you another dog for free? 

You pay more for a warranty, it makes sense you would pay for a health guarantee.


----------



## CainGSD (Nov 15, 2003)

Granted the pup can adversely affected with improper nutrition and exercise and training. Those are certainly all factors out of the breeders' control.

I definitely understand higher risk includes higher cost but OTOH if all things are equal up to the sale of the pup where is the higher risk to warrant higher cost? Unless the breeders' thought process is to simply bank those extra monies and bet against themselves that they will have to honor their guarantee at some point in a particular pup's life.

Thank you for the interesting topic


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

rvadog said:


> I read an interesting thread on another board and was curious what you guys think.
> 
> The thought process is that as a breeder all you can do is health checks and then make the best guess for pairing of a sire and dam. If you have OFA'd your dogs (and any other breed specific health check) and that have come out clear and you make that info available to the potential buyers then why should you guarantee health?
> 
> Basically it's not your fault if the dog develops hip dysplasia. You checked your dogs and the dogs in the ped. The buyer new the same info as you. Why would you replace a puppy when you did everything you could?


 
Hip Dysplasia, as well as many other health issues IS genetic. It really is. It's the unknowledgeable and irresponsible breeders that blame the new puppy owner for it. Some of them even go to the extent saying their puppies can do zero stairs for the first year to prevent HD (who carries their 1 yr old GSD up to the 2nd floor?). 

I think you are confusing good OFA results on one dog meaning that ALL the dogs in the lines also have excellent hip results. You need to (like a good breeder knows to) broaden what you are looking. One puppy from a litter of 12 with great hips means nothing. All 12 puppies with great OFA's is better. Both parent dogs and the parent dogs brothers/sisters having great hips is better knowledge. Both parent dogs, their brothers/sister PLUS the parents of those dogs and their brothers/sister means much much more. YOu need to look at ALL the dogs you can and have real results. 

The knowledgable and responsible breeders KNOW, really know the dogs they use in their breeding program and follow all the puppies forever and ever and ever... so they know what they have good and bad in their lines. To continue to breed to the good and avoid the bad.

Doing the aframe full sized at 5 months will damage the growth plates, not cause HD. So that can be seen by a vet and the breeder will be reassured it's not a genetic issue.

Being a responsible breeder involves a CRAZY amount of work and knowledge about your dogs, your lines and then figuring out what other dogs you may want to blend in to make it even better! Much more than just one set of OFA x-rays on one dog....

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/choosing-breeder/137533-things-look-responsible-breeder.html

:wub:


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

The short answer is that US buyers expect it, pretty much demand it, and jump to the conclusion that a breeder who doesn't offer a warranty is a bad one.

In Europe, there are no warranties. For exactly the reasons stated. Even if a breeder does everything humanly possible to avoid problems, they will still crop up from time to time. We're dealing with living creatures, not something built in a factory where the person making the product has complete control over everything. Health, and temperament, issues will crop up in even the best breedings, despite the best efforts to prevent them. Common sense is that when buying a living creature, there are no guarantees. Genetics can't be made to order like a pizza.

In Europe, the general trend is that everyone accepts this. Buyers are expected to do their research on the lines and any potential health issues, realize that no matter what there is still no guarantee, roll the dice and accept the risk. Of course, many people in the US understand the reality of the situation there as well. But the overwhelming trend amongst buyers here is that if something goes wrong there must be someone to blame, and they are owed something in return for their bad luck. They want someone to hold responsible and they expect compensation of some sort, and this general attitude about the whole thing means that US breeders are pretty much expected to offer health warranties or they will be considered "bad" breeders.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Chris Wild said:


> The short answer is that US buyers expect it, pretty much demand it, and jump to the conclusion that a breeder who doesn't offer a warranty is a bad one.
> 
> In Europe, there are no warranties. For exactly the reasons stated. Even if a breeder does everything humanly possible to avoid problems, they will still crop up from time to time. We're dealing with living creatures, not something built in a factory where the person making the product has complete control over everything. Health, and temperament, issues will crop up in even the best breedings, despite the best efforts to prevent them. Common sense is that when buying a living creature, there are no guarantees. Genetics can't be made to order like a pizza.
> 
> In Europe, the general trend is that everyone accepts this. Buyers are expected to do their research on the lines and any potential health issues, realize that no matter what there is still no guarantee, roll the dice and accept the risk. Of course, many people in the US understand the reality of the situation there as well. But the overwhelming trend amongst buyers here is that if something goes wrong there must be someone to blame, and they are owed something in return for their bad luck. They want someone to hold responsible and they expect compensation of some sort, and this general attitude about the whole thing means that US breeders are pretty much expected to offer health warranties or they will be considered "bad" breeders.


