Exclusions / Endorsements!!!

[praia]

The fact that the dog wasn't registered in the first place and that the breeder was breeding from an unregistered dam should have been the first warning sign.  There is absolutely no good reason why a dog isn't registered.  Even if you are only interested in a pet, proper documentation of registration and health tests should have been offered upfront by the breeder.  I don't understand why you had to do all the digging for research yourself when your dog's breeder should have been the knowledgeable and responsible party here.  Just because the breeder is a "true hobby breeder" doesn't make them reputable or responsible.  A lot of "hobby breeders" are just backyard breeders with a nice front and a nice name.

This is a hard lesson learned and you just might have to cut your losses.

[dylandog]

JohnK> I didn't ask for the KC paperwork when purchasing my puppy  because the breeder had already told me that he was not KC registered, so there wasn't much point in asking for paperwork that didn't exist. She simply said he wasn't registered - I knew that I would have to do the leg work to get him registered, and all would have been straightforward if the breeder of his mother hadn't been 'selective' with the truth. She 's the one at fault, not my puppy's breeder.

Seems to me this puppy breeding / showing / selling business is shrouded in mystery, and is only for the 'knowledgeable' in the know breeders, we the general public are dealing with a 'closed shop' mentality. I know that breeders keep the best for themselves, and will only tell you what they want you to know or what suits them. At the end of the day... for the most, breeders are in it for the money. Breeders that do it for the love of it are few and far between.

I'm seriously thinking of contacting the stud that sold the so called 'pet' cocker with the endorsements / exclusions and informing them that the dog has been used for breeding and on several occasions!  Unless someone sticks their neck out and uncovers this type of thing, it's just going to keep happening.

Can you tell me... if they really didn't want the dog bred from, why didn't they just cut off it's bits before selling it??

I'm not bothered by 'armchair critism' bring it on... I'm learning from it that's for sure. Just don't know if I like what I'm learning about the dog breeding world... rather shady if you ask me. 

Think I'll stick to gold fish - they don't come with endorsements!

[Helen]

JohnK> I didn't ask for the KC paperwork when purchasing my puppy  because the breeder had already told me that he was not KC registered, so there wasn't much point in asking for paperwork that didn't exist.

To be brutally honest if you wanted a KC registered pup that badly it would have been better to walk away at that point and find a pup that did have its papers 

[LynneB]

JohnK> I didn't ask for the KC paperwork when purchasing my puppy  because the breeder had already told me that he was not KC registered, so there wasn't much point in asking for paperwork that didn't exist. She simply said he wasn't registered - I knew that I would have to do the leg work to get him registered, and all would have been straightforward if the breeder of his mother hadn't been 'selective' with the truth. She 's the one at fault, not my puppy's breeder.

Seems to me this puppy breeding / showing / selling business is shrouded in mystery, and is only for the 'knowledgeable' in the know breeders, we the general public are dealing with a 'closed shop' mentality. I know that breeders keep the best for themselves, and will only tell you what they want you to know or what suits them. At the end of the day... for the most, breeders are in it for the money. Breeders that do it for the love of it are few and far between.

I'm seriously thinking of contacting the stud that sold the so called 'pet' cocker with the endorsements / exclusions and informing them that the dog has been used for breeding and on several occasions!  Unless someone sticks their neck out and uncovers this type of thing, it's just going to keep happening.

Can you tell me... if they really didn't want the dog bred from, why didn't they just cut off it's bits before selling it??

I'm not bothered by 'armchair critism' bring it on... I'm learning from it that's for sure. Just don't know if I like what I'm learning about the dog breeding world... rather shady if you ask me. 

Think I'll stick to gold fish - they don't come with endorsements!

Sorry you feel this way but I would just like to point out a few things. The first thing is not to buy an unregistered dog, there is no reason for the dog not to be KC reg unless something underhand is going on. Only the dogs breeder can KC register the dog so you could not do anything about it yourself.

There are lots of threads on COL and other breed websites that give lots of valuable info about buying a puppy from a reputable breeder so no, dog showing/breeding is not shrouded in mystery.

From what I can see from this thread is that maybe your puppy's breeder should have done her homework before breeding. This is just my opinion but to tar every breeder with the same brush because you have been unlucky is a bit unfair.

[JohnK]

JohnK> I didn't ask for the KC paperwork when purchasing my puppy  because the breeder had already told me that he was not KC registered, so there wasn't much point in asking for paperwork that didn't exist. She simply said he wasn't registered - I knew that I would have to do the leg work to get him registered, and all would have been straightforward if the breeder of his mother hadn't been 'selective' with the truth. She 's the one at fault, not my puppy's breeder.

