View Full Version : Co-ownership of dogs
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 09:50 AM
Some people may not understand why a dog is co-owned. The purpose of a co-ownership does several things. Number one- it keeps the breeding of show dogs with all parties agreeing the breeding would be a good one- not only for the reputation of the dog, but also the litter to better the breed and be a good example of the parents of the puppy.
Second- co ownership also insures that the person can not sell the dog to someone without the breeders knowledge.( or at least not sold with papers) . Not only does this protect their breeding of that dog- such as being sold to a puppy mill etc, but also insures the dog will always be recorded as being theirs in the event something happens to the original owner.
One of my shepherds, the owner died. Without that co- ownership having the dog returned to me, I am not sure what would have happened to the dog as the estate was broken up. After all- I approved of their purchase of one of my pups, in their family situation. And that situation only. Shepherds are fabulous dogs in the right situations- in the wrong ones- they can be a handful.
Even a pup destined to be spayed or neutered at this point would still be co-owned. I have seen too many good situations turn terribly bad to not do it.
Co-ownership is also used to show that the pups owner is considered to be a person they want for the life of the dog, association with this person in potential of the dogs accomplishments.
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 10:05 AM
When I bred cats & placed them in their new homes. I had a co-ownership contracts on all of them (even pet quality cats) instead of a standard sales contract that gave me very specific rights as to the comfort and care of the cat for the remainder of its life.
Once you've sold an animal, you have little backup in court if there is ever a dispute unless you are a co-owner. It also clearly indicates that, if for any reason the new owner can't keep the pet, it is to be returned to the co-owner.
Just a side note supporting the merits of co-ownership ... I didn't intend to hijack your thread.
just because I am curious and I will probably need it in the future...what does a co-ownership contract look like?
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 10:18 AM
just because I am curious and I will probably need it in the future...what does a co-ownership contract look like?
My contracts looked just like a regular contract but were titled "Contract of Co-Ownership". It clearly defined all parties and their roles in the ownership. It should specify where the animal will live (unless certain criteria requires return to the other co-owner), who will pay for what expenses (unless certain circumstances occur), etc. A good co-ownership contract will clearly outline who is responsible for what & what happens if certain guidelines aren't met.
In the case of a show dog, you could specify that one co-owner must show a minimum of "X" number of times during a show season or return the dog to the other co-owner or it could split show responsibilities. It should specify how the dog is to be used for breeding (or not) and by whom, etc. Anything can be included in this type of contract.
It is just a tool that can be used to clearly outline the responsibility of each party as respects the future of the dog. A good contract can be a lifesaver in times of dispute. Trust me, been there ... done that ... it's not pleasant but it will stand up in court if it is properly written.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 10:44 AM
just because I am curious and I will probably need it in the future...what does a co-ownership contract look like?
In AKC the papers are marked as owners- the owner and co owner with signature of breed.
Additionally I have a contract. Its the date etc sold, then signature is required the owner is aware this _--- puppy is sold under co-ownership. All breedings must be in agreement ( for show) or placement of this dog is contingent of agreement in writing of placement of this dog. In the event the __ ( owner) can not keep the dog for any reason, said dog is to be returned to the co owner at owner expense.
I also state this dog may not leave the country ( US) without written conscent of the co owner.
etc etc. I can email you my contract if you want it.
In AKC the papers are marked as owners- the owner and co owner with signature of breed.
Additionally I have a contract. Its the date etc sold, then signature is required the owner is aware this _--- puppy is sold under co-ownership. All breedings must be in agreement ( for show) or placement of this dog is contingent of agreement in writing of placement of this dog. In the event the __ ( owner) can not keep the dog for any reason, said dog is to be returned to the co owner at owner expense.
I also state this dog may not leave the country ( US) without written conscent of the co owner.
etc etc. I can email you my contract if you want it.
that would be awsome...that way I can start to look at what I need to have a good program in advance, so that when I do finally get there, I am prepared. Thanks!