Chris, how much of a difference do you think it makes in Germany that you can't breed your dog and get papers on it unless it has at least a Sch1 title. Which means there is a bit of a health and temperment assurance just in that? (Don't they also have x-rays involved with that?). 

I've also heard that they cull out (kill) sick or unsuitable puppies over there which pulls out those genetics also? (or has that stopped?)


----------



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

Maggie,

I know what a good breeder looks like. I was asking aspecific question. And if you think Vets know everything about HD then you are misinformed. I just now read where a study linked free feeding (nutrition!) to HD. Perhaps some dogs are genetically more prone to it but when you don't take care of your pup's joints then you are asking for trouble.

Also can you imagine trying to explain to someone that "Sure your dog's hips are bad but it's not displastic so I don't guarantee it. Yes I said I guarantee hips but only dysplasia. No that doesn't count". To the uninformed you would look like a swindler.


----------



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

MaggieRoseLee said:


> I've also heard that they cull out (kill) sick or unsuitable puppies over there which pulls out those genetics also? (or has that stopped?)


I know of U.S. breeders that do this.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

CainGSD said:


> I definitely understand higher risk includes higher cost but OTOH if all things are equal up to the sale of the pup where is the higher risk to warrant higher cost? Unless the breeders' thought process is to simply bank those extra monies and bet against themselves that they will have to honor their guarantee at some point in a particular pup's life.


The higher risk is monetary. 
Without a warranty, the breeder knows once the sale is over and done with the money is their's.
With a warranty, depending on the actual terms of the contract, the breeder must be aware that the buyer may come back later and claim a replacement pup or refund. That means it may be a year or 2 or more before the breeder can safely assume that money from the puppy sale is their's and they won't suddenly be placed in a situation of having to give someone a huge chunk of change, or lose expected revenue from another litter.

And simple fact with this breed is that no matter how good the breeder and lines, if warranties are offered at some point the breeder WILL have to honor a few. For those breeders who tier their pricing based on whether there is a warranty or not, charging more for the warranty makes sense. The buyer is paying more for the option of getting compensation if their luck was bad, and the breeder is getting more for the trouble this will cause them down the road and to provide the funds to honor those warranties when needed.

Why would a breeder not charge more for a warranty? It cost the breeder the same amount to produce Pup A without a warranty as it did Pup B with a warranty, but Pup Bs owner has the option of coming back later and demanding $$ or another pup, meaning that now Pup B cost the breeder a whole lot more than Pup A did.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

MaggieRoseLee said:


> I've also heard that they cull out (kill) sick or unsuitable puppies over there which pulls out those genetics also? (or has that stopped?)


There's a huge long epic thread on PDB about culling right now.


My thoughts:

First off, they're not really offering a guarantee; they're offering a warranty. A guarantee says that I can promise you nothing will go wrong. A warranty says that if something does go wrong, I will take steps (refund your money, pay for surgery, replacement puppy) to make it right. 

I'm getting to where I really don't much care for guarantee/warranties on dogs. A lot of unscrupulous breeders offer warranties to make them look better, but if you read them carefully there's basically no way the breeder will ever have to honor it. The dog can NEVER climb stairs. You have to PROVE that you never ran the dog on concrete. And my two personal favorites: you have to buy a supplement or food that the breeder sells, or you have to return your dog that you've had for two years to get another puppy and the breeder will presumeably put your dog to sleep. 

When evaluating a breeder, I personally don't look at _whether_ they have a guarantee or warranty, I look at what it says. If they don't have one I'm fine with that. At least they're honest, and like Chris says breeders in other countries don't do it either. If they have a dishonest or tricky guarantee, I say pass.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

A guarantee is only as good as the breeder who writes it.

How many times have we seen on here bad breeders weaseling their way out of a guarantee or flat our refusing to respond to contact intitated by a former puppy owner?

While a guarantee is nice (as, as said, more or less expected here), I would not hesitate to buy a dog from a good breeder in Europe, either. 