Seems to me this puppy breeding / showing / selling business is shrouded in mystery, and is only for the 'knowledgeable' in the know breeders, we the general public are dealing with a 'closed shop' mentality. I know that breeders keep the best for themselves, and will only tell you what they want you to know or what suits them. At the end of the day... for the most, breeders are in it for the money. Breeders that do it for the love of it are few and far between.

I'm seriously thinking of contacting the stud that sold the so called 'pet' cocker with the endorsements / exclusions and informing them that the dog has been used for breeding and on several occasions!  Unless someone sticks their neck out and uncovers this type of thing, it's just going to keep happening.



Can you tell me... if they really didn't want the dog bred from, why didn't they just cut off it's bits before selling it??

I'm not bothered by 'armchair critism' bring it on... I'm learning from it that's for sure. Just don't know if I like what I'm learning about the dog breeding world... rather shady if you ask me. 

Think I'll stick to gold fish - they don't come with endorsements

I wasn't trying to be negative over all this, I am just amazed that people sell their dogs as pedigree, without the documentation to prove it. I have never wanted to breed from my dogs and have always had my bitches neutered and I am sure Dennis will soon be "done"

I do think that if people are putting endorsements on their puppies, there should be a considerable discount for the privilege.

By this action, not only have you been stopped from having your dog sire KC registered dogs, but you have also been stopped from showing in KC shows. I think these type of endorsements should be much more visible, as I am sure many potential buyers would be deterred by these restrictive practises.

[Emilyoliver]

As far as my experience goes, endorsements can and are lifted by breeders. If you are able to show that you aim to breed for the right reasons, many breeders are happy to remove endorsements/ exclusions. However reasons such as 'I really like my dog and my neighbour has a nice bitch who needs to have a litter' are unlikely to be acceptable. My breeders insisted that I contact them should I want to breed as they would be the right people to advise on suitable, compatible lines.  I saw this as valuable support and sharing of knowledge. They also wanted their puppies shown to prove that they were suitable stock. I don't believe any of these requirements are excessive, and don't believe decent breeders hide info or are frugal with the truth. This is usually the case with people breeding 'to make a bit if cash'.

[twiceover2]

I think it is fairly common for dogs to be endorsed as not for breeding.  Both Pippa and Barney are.  I have no intention to breed from either, but their breeders both said that if I wanted to in the future they would look at lifting the restriction IF the dogs were suitable for breeding (right temperament, health checks, no undesirable features etc).  I am quite happy with this as the restrictions simply help prevent ill-considered indiscriminate breeding but don't stop me breeding my dogs if they are smashing dogs that could add something to the breed.  I didn't get a discount on them or expect one because they were endorsed.

Not being KC registered at all is a different matter.  I wouldn't buy a dog that wasn't.

[elaine.e]

I've removed some posts from this thread because it was going off topic and some unpleasant comments were being posted.

My understanding is that breeders put endorsements on in order to try and prevent people from breeding litters indiscriminately. Endorsements can be lifted with the agreement of the breeder and I know of cases where that has happened. I don't see that endorsed puppies should be sold at a reduced price. A KC registered dog with endorsements can be shown and do all normal activities but if the owner chooses to breed they do so knowing that the puppies can't be KC registered.

[Jane S]

As far as my experience goes, endorsements can and are lifted by breeders. If you are able to show that you aim to breed for the right reasons, many breeders are happy to remove endorsements/ exclusions. However reasons such as 'I really like my dog and my neighbour has a nice bitch who needs to have a litter' are unlikely to be acceptable. My breeders insisted that I contact them should I want to breed as they would be the right people to advise on suitable, compatible lines.  I saw this as valuable support and sharing of knowledge. They also wanted their puppies shown to prove that they were suitable stock. I don't believe any of these requirements are excessive, and don't believe decent breeders hide info or are frugal with the truth. This is usually the case with people breeding 'to make a bit if cash'.

That's exactly how we use endorsements and all our owners fully understand about the endorsements and why they are there. We have occasionally lifted the breeding endorsement on request and after health tests have been done but it doesn't happen often as most of our owners have no intention of breeding & indeed we don't generally encourage pet puppies to be bred from. There's no hiding of the endorsements - we state on our website that puppies will be endorsed (including pups we keep ourselves because we don't know when keeping a pup whether he or she will be good enough to breed from) and endorsements are also discussed when potential owners visit and explained again in writing in our puppy contract (as the KC insists breeders must do).