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 11:21 AM
Sorry the only way I would ever co-own would be if the breeder gave me the dog/pup. Co-ownerships can go bad so I choose not to sign one. I have not had to co-own one of my own I trust everyone of my family's that I very carefully selected. They know my contract they are notarized and fully understand what happens if contract rules are not followed.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 06:16 PM
Co-ownership controls who has the dog- to prevent resale or bad breedings.
golden&hovawart
03-13-2007, 07:08 PM
Sorry the only way I would ever co-own would be if the breeder gave me the dog/pup. Co-ownerships can go bad so I choose not to sign one. I have not had to co-own one of my own I trust everyone of my family's that I very carefully selected. They know my contract they are notarized and fully understand what happens if contract rules are not followed.
I agree with you.
I would never co-own an animal cos I would have the impression that the animal is not really mine.
I actually past on a dog cos I didn't agree with the contract.I was going to get a Pyrenean shepherd but the contract said that I had to show her,at my expense and that she had the pick of the litter.I thought it wasn't fair and refused the dog.
As BratBoxer said,it can turn sour.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 07:28 PM
I agree with you.
I would never co-own an animal cos I would have the impression that the animal is not really mine.
I actually past on a dog cos I didn't agree with the contract.I was going to get a Pyrenean shepherd but the contract said that I had to show her,at my expense and that she had the pick of the litter.I thought it wasn't fair and refused the dog.
As BratBoxer said,it can turn sour.
The dog is yours- but the breeding is not- nor who it can be sold to. You have to understand- that dog you have has parents- and bad decissions or the wrong breeding that produces dogs that are displystic etc shows on the parents as well. It also makes sure that puppy you brought into the world is not sold on 'ebay' or into a puppy mill. It protects the breeds reputation and the dogs produced.
Quite frankly- if the breeder DOES NOT want a co ownership= it really means they have no interest in protecting their lines or preventing breedings that produce dogs with major problems later. - nor care what you do with the dog should you not keep the dog for the lifetime of the dog. . Of course- understand- I am getting dogs from the best breeders that know all the other breeders lines as well- .. To prevent genetic disorders etc. And to me- co ownership also is a back up if you can not keep the dog. For whatever reason.
golden&hovawart
03-13-2007, 07:53 PM
The dog is yours- but the breeding is not- nor who it can be sold to. You have to understand- that dog you have has parents- and bad decissions or the wrong breeding that produces dogs that are displystic etc shows on the parents as well. It also makes sure that puppy you brought into the world is not sold on 'ebay' or into a puppy mill. It protects the breeds reputation and the dogs produced.
Quite frankly- if the breeder DOES NOT want a co ownership= it really means they have no interest in protecting their lines or preventing breedings that produce dogs with major problems later. - nor care what you do with the dog should you not keep the dog for the lifetime of the dog. . Of course- understand- I am getting dogs from the best breeders that know all the other breeders lines as well- .. To prevent genetic disorders etc. And to me- co ownership also is a back up if you can not keep the dog. For whatever reason.T
Then inforce the spay and neuter contract which I believe in.
Lets say that I don't agree with you and any type of co-ownership.
So let's say that i agree to desagree.I'll leave it to that.
I am also a breeder,all my dogs have their clearances and are shown.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 07:59 PM
T
Then inforce the spay and neuter contract which I believe in.
Lets say that I don't agree with you and any type of co-ownership.
So let's say that i agree to desagree.I'll leave it to that.
I am also a breeder,all my dogs have their clearances and are shown.
I agree on spay neuter contracts- however- like use this an example- lets say "I" buy a dog from you- without a co own- I can sell that dog to anyone I want. A home you didnt approve of etc.. with a co- ownership- you cant do that..
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 08:09 PM
Ummm...You don't need a co-ownership to keep the owner from selling a dog to someone else. I have it in my contracts they are not to transfer to another person without my consent and having first right to that dog. all pups were microchipped with my name on them also. If I find this happens there are repercussions it is all in my contract. I also keep in close contact with the owners.
golden&hovawart
03-13-2007, 08:18 PM
All the dogs I've baught have a contract that says I can't sell the dog without his approvement of the new house.