If there is a guarantee I read it carefully, ask questions, and possibly ask to add or subtract things. But I'm not going to buy a dog from a breeder because I think their guarantee is better or worse than another's. I will buy from the because I trust that they are producing dogs of sound body and mind. A dog is always a crapshoot, however.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I have offered to purchase a dog with no guarantee, but the litter did not take. When I get a dog I assume it is my responsibility and not every dog is perfect so along the way I may end up with a dog with a "defect". Even with certain conditions I'd have no desire to return the dog anyway. I like a few different types of dogs from different breeders so I'm not interested in a "replacement" dog even if I can keep the original one. Ideally, a breeder would offer me a "replacement" dog without having to return the original for any genetic condition that would prevent the dog from receiving KKL1 or KKL2 (bad dentition, retained testicle, HD or ED...), but this agreement really only benefits me as the buyer and not the breeder besides like Chris said, it seems to be what Americans demand. Right now I have a dog that cannot be Koer'd and I have no desire to return the dog, obtain a second dog, nor do I think ill of the dogs or breeder. It's just the way the cards are dealt.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

I think the biggest problem with warranties is that it gives buyers a false sense of security, and also in their mind absolves them of any responsibility, not just for the dog but for research before hand. Many do mistakenly assume that a warranty is a guarnatee that nothing can go wrong and then completely freak out when it does. And many, many people it seems use the existance of a warranty as a quality check and then don't bother to do their own research into the bloodlines. It's a short cut. Warranty is there, so the lines must be healthy and the breeder must be doing everything right, so no need to put the time and effort into doing their own research.

And of course that's not the case. A warranty doesn't mean nothing will go wrong, nor does it automatically mean that everything is in place to minimize all risk of health problems, and it certainly shouldn't absolve the buyer of doing their research. But many do treat it that way.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

MaggieRoseLee said:


> Chris, how much of a difference do you think it makes in Germany that you can't breed your dog and get papers on it unless it has at least a Sch1 title. Which means there is a bit of a health and temperment assurance just in that? (Don't they also have x-rays involved with that?).


I really don't think that has anything to do with it. There are plenty of breeders here who follow the same rules even though they are not mandatory, breeding generations of dogs bred under those rules, and it has no bearing on people's expectations of warranties. It's the mindset of the buyers that is different.

I just know too many Europeans who think the whole American warranty idea is absurd, and know it has nothing to do with breeding regulations but rather just a very different mindset about the whole process, and the responsibilty placed on the buyer to research and make a sound decision, and then accept whatever that decision brings.



MaggieRoseLee said:


> I've also heard that they cull out (kill) sick or unsuitable puppies over there which pulls out those genetics also? (or has that stopped?)


Sure some culling goes on, but mainly young pups for obvious defects or failure to thrive present at a young age. Culling defective or sickly pups has absolutely no bearing on the presence of genes for those issues that come about later in life as things like HD, ED, EPI, DM, SIBO and all those other health issues can't be identified as a young pup so the dog carrying those genes can't be culled even if someone wanted to because there's no way to know which pup has them and which doesn't.

Your Glory probably would have been culled in the traditional sense in Europe, whereas here the genetics were still removed from the gene pool just in a manner that didn't sentance her to death. But either way the genetics are removed, so I don't see how either form of culling makes a hoot of difference as the end result is the same. And of course for those things that can't be seen in a young pup, which is the vast majority of health issues, it makes no difference either.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

I've only purchased five of the Hooligans. All five had different guarantees (or in Slider's case, no guarantee at all). It doesn't bother me one way or another. When I bought my OES she was to be a show dog and used for breeding ... her hips were absolutely terrible and her breeder gave me a refund between the price of the show dog and pet. Other than that I never requested a refund for anything covered under a guarantee since all were purchased as pets.


----------



## Lora (Jan 7, 2011)

Warranty or no warranty, it is not often they offer to cover Vet bills, surgery and other things. Usually it is that if you find your canine to have any of these defects they will replace the canine. Sorry, but I would rather keep my loving GSD or whatever then trade him because something happened beyond his/her control. To me a warranty means nothing!


----------



## BlackthornGSD (Feb 25, 2010)

My warranty is 1/2 the puppy price back. It's my way of "putting my money where my mouth is" -- that is, I've done my homework and I have every expectation that the hips and elbows will be fine. But I will freely admit that all I've done is stack the deck in the dog's favor, and there's still the chance that the dog will pull the wrong genetic "cards" and end up with an issue. I can't (no breeder can) do anything further to pull those bad cards out of the deck, though.

But yes, by offering a warranty, I'm undertaking a future potential liability, so the price of my puppies is higher to cover that risk I'm taking. That's economics--it's how it works. 

Puppy prices are lower in Europe--but there are no warranties and no contracts. The culture in the US and Canada is different. And you'll see other, often dramatic, differences if you look at people who breed mostly for AKC showing versus those who are dealing with a lot of imported/European style bloodlines/showing/trialing.