[Nicola]

, and all would have been straightforward if the breeder of his mother hadn't been 'selective' with the truth. She 's the one at fault, not my puppy's breeder.

Your dog's breeder wasn't misled though, she chose to buy an unregistered bitch and then breed from her anyway without even trying to register her or she would already have known about her sire's endorsements when you approached her. If it mattered to her she should have asked when she bought the bitch, or at the very least before breeding from her for the first time. Your frustration is understandable and the stud owner should not be offering an endorsed dog for breeding, but your dog's breeder really hasn't done things the right way either. I don't think she has any right to be angry with anyone given that she's already bred the bitch twice before deciding to try to register her which is shutting the stable door long after the horse is gone.  

It's understandably frustrating for you, and underlines the importance of finding a responsible breeder and making sure everything is in place in terms of registration and health testing before you buy a puppy. The 'just for pets' excuse doesn't hold, there's no good reason for breeders not to register litters. Of course there are bad breeders who do KC register, but that's where buyer research again comes into play and ensuring that 'your' breeder is doing it in the right way and for the right reasons. Everyone has to start somewhere but when it's something as important as bringing more puppies into an already over-full world - rescues are full to bursting with 'pet bred' dogs - it should be after doing the research and making sure you're doing it properly. The information is there for breeders and buyers, there's nothing shady or mysterious about it, the internet has made doing the research a lot easier with breed club websites, forums like COL, the Kennel Club website etc. all easily accessible.

I'm also not sure what is meant by 'armchair criticism'; you've asked questions on a forum and are getting answers, they may not always be what you want to hear but nobody on the thread has been personally critical.

[dylandog]

Just want to say a big 'thank you' for all your replies...very enlightening!! Espcially to the 'uneducated'.  Can I just say - It was not me that first posted about 'armchair critisim', I can't remember off hand who it was, so don't shoot the messenger, please!

Also, it is not true, the breeder is not the only one that can register the dog, my dog in this case I have it in writing from the KC that I can register him as long as I get the forms signed by his breeder and his grandsires breeder. You just follow the 'late registration' process.

Also, why is it so  important to have dogs KC registered, like my puppy's breeder, what's wrong with breeding cockers and not registering them. I have heard that many breeders are not doing this now... there are so many people out there that couldn't care less if they are registered or not. As long as it is pointed out at the point of sale. My puppy's breeder has bred 4 lovely litters of pups that have gone to good homes and all owners are very pleased with them and didn't mind one bit that they were not KC registered.  Her main reasons for not registering them is because she didn't want the boys to become stud dogs as some live a very unhappy lives, and the other reason is because she doesn't like the showing world, so she tries to place her pups into loving homes where they are just pets.  I unfortunatelly fell in love with  my puppy when I saw him, and let my heart rule my head...totally  my fault, I knew it was going all down to me to get him registered and pay the money too.  Yes I should have walked away, but he was gorgeous and had such a lovely temperament. I just didn't understand or know about 'endorsements'.

I know you are all going to shoot me down in flames now for saying that it's perfectly okay to sell unregistered pups... I understand about the health reasons etc. But papers doesn't mean the dog is not going to die from some terrible disease. I suppose registering does keep a tally on the number of pups being born and to what dog. So there is for and against.

You can even KC register a cocker from an 'unverified pedigree'.

[Jane S]

Also, it is not true, the breeder is not the only one that can register the dog, my dog in this case I have it in writing from the KC that I can register him as long as I get the forms signed by his breeder and his grandsires breeder. You just follow the 'late registration' process.

It is true - maybe it's a case of semantics here but even in cases of late registration, it's still actually technically the breeder doing the registering even though the owner might be organising or trying to organise the paperwork, get signatures etc

Also, why is it so  important to have dogs KC registered, like my puppy's breeder, what's wrong with breeding cockers and not registering them. I have heard that many breeders are not doing this now... there are so many people out there that couldn't care less if they are registered or not. As long as it is pointed out at the point of sale. My puppy's breeder has bred 4 lovely litters of pups that have gone to good homes and all owners are very pleased with them and didn't mind one bit that they were not KC registered.  Her main reasons for not registering them is because she didn't want the boys to become stud dogs as some live a very unhappy lives, and the other reason is because she doesn't like the showing world, so she tries to place her pups into loving homes where they are just pets.  