Borzoimom,
I understand yr point of view but co-ownership is not for me.
i understand that breeders use it to keep some of their ligns going but a crook is a crook whatever is the contract.
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 08:23 PM
The only point in entering into a co-ownership contract is when both owners have a COMPLETE & THOROUGH understanding & agreement on what is intended for the animal being co-owned. The contract simply puts all of that in writing & is a commitment you make to each other & the animal. If you don't agree with the intent of the contract, then you should never enter into such an agreement.
These contracts help you not only come to a common agreement on the date that the contract is signed but it ensures that you'll agree to that years from now or take the steps outlined in the original contract to remedy that new disagreement in terms.
To me, it is like an integrity agreement ... that can be called upon years down the road if necessary.
Whenever I brought a kitten into the world, I made that commitment for the life of that cat & those contracts helped me make sure I could have the opportunity to intercede if good intentions turned bad or changed for some unforseen reasons.
RagTyme Boxers
03-13-2007, 09:32 PM
Sorry, I have a very negative veiw on co-ownerships. They are a power trip for breeders and allow them to maintain breeding control but not expend the time, energy, or money that is needed to train, show, and breed a dog. Sorry, but there are other ways to protect lines, with other contracts.
I do not sell my puppies on co-ownerships, nor will I buy a puppy with one.
If a breeder has issues with puppies getting resold and such then they need to be more selective of whom they sell to and screen buyers more carefully.
I wrote an exert on my feelings which goes a bit more into my feelings on Co-Ownerships. I will quote it below. Please keep in mind that this is MY PERSONAL OPINION, it may or may not be shared by others.
Co- Ownerships
Where to start? Co-ownerships have numerous flaws and downsides while offering very few positives. Co-Ownerships are very common and seen with almost all breeders now days. There are MANY reasons why breeders utilize co-ownerships.
If a breeder kept every dog/bitch they would be viewed as a PuppyMill or some other terrible label. The co-ownership is an inventive way around such labels.
The breeder will retain some or all of the breeding rights to the dog/bitch. The puppy buyer often must breed when and to whom the breeder dictates. Puppies from litters must be returned to the breeder, which they can do with as they please(often reselling on the same terms you got your puppy)
Co-ownerships allow the breeder to maintain full control over every aspect of the dogs life. Breeding, Showing, Testing, Traveling..etc.. all must be done according to the breeders instructions.
If there is a falling out between the breeder and the puppy buyer the likelihood of the puppy buyer losing their new family member is very high.
In summary, Is it acceptable to pay FULL price ($1000 and up) for a puppy that is not really yours? Do you want someone else telling you want you can and can not do with YOUR dog. Do you want someone else getting Credit for all the wins and Glory that was won because of YOUR money, blood, sweat, and tears?
They will receive plenty by just being the breeder, which the pedigree reflects.
LET THEM EARN THEIR OWN GLORY!!
If you still feel you MUST enter into a co-ownership then do so AT YOUR OWN RISK! Heartache may very well be just a day away.
Can you put in a non-co-ownership contract that should there be a case when the puppy/dog needs to be surrendered it will be brought back to the breeder? And this dog will only be bred to other dogs of the same (pure) breed? would that be considered co ownership or just part of a contract? Can you write that into a contract along with a spay and neuter clause should it be required? I plan on breeding show dogs...and while I dont want to own the dogs I sell, I dont want to see them end up in shelters or bred to some random other breed. And I know there needs to be a serious screening process, but I know also that there are people who can dupe the best of us...which is why those three things are very important to me when I do finally have a program.
RagTyme Boxers
03-13-2007, 09:41 PM
Ceph-
A contract can have any terms you like. I would suggest making a list of what points you want included and then asking an attorney to help you write it up.
The wording in a contract can make or break you in court should it ever be needed.