I've never sold a puppy without a hip warranty, but if someone asked me if I'd do that and take reduced puppy price, I would probably agree.


----------



## Klamari (Aug 6, 2010)

GSDElsa said:


> A guarantee is only as good as the breeder who writes it.
> 
> How many times have we seen on here bad breeders weaseling their way out of a guarantee or flat our refusing to respond to contact intitated by a former puppy owner?





GSDElsa said:


> I will buy from the because I trust that they are producing dogs of sound body and mind. A dog is always a crapshoot, however.


I second this. I would only buy from someone I trust, guarantee or not. 

As Chris and others have said, I think the difference between why it is expected here and not in Europe is the buyers. It is because the idea of personal responsibility for decisions and choices is seriously lacking in America today. If crap happens, well then of course someone else but me is at fault!! And even if it's just the fact that life isn't fair, people have to find someone to blame.

And I'll step off my soapbox now


----------



## Kris10 (Aug 26, 2010)

Klamari said:


> I second this. I would only buy from someone I trust, guarantee or not.
> 
> As Chris and others have said, I think the difference between why it is expected here and not in Europe is the buyers. It is because the idea of personal responsibility for decisions and choices is seriously lacking in America today. If crap happens, well then of course someone else but me is at fault!! And even if it's just the fact that life isn't fair, people have to find someone to blame.
> 
> And I'll step off my soapbox now


Wow - good post. I totally agree with this-


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

rvadog said:


> I just now read where a study linked free feeding (nutrition!) to HD.


Do you think maybe the same owners who free feed Purina Puppy Chow are the same people who are misinformed about the lineage of their dogs and therefore report more HD?
People who feed RAW and research their lines back to 1902 likely will end up with dogs less prone to HD than those who buy a "puppy with papers" from craigslist.
I looked for a puppy with a guarantee purely for financial reasons. I can't live without a dog and if it dies suddenly at a young age, I'd like to be compensated.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

rvadog said:


> Maggie,
> I just now read where a study linked free feeding (nutrition!) to HD. Perhaps some dogs are genetically more prone to it but when you don't take care of your pup's joints then you are asking for trouble.


I bet the free feeding linked to HD because usually that equals overweight dog. A lean dog who has mild HD might never show signs of it and never be xrayed because he's kept fit and at a healthy weight. Overweight dog is more likely to show phsyical signs of HD and go get an xray to show such.


----------



## Dogaroo (Mar 4, 2003)

If a breeder can show me the results of health clearances for the pup's parents & several of its close relatives & analysis of those results appear to indicate a low risk of health issues, I would probably be willing to buy a pup without a warranty. Yeah, I might be one of the unlucky ones who gets a dog with issues.... but sometimes Stuff Happens. That's just how life is. If the breeder can't show me those results, well.... I probably wouldn't be getting a pup from them anyway. 

With that said: Just recently, I knowingly bought a dog with "not so great" hips. I signed a contract saying I had been informed of his hip x-ray results, would not use him for breeding purposes, and would have him neutered. As I already have a dog with much shallower hip sockets who has been active & pain free for 8.5 years, I know there's a very good chance that, with careful management, he won't develop any problems for a good, long time. Of course it's possible that we will have a much shorter time together, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. Every single day I have with him is worth the little bit of money I paid, and even if my heart ends up broken, the pain will pale in comparison to the joy he's already given me.


----------



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

Jax's Mom said:


> Do you think maybe the same owners who free feed Purina Puppy Chow are the same people who are misinformed about the lineage of their dogs and therefore report more HD?


That's not how scientific studies work. And it's slightly snobby that you think people how feed raw are more well informed about peds than those who feed raw. I don't feed raw because there is no (absolutely none) scientific studies link raw to less health problems than kibble. We all know of people that have had dogs for 15 years and ate ALPO the whole time.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

rvadog said:


> That's not how scientific studies work. And it's slightly snobby that you think people how feed raw are more well informed about peds than those who feed raw. I don't feed raw because there is no (absolutely none) scientific studies link raw to less health problems than kibble. We all know of people that have had dogs for 15 years and ate ALPO the whole time.


That was my point. Food may have absolutely nothing to do with the dog's health, but those who feed raw generally tend to do more research and as such would likely purchase a dog with a more extensive look into their history and THAT would result in them ending up with healthier dogs.


----------



## s14roller (Nov 18, 2010)

Jax's Mom said:


> That was my point. Food may have absolutely nothing to do with the dog's health, but those who feed raw generally tend to do more research and as such would likely purchase a dog with a more extensive look into their history and THAT would result in them ending up with healthier dogs.