Not going to shoot you down in flames at all and in some respects you are right as yes there are plenty of buyers out there who don't care about registration and breeders too. BUT and it's a big BUT, your breeder's argument that non registration stops her dogs being bred from doesn't hold any water at all - as you say yourself, unregistered dogs are being bred from all the time so it makes no sense to use this as a reason for breeding unregistered puppies The other argument that she doesn't register her pups because she likes her pups to be placed in loving homes as pets is also a bit baffling to be honest - we show and register all our pups and 99% of our pups are in carefully chosen pet homes (as is the case for most show breeders). A pet home also doesn't exclude showing by the way - I consider my own dogs to be pet dogs first, show dogs second and I know a lot of COL members who show feel the same way (presumably you do too since this whole sorry tale started because you want to show your boy & your breeder was happy for you to do so)

KC registration is no guarantee of a good breeder but it should be the basic starting block for all breeders - you have a traceable pedigree ancestry, public access to health testing results (not available for non registered dogs or those registered with other companies), access to a wider range of activities etc etc. Breeders who register their puppies also make their breeding activities public - breeders who don't KC register their puppies in effect hide their litters (and this I know is one of the motivating factors for some breeders since it makes it more difficult for local authorities and inland revenue to trace how many puppies they breed). I could go on but suspect it won't make any difference to your own views but it might help any other potential puppy buyers out there

[dylandog]

Hi Jane S.

Thanks for your reply... if there is one good thing to come out of all this is... I've learnt a dam lot!!  Phew, there's a lot to take in.

I was wrong, when I said in my last post that I could register my puppy, I read the letter wrong, I am doing the paperwork and sending it in, I just had to get the breeder of my puppy to sign it; so in effect she is registering him, I'm just doing all the leg work to get it done, but it will look like the form to register him is coming from her. Can't believe it was going to cost me £120 to get both the dam's sire and the dam registered. It was only right that I paid as it was only me that wanted them registered.

But that's all water under the bridge now... looks like I may have hit a brick wall and that will not even happen now.  My only other way  round this situation is to contact the stud that put on the endorsement to see it it could be lifted 'maybe for one puppy?'  But as I have said  before, it drops the stud that used the 'endorsed' dog into hot water.

I'm still waiting on a reply from the KC. They say it's who you know not what you know; wish I knew someone in authority in the KC!

Yes, this has been a steep learning curve for me, and I apologise to anyone that I may offended, I didn't mean to tar all breeders with the same brush. Of coure there are hundreds of good breeders out there who truly care that they breed healthly dogs and sell them with all the correct credentials.

I have seen it mentioned a few times that I could have gleaned correct information from the KC website or COL. But if you don't know about these websites, then they are not much use. I didn't realise what a wealth of information there was on the KC website, and what a 'knowledgabe' bunch you all are. I only found out about COL by accident too.

But should I come accross anyone thinking of buying a puppy, I have certainly learnt a lot of very useful information that I can pass on. I will always steer them to the KC website and forums for the breed that they want. In life it is said, that for every bad situation that you find yourself in, as long as you learn from it, then it's not been for nothing.

Imagine all the help that I would have got from yous if I posted that I was going to buy an unregistered dog that I wanted to show, from an unregistered bitch!!  I certainly would not be in this position that I'm in now.

But, then I wouldn't have my lovely cocker either, who I love to bits, wouldn't want any other cocker, he's my life and we will enjoy whatever we do together. 

Mind you, I may not be saying that in a month's time when we've started the agility... I'll have more aches in places I didn't know could ache!!

Once again - thank you all for taking the time to clarity the situation and pass on your 'invaluable' knowledge' to me - which is now stapled on my brain!

Thanks. x

[Jane S]

But that's all water under the bridge now... looks like I may have hit a brick wall and that will not even happen now.  My only other way  round this situation is to contact the stud that put on the endorsement to see it it could be lifted 'maybe for one puppy?'  But as I have said  before, it drops the stud that used the 'endorsed' dog into hot water.

Well maybe they deserve to be in hot water as they have not acted ethically or responsibly Trouble is if the endorsement is lifted, that's it - it can't be done for one puppy only and then be reinstated afterwards as the dog is no longer in the original breeder's possession. Perhaps best to see what the KC says but you might have to be patient - they don't tend to reply quickly to this sort of enquiry (don't think it matters if you know someone at the KC or not as it would be the admin staff that deal with registration/endorsement enquiries rather than KC members)

Anyway good luck with the agility - I'm sure your boy will enjoy it and it's definitely a good way to get fit

[dylandog]

Thank you Jane S. Yes I'll be patient and see what they say. I agree with you perhaps the breeder in question does deserve to get thier knucles wrapped'.

I'll post the reply that I get from the KC.

xx