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 09:42 PM
Can you put in a non-co-ownership contract that should there be a case when the puppy/dog needs to be surrendered it will be brought back to the breeder? And this dog will only be bred to other dogs of the same (pure) breed? would that be considered co ownership or just part of a contract? Can you write that into a contract along with a spay and neuter clause should it be required? I plan on breeding show dogs...and while I dont want to own the dogs I sell, I dont want to see them end up in shelters or bred to some random other breed. And I know there needs to be a serious screening process, but I know also that there are people who can dupe the best of us...which is why those three things are very important to me when I do finally have a program.
You can "say" all of those things in any type of contract but the only way the courts will hold it up is likely to be if there is co-ownership involved unless there is severe circumstance. Judges don't take the contract language as seriously down the road if the "buyer" has assumed all responsibility for an animal up to that point. The seller will lose the dispute 99% of the time & be powerless to do a thing about it without co-ownership.
good to know...and good to know early...sounds like it might take a little bit of time
thnks
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 09:53 PM
The problem with contracts is subject to laws of the state. The co ownership is AKC and recognized as an owner of the dog. Its much easier than fighting a contract.
I respect others opinions- however the purpose of this thread was to explain what it was. I hate to say this- but in a time when the papers is what matters- it stops the process right there. A contract may take months to years to find out- this is an instant stop. - both in breeding and the resell of the dog.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 10:00 PM
Okay- let me post fictional situations. Lets say that one of the co owners of my dogs wants me to breed to a dog. But the colors would not give what I want- I can also say no.
Co ownership doesnt mean one has more power than the other- its just that everyone has to agree. Also- although my breed is pretty clean in medical problems- alot are not. There is no way if I was Joe -owner that I would know what is in certain peoples lines- but the experienced co owner would.. The dog bred to may be to a "die for in looks" etc- but grandmother threw pups with major problems.. How could I , as a new one to that perticular breed - KNOW that????
IN a co own- its your dog- the dog lives in your house, eats your feed, take to what shows you do etc. Its just that all have to agree what is bred to, and make sure the dog isnt sold to a condtion I did not approve of. Also- the purpose of showing dogs is to determine breeding 'stock'. That means if breeding into a line sets the hard work of bettering the breed by generations- what purpose has been done.
Two of my dogs are co-owned- and I am proud of who holds the other ends of my dogs. YES - THEY ARE my dogs- YES they live with me- YES I AM THE ULTIMATE decission on anything with them, and YES I must have conscent who they are bred too to further the breed. "Co-own" doesnt mean the breeder did not trust me- it means- this is my baby, and I have great things planned and we are alllllllllllll in the cheering squad here..
RagTyme Boxers
03-13-2007, 10:17 PM
Okay- let me post fictional situations. Lets say that one of the co owners of my dogs wants me to breed to a dog. But the colors would not give what I want- I can also say no.
IMO one should not be breeding for color, but for health, temperament, and conformation.
There is no way if I was Joe -owner that I would know what is in certain peoples lines- but the experienced co owner would.. The dog bred to may be to die for in looks etc- but grandmother threw pups with major problems.. How could I , as a new one to that perticular breed - KNOW that????
Its called Mentoring. No co-ownership required.
From the AKC Procedures For Registration Matters (Rulebook)
C. CO-OWNERSHIP CONTRACTS
Co-ownership arrangements, in far too many cases,
lead to problems. While AKC registration application
forms provide for more than one owner, we recommend
that co-ownerships be avoided. It has been our experience
that purchasing a dog “outright” is preferable.
We would like to point out that if a co-owner is suspended
of all AKC privileges, then for the term of the
suspension, recording of a transfer of the dog that is
co-owned is barred and registrations of litters sired by
or whelped by the dog in question are barred. Wins
taken by the dog in AKC-licensed or member events
are subject to disallowment.
For the reasons cited above the AKC recommends
that co-ownerships be avoided.
lol, lets not get to heated guys, in reality I think it is up to the person. Clearly it works for Bmom, since her two of her dogs are co-owned. I can understand were you would want a co-ownership for breeding...not caring if the dog is shown or not, but rather looking at what they are being bred too...I wouldnt want any of my puppies being bred to anything that would lower my lines or the breed itself.