I'd have to agree with this...you can't just look at statisics/research and take it as is...

The book "Freakonomics" is a good read.


----------



## elisabeth_00117 (May 17, 2009)

I am looking at breeders overseas at the moment who do not offer guarentees either.

I think as a buyer we must do our research too to ensure that we are getting what we pay for. Sounds a little harsh, but the reality is, a dog with HD can be very exspensive (if cared for and maintained properly).

I have been researching and researching and researching for almost a year now, seriously within the last three months and have come to understand that the guarentees that some breeders put forth on to their puppies are not going to ensure that the puppy doesn't develop HD, they are basically saying what Christine said, "I've done all I can to stack the cards in the favour of this puppy".

I think Christines guarentee is VERY generous and not many breeders would be willing to do that - even reputable ones.

Most breeders will offer a replacement puppy which I have no interest in mainly because I can not afford to care for a a dog with HD, my resident dog and a new puppy(the replacement). I also am not willing to give a dog back to the breeder once it has spent time in my home.

I thought a guarentee was everything but now have come to realize (at least for me) that it is not. I am willing to purchase a puppy without one BUT I also make sure to really research the lines being mated in great depth to ensure that *I* as well as the breeder are doing everything we can to get a dog without HD.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

For me as a puppy buyer, warranties or "guarantees" don't really play into my decision to buy a puppy or not. As a breeder, I have gone back and forth on the issue of offering a warranty or not and what it would cover. I do think the desire for Americans to have "guarantees" when buying a puppy shows a major flaw in thinking. It seems most of the general public and even many more educated and involved people believe that if a breeder produces a dog with less than ideal temperament or health, the breeder and/or their dogs must be bad. If you want a dog who is guaranteed not to have HD/ED, to mature into a great working dog and to have no DQ faults don't buy a puppy. While I do appreciate breeders willing to give a replacement puppy or partial refund if a puppy bought as a show/working prospect doesn't turn out, puppies are always a gamble and puppy buyers should understand that.


----------



## Dogaroo (Mar 4, 2003)

Dogaroo said:


> With that said: Just recently, I knowingly bought a dog with "not so great" hips.


I should clarify: "Not so great" means his hip sockets are a bit shallower than ideal, not that he already has or is definitely going to have hip problems later. They're not ideal for breeding or a sport that requires a lot of jumping, but they're not bad enough to warrant surgery, and he can (and should) remain active. Of course there's a chance he could develop arthritis & remodeling of the hip sockets, but there's also a good chance he won't. Meanwhile I'll feed him good food, keep him on supplements (salmon oil, glucosamine, MSM, etc.), keep him lean & well muscled, and cross my fingers.


----------



## rvadog (Dec 9, 2010)

Jax's Mom said:


> That was my point. Food may have absolutely nothing to do with the dog's health, but those who feed raw generally tend to do more research and as such would likely purchase a dog with a more extensive look into their history and THAT would result in them ending up with healthier dogs.


I understood your point and your point was baseless. That's not how science works. This was a controlled experiment. They didn't just survey people on what they feed their dogs. Nice try though.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

rvadog said:


> I understood your point and your point was baseless. That's not how science works. This was a controlled experiment. They didn't just survey people on what they feed their dogs. Nice try though.


Uh, post the study and we'll see. There are actually quite a few bad scientific studies that don't look at the "whole picture" that get published. Until I read a paper from the first to last word I don't make any assumptions. Especially scientific studies that are simply "showing a coorelation between" an action and a disorder. The study in and on itself is actually more like a sociological study in the sense that "person engages in X action and the result is an increas in Y."

I think a perfect example of this is the infamous study of "couples who live together before marriage have a higher divorce rate than those who don't". I have reviewed the published research on the topic and there are so many glaring holes in their methodology it's ridiculous.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I have bought dogs with a warranty and dogs without one. 

For me, as long as the parents are health tested, and it's a puppy I'm interested in, I'm happy with that. I appreciate that warranty, but I don't need it nor desire one. If one of mine ever ended up with HD or ED, it's not something I would "blame" the breeder for nor expect any type of compensation for it. My dog, my responsibility, once it leaves the breeder.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

rvadog said:


> I understood your point and your point was baseless. That's not how science works. This was a controlled experiment. They didn't just survey people on what they feed their dogs. Nice try though.