At the same time I see how people dont like it...it may infringe on a person's freedom...and some people would not like that
lets not get into a match :D this thread was to inform people about it....not to get snipey:p
We all make the decision when we get there....I dont know which way I'll go...but there was a White Shepherd dog who was sold to a reputable breeder some years ago...this dog was top ten UKC for a loong time...and now he is dead because the new owner developed a liking for drugs, let the dog out accidently, and the neighbor shot the dog for trespassing, and now we have been deprived of a wonderful animal and some very superior genes....the breeder could do nothing in that case to help the dog...and I can see in that case where a co-ownership may have been useful.
At the same time, I bet all kinds of arguments break out with certain co-ownerships...Bmom's co-owners are really great people, so that hasnt happened...but I can def. see it with those breeders requiring showing on certain more strict clauses....it can go either way, depending on yourself and the breeder :D
Is that about right?
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 10:26 PM
From the AKC Procedures For Registration Matters (Rulebook)
Of course they say that because the first place the dispute lands is in the AKC's lap instead of where it belongs ... in a courtroom. AKC doesn't want the drama between breeders any more than the breeders want it themselves. Any contract agreement can go sour so it is best to only do a co-ownership in a breeder/show dog situation when all parties are well known to each other & already of the same mindset & working toward the same goal.
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 10:27 PM
This isn't arguing it is good info to know before diving into co-ownership with someone.
Of course they say that because the first place the dispute lands is in the AKC's lap instead of where it belongs ... in a courtroom. AKC doesn't want the drama between breeders any more than the breeders want it themselves. Any contract agreement can go sour so it is best to only do a co-ownership in a breeder/show dog situation when all parties are well known to each other & already of the same mindset & working toward the same goal.
I agree :D
They can be beneficial in certain situations, as they are with Bmom...but I am sure they can also blow up in your face with a big boom :p
didnt mean to offend anyone with the argument thing...it just started to sound a weeee bit heated....sorry if I was wrong...
RagTyme Boxers
03-13-2007, 10:32 PM
No one is arguing. I am simply offering a different view. There are 2 sides to every issues and I feel that both sides should always be presented.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 10:33 PM
Rag Tyme- if I am doing a litter and its between two males( both equal in temperment and health- by the way- that is a given anyway BEFORE you consider any dog)- one throwing a color I do not want- I have the decission to say no. ( and did..). If I can find a equally outstanding male, which by the way I have, that will also produce the color I want- that is the last factor... * more on that later.)
And ' mentoring' will get you no where in a court of law.. Let me tell you a true story- I had a collie- a champion, when I moved into a house that had typical Virginia clay. After several months of a total mess of collie and clay in a yard that had no grass, I sent my champion male out to be fostered for 3 months until we could get the grass going. He was having allergy problems from the clay.
MOnths went by- I tried to get him back.. no answer at the door, no phone answering etc.. when one day I get this call from the Charlottsville PD dog warden. He said " we have your collie mix here- come get him.." I am like asking questions like what collie mix- when finally the man said " LOOK LADY- THE DOG HAS YOUR SOCIAL AS A TATOO- COME GET HIM OR WE PUT HIM DOWN..We have no room.".. I get in the car- drive two hours only to arrive to see- MY CHAMPION COLLIE- SHAVED COAT- 20 POUNDS under weight, fleas and ticks everywhere looking totally worn out. ( this was printed in dog world several years ago this true story..)
I cried half the way home and he just slept and groaned. I called the sheriffs office- . They investigated- this so called friend of mine- had sold him the week after I dropped him off to be cared for but never had the papers obviously. We were able to press criminal charges on her, and the man that bought him got nothing. The PAPERS IN COURT the AKC registration that showed ME as the owner is why we won.. Those papers of ownership go a long way in the courts. Its like a title to the car!
KatzNK9
03-13-2007, 10:40 PM
I'm not arguing either ... but as a cat breeder for more than 20 years, I have a few bad experiences that were as a result of a straight-out sales contract. A hard lesson to learn and in one case a tragic ending due to a judge's viewpoint that the owner held all the marbles regardless of contract based on full ownership of the cat. I've never had a single dispute over a co-ownership contract as everything was clearly outlined up front & there was no need to argue. In addition, there was a clause in the contract that did allow for changes (agreed to by both parties in writing) to the contract if circumstances warranted.
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 10:44 PM
The story would have been the same unfortunately whether a co-ownership or not because the dog was sold without papers anyway. PPl just need to be more selective with who they sell or leave their dogs with. The same kind of thing happened to me. Left my male and female with a friend of mine. couldnt get him to give my dogs back, Finally I broke into his home and found 1 of my dogs skin and bones no electricity or water scared to death male missing was told after he died but was found at the pound in a cruelty case went to court twice my vet even stated in court he was my dog but the trash got him back and I was left in tears again. The only thing they had to do was pay for the fees of 500$ for the 3 months he was held up at the HS.
sheplovr
03-13-2007, 10:45 PM
Well for what it might be worth if one wants a 5,000 dog and I do not have the money trust a good friend so we buy, pay and co own. Breed to the best and get pups to sell also for that price, we make money, breeding the best, not arguing about a thing, split all fees, show expense, etc. We are making money and paying our bills on good dogs co owned. That is how I see it, would never get into a co owned because of the price involved, but I know Borzimom would, her dogs cost a ton. Mine cost alot to buy in Germany and other foreign countries and to flight them here now is near $600 per dog. I have alot of money tied up in my Shepherds and trust I have done my homework only to have lost 5 pups yesterday. We have traced it to the female side to be checked with tests by the vet to eliminate any problems genetic. All costs all split being co owner of anything that goes, so this is just my point of it. But it must be a top dog to co own.
borzoimom
03-13-2007, 10:47 PM
I'm not arguing either ... but as a cat breeder for more than 20 years, I have a few bad experiences that were as a result of a straight-out sales contract. A hard lesson to learn and in one case a tragic ending due to a judge's viewpoint that the owner held all the marbles regardless of contract based on full ownership of the cat. I've never had a single dispute over a co-ownership contract as everything was clearly outlined up front & there was no need to argue. In addition, there was a clause in the contract that did allow for changes (agreed to by both parties in writing) to the contract if circumstances warranted.
EXACTLY- this man had a contract on my collie from the lady that sold him- but when it boiled down to it- whos name was on the registration is how I was able to prove he was MY dog. Your name on a registration is all you need- a contract is subject to the state laws they move that dog too.. If I can get my scanner to work- I will post before and after pictures of him. This did appear on dog world with the subject was getting a tattoo- but the fact is- that tattoo only got him home- but the papers let him STAY home. NOT her contract she drew up when she sold him.
ooooo, okay, Bmom, I think I see your point with that.
In the case that the co-owner you sell too sells the dog, you may have no way to trace it, or no way to get it back if you do trace it...with the co-ownership your name is on that sheet and it would stand up better in court.
I could see how that could be arranged in a contract too...though that would probably be a little harder to argue in court.
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 10:52 PM
Co-ownership to me is anything and everything to do with the dog is split 50/50. That would be a good co-ownership otherwise IMO its junk.
I dunno....if I bought a co-ownership dog I would rather pay for all the stuff myself and keep the dog to myself and just have that person/breeder there for emergencies or if I needed the dog to stay somewhere for a while...or to get help on suggestions for breeding, but thats me mostly....I understand it, and in all liklihood I will adopt a co-owned dog in the future (alot of the WS in the states end up being co-owed I think), and I would rather the dog be mine with that little voice in the back of my head offering suggestions and maybe telling me when I might be doing something wrong....Maybe maybe if I needed someone to show that dog at a time when I couldnt. :D
but lol, I shouldnt even be talking...my puppy wont be co-owned, though my future dogs may be, but thats the future...as is any kind of contract/agreement I draw up. :p
BratBoxers
03-13-2007, 11:08 PM
I'm afraid its not just a little voice! All I know is you better have known the co-owner for many years and trust them, if not they can do what they please even take the dog back trust me they will find a way if they really want the dog back.