I think you missed it again...you've just resigned yourself to the fact that I disagree with you so I must be wrong. If you interpret what is in front of you instead of just reading it, you'll see that I'm not disagreeing. Makes me wonder about your understanding and interpretation of these "scientific studies".


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Could we please get back on topic. If you would like to discuss scientific studies please start another thread.

Thank you,

ADMIN Lisa

*****


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

I have never liked the word "guarantee" and have always used "warranty" in my contracts since day 1....also have a short paragraph about conformation and HD in the contract...the angulation of the hip, the socket and the size of the femoral head are just as genetic as the set of ears, eye and length of croup! As a buyer, there are sources of pedigrees, and hip ratings available...it is your responsibility to do that research and confirm what the breeder tells you about the history of the family...and to question what concerns you may have. There is a risk involved in any purchase of an animal - dog, horse etc...buyers should not only be educated by their breeder prior to purchase, but should take that initiative on prior to buying a pup - in any breed, not just GSDs.

Environmental factors can affect the _soundness_ of the dog - years ago, I got a 7 month old Great Dane, and she went out every day with us when we rode/trained our horses....she ended up with arthritis and I always have wondered if it was due to too much activity too young. Also, many people go to vets who do not take good x-rays and they get sent in anyway...there are alot of dogs who change from 1 to 2, and I would bet although some do change, a good portion of them just have had better x-rays the second time around!

Another issue is that so many people assume that any lameness in a GSD is HD - old dogs, young dogs, middle aged dogs - when it can be arthiritis, DM or ACL damage. Any lameness is immediately blamed on HD...

As other state, warranties are an economic responsibility for the breeder...in Europe, people do not expect them, and prices for a pup are normally less than here....IMO there are factors other than a warranty affecting puppy prices....speaking as a breeder who trains and titles dogs, the cost of training and related travel here are going be far more than in Europe where clubs are in most towns, trainers/helpers are part of the club not costing $50-100 per day, and people can bike or only go a few miles rather than a 100-400 mile round trip in a gas hog 4x4s to train breeding dogs...Pricing even in Germany has gotten higher for higher profile litters as well...but the few people I know who got replacement pups (paid US prices too) got what had to be the worst pup available as a replacement!

Lee


----------



## Larien (Sep 26, 2010)

I will not purchase without a warranty, and I'd probably never even use it - I like that the breeder is willing to have one in the first place, they they're willing to replace/refund, that they're confident enough in their breeding to have it, and that they're available to me for the lifetime of the dog. All of that said, a warranty alone does not cut it - I also require OFA certs, quality pedigree, healthy dogs, and titles, and a breeder that has properly raised her pups in the proper environment with all of the right things happening in accordance with the research I have compiled from books, forums, experts, vets and trainers to ensure the puppy has the best start possible in life.

But again, to confirm, while I require the warranty (and also do not like the word guarantee, it's not possible to guarantee anything) I would NOT use it in the sense that I would ever return a puppy for replacement. It's the security of having it that I want.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I offer a hip/elbow guarantee, or warranty, because it is expected.

Do I believe that these conditions are 100% genetic, no. Sorry, I think injuries, early spay/neuter, and even poor nutrician and when and where you take the x-rays can affect the overall answer. Oh, I could put in the warranty you must feed such and such, and you must not do thus, but how could I possibly enforce that.

So if a puppy comes back with a problem, I will honor my warranty if the proper steps have been taken -- I require x-rays be evaluated by OFA. 

Mostly we do it because we do not want to get a repuatation for not being fair to our customers. It is easier to take back a puppy, and or replace a puppy than to haggle back and forth until there are bad vibes all around. A puppy buyer with a bad name will find a breeder who hasn't heard of them and get another puppy. A puppy breeder can be seriously injured by not following through, even when the dog's problems may have been caused by something other than a genetic problem. 

Hip dysplasia is mostly considered a genetic problem, but exercise and nutrician can certainly affect the extent that the problem has manifested itself. If you have fed the dog some puppy food with tons of calcium in it, and allowed the pup to get fat to boot, well, what might have been a-symptomatic HD, can become moderate or severe HD. And Elbow dysplasia can be caused by injuries -- not necessarily genetic.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

wolfstraum said:


> Environmental factors can affect the _soundness_ of the dog - years ago, I got a 7 month old Great Dane, and she went out every day with us when we rode/trained our horses....she ended up with arthritis and I always have wondered if it was due to too much activity too young.


 IMO it is far more likely that prior to you getting her, she didn't receive enough exercise which led to a predisposition for getting arthritis. I suspect some dogs, like some people are also genetically more prone to developing arthritis. Most research seems to suggest that growing mammals thrive on exercise and without it, their bones and muscles to not properly develop. 

A friend of mine and I had two dogs of the same age, first dogs for serious training. She got her's when he was 6 months old and prior to that, he had mostly been kept in a kennel. Early on he was mostly exercised with on lead walks but long ones. I got mine at 8 weeks old. I walked mine for miles from the time he was 4 months or so. I jumped him over jumps jumps up to my knees by that age as well. As he got older, I would jump him over jumps as tall as me. Both dogs did agility starting as adults, when the big dogs had to jump 30". Guess which dog developed bad arthritis? Not the one who was jumping as young puppy but the one who had limited exercise until he was over 6 months old. 



selzer said:


> I offer a hip/elbow guarantee, or warranty, because it is expected.
> 
> Do I believe that these conditions are 100% genetic, no. Sorry, I think injuries, early spay/neuter, and even poor nutrician and when and where you take the x-rays can affect the overall answer. Oh, I could put in the warranty you must feed such and such, and you must not do thus, but how could I possibly enforce that.


 The way such things are generally enforced is that in order for them to get whatever the warranty promises them, they have to produce proof. Proof of what the have been feeding (by saving receipts), proof of age of altering, proof that they took the dog to class, etc. I have found a good number of breeder who do this and use their warranty to ensure the dogs are being cared for in a certain way. 




selzer said:


> Mostly we do it because we do not want to get a repuatation for not being fair to our customers. It is easier to take back a puppy, and or replace a puppy than to haggle back and forth until there are bad vibes all around. A puppy buyer with a bad name will find a breeder who hasn't heard of them and get another puppy. A puppy breeder can be seriously injured by not following through, even when the dog's problems may have been caused by something other than a genetic problem.


 I haven't had a problem selling puppies without warranties. Different breed but honestly, most people don't even ask about it. If I sell a puppy as a show or breeding potential and the puppy doesn't turn out, I do offer a replacement puppy. I don't charge differently for show vs pet vs performance prospects but if I did, I'd offer a partial refund for the difference if the dog didn't turn out. 

To be honest, I'm not sure I'd want to sell to someone hung up on having to have a "guarantee". I want puppy buyers to understand that I have done my best but that I can't control the exact genetics of the litter. I'm certainly fair to my puppy buyers but I expect they be fair as well. 



selzer said:


> And Elbow dysplasia can be caused by injuries -- not necessarily genetic.


 ED is genetic, DJD (one reason for failing OFA elbows) can be caused by injuries. One of Jora's sisters broke her elbow as a puppy and could not be OFA'd due to it but was not diagnosed with ED because of it either. The same is true for hips. Dogs can fail hips because of an injury but it doesn't mean they have HD.


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

I have had more *questions* about health guarantees over this past year, than ever before.
I've even had people ask if the puppies were guaranteed through out their _"life_ _span"...?!_
They stipulate that they ask these questions and request this information because they are being *educated* by all the reputable breeder topics floating around the website forums.....and that only GOOD breeders offer 100% guarantees with all their puppies.
I read over and over threads from owners that have a problem arise....and bash the breeder all over the place. Dogs that have "symptoms" of possible HD problems at 6+ yrs of age...and the breeder is now to blame.
Dog's that develop some form of cancer or strange health condition (as adults even)...and it's pushed off on the breeder as breeding bad genetics.
*We offer a simple/basic warranty*...and we will replace the dog/puppy if requested.*....the dog/puppy does not have to be returned, unless buyer decides to.

Yes...there are many *avenues* a breeder should *insure,* before breeding a litter..ie.._health, mental & structural soundness....._but nature is an undetermined & uncertain foe....a breeder cannot be 100% certain of all outcomes.
Many breeders invest into their breeding programs...100% of *themselves*..."monetary, physically & mentally". 
...after all IMO,....why would a breeder want genetic problems/issues reintroduced in their breeding program over and over again?.....let alone...to the general public?
...I could never figure that out?...
Robin


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

A warranty is pretty much useless like most people said. Most of us would not have the heart to get rid of a dog that has been with us for 2 or 3 years just because they have a genetic problem or developed HD early. While this does mean extra cost, I don’t know anyone who would do that. When I first started doing research I really wanted to see the difference between going to a breeder, or a pet store that claimed to deal with breeders (Don’t worry I went to a breeder). 

When I did research on the pet store, like all pet stores, they have a warranty. But then reading a review I found quite the funny story. Someone purchased a puppy there, thought how great the warranty was, and went home. The puppy, not a GSD, developed a rare condition and the people paid about $10,000 to try and fix it. They then went to the store to try and recover some of that money, claiming they had a warranty. Well the store said, they would replace the puppy. Exactly what I would expect, it’s a low cost solution. The people of course were outraged.

Now I get this is partially due to the fact that people don’t read the warranty and expect the world of it. But if a pet store, or a breeder, agreed to pay any and all vet bills, they would not be a pet store or a breeder for very long. The breeder of course expects their puppies to be healthy and would know genetically where they came from, but it’s the same idea.

In my mind, a warranty is useless. Do I like to see it offered? Yes. But I don’t think I would get one if it was an extra cost on top of a puppy. If I’m buying a puppy and its $1000 which includes a warranty I’m fine with that. But if the puppy is $800 and then I have an option of a $200 warranty, I wouldn’t buy it. I’m not returning a dog, and like most people said, I can’t take care of a second.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

As a buyer, and I hope I'm being realistic, I would expect the following things

1) A warranty for GENETIC diseases such as HD, ED, DM, etc.
2) A healthy puppy free of worms or other diseases
3) A puppy sound in temperament. Not developed problems such as a puppy attacked who develops fear aggression but a dog that came from a line of aggressive dogs.
4) If the dog had HD, I would much rather have 1/2 money back than another puppy. Not because I think the breeder is putting out unhealthy puppies but because I may not have time, or the desire, to have a replacement puppy and I certainly am not giving my dog back. I would rather have the money to help pay for medical care of surgery were required. Or if I did have the time and desire to get a puppy, I could use that money to purchase another.

Arthritis should not even be a thought in a contract. It is not realistic for a buyer to expect the breeder to pay for that as arthritis develops with age, could develop from injury, etc. It's not the breeder's fault if start jumping my 5 month old puppy at 20". That's like suing my ortho surgeon for the arthritis in my ankle from my break when I slipped while mowing grass. 

I look at a warranty from a breeder as them putting their reputation out there as confident the dogs won't develop problems. And IF I do my homework...there isn't anything in the contract I'll have to ever worry about and it's just a dust collector in my desk drawer.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

What do you think about breeders that offer a replacement puppy and _don't_ require you to return the one you have?


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Emoore said:


> What do you think about breeders that offer a replacement puppy and _don't_ require you to return the one you have?


The breeder I chose does this. I think it's great that they feel they can do this. Obviously we'd never bring another dog into the home unless we feel like we could handle another one...and I can't imagine giving a dog back to a breeder unless there were extenuating circumstances.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

But I do require proof of speutering before I will replace a puppy. Just to prevent "accidents".


----------



## BlackthornGSD (Feb 25, 2010)

I don't offer a "replacement" puppy because I don't want to be contractually obligated to give someone a puppy--perhaps I'm not happy with how the first puppy is living or trained or housed, for example. I want to be able to make the offer of a replacement puppy without being *required* to give someone a 2nd dog.

I've also heard of cases where someone thinks it's a good idea to sell the replacement puppy to "make their money back."


----------



## Larien (Sep 26, 2010)

BlackthornGSD said:


> I don't offer a "replacement" puppy because I don't want to be contractually obligated to give someone a puppy--perhaps I'm not happy with how the first puppy is living or trained or housed, for example. I want to be able to make the offer of a replacement puppy without being *required* to give someone a 2nd dog.
> 
> I've also heard of cases where someone thinks it's a good idea to sell the replacement puppy to "make their money back."


Excellent points, that stuff never even occurred to me... Guess I'm just honest and forget about the jerks out there sometimes!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Emoore said:


> What do you think about breeders that offer a replacement puppy and _don't_ require you to return the one you have?


I think that's very nice, certainly above and beyond what I expect from a breeder.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

BlackthornGSD said:


> I don't offer a "replacement" puppy because I don't want to be contractually obligated to give someone a puppy--perhaps I'm not happy with how the first puppy is living or trained or housed, for example. I want to be able to make the offer of a replacement puppy without being *required* to give someone a 2nd dog.
> 
> I've also heard of cases where someone thinks it's a good idea to sell the replacement puppy to "make their money back."


This forum continually gives me food for thought. Thanks Blackthorn!


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Christine's point is why our contract specifies refund OR credit toward replacement puppy. This gives the buyer the option, but also gives *us* the option of being able to refuse placing another dog with the person without violating our warranty in doing so. We also don't require return of the dog, just proof of spay/neuter, though will take the dog back and rehome it if the person does want to return it.


----------