lol, oh believe me...I wont be buying from someone I havent known for a few years...:D Its why I am in the breed clubs already and I dont even have my first puppy yet....and also why I am going to spend some of my normal skiing and visiting family time meeting breeders in Switzerland...I'll never get a dog out of that country otherwise...and thats a biiig goal for me....they do contracts too...so better get to know them now than later :)
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 09:01 AM
You know Boxers- it could be the difference in the breeds between Boxers and Borzois. Boxers are currently number 7, where as Borzois are 96. Boxers had like probably 20 times more registered dogs than Borzois in one year. Borzois only had like 700 dogs registered last year. Boxers probably had close to a 100,000 registered or some really high number.
Borzois have a 18month to 2 year heat cycle, and small litters for the size of the dog. Its common place to have a several year waiting list. The Borzoi club is also highly active making sure every rescue ends up placed, with only like 3 places ( one is little giants or somename like that) that can keep Borzois- but still placed by the club.
The difference in the point of view between us, is probably breed related. With so few dogs a year, they are usually almost always- co owned in the Borzois.
Co-ownership is more common in the rare breeds. I would bet that is the reason for the difference in view. Even to be in the breed club in Borzois, you have to have a house visit by two members. And a sponsership from other members as well.
BratBoxers
03-14-2007, 09:52 AM
Co-ownership has nothing to do with breed. Boxers go into heat from 6 months to 2 yrs. The show lines only have small litters most of the time between 4-6. I'm not sure how that has anything to do with it, but thanks for the education. Co-ownership could be used a lot more in rare breeds yes doesn't make me any more likely to sign one.
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 10:09 AM
Co-ownership has nothing to do with breed. Boxers go into heat from 6 months to 2 yrs. The show lines only have small litters most of the time between 4-6. I'm not sure how that has anything to do with it, but thanks for the education. Co-ownership could be used a lot more in rare breeds yes doesn't make me any more likely to sign one.
No- I mean the availability with puppies in a Boxer verses a Borzoi.
KatzNK9
03-14-2007, 10:24 AM
I think the difference in thought process about co-ownership has more to do with the different sides of the situation. Those who have something people want .. and those who want something people have.
Breeders who work very hard for many years to build a solid breeding program want to protect those efforts & the future of the breed. Those who have worked hard in this area have real reason to want to protect the future of how their dogs will continue the process even when they aren't in their sole control. Reputable breeders want their animals used properly in breeding programs & have every right to contractually demand that others respect that.
People who haven't lived it along with all the joys & suffering that comes from those years of experience will never understand what that entails. They can say they do & can promise the world of intentions to the original breeder. Those who are on the receiving end of a dog simply aren't as interested in what the breeder's original purpose and goals entail. That's just a fact of life.
That is why I placed very few breeding cats beyond my few partners in the work I was trying to accomplish within my breed of cats. We had the same goals & were the best of friends but we still signed very restrictive contracts between us & were glad to do it without hesitation.
golden&hovawart
03-14-2007, 10:33 AM
Katz,
what breed of cats do you breed?.
As for co-ownship if everything is split in the middle,why not but,in my case,it wasn't that.I would have had to pay for absolutly everything and still have to give the pick of the litter,in each litter she had.So for me,it was a lose/lose situation.
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 10:44 AM
Katz,
what breed of cats do you breed?.
As for co-ownship if everything is split in the middle,why not but,in my case,it wasn't that.I would have had to pay for absolutly everything and still have to give the pick of the litter,in each litter she had.So for me,it was a lose/lose situation.
OUCH!!! Man! Now I understand how you feel about this situation with co-ownership.. Whew! That sounds awful!
Mine is no where near that scenio. Maybe its more so the person you are dealing with.
Yes mine have to agree on which dog- and each has the power to say no. However- I have the dogs- I get pick, and except for regular care, anything with the breeding in expenses ( like a c section which I doubt) would be paid for equally. Even the stud fee is divided to pay equally.
KatzNK9
03-14-2007, 10:54 AM
I never said anything was split in the middle. Quite the contrary. Most people on this thread have a completely different idea of what a co-ownership contract can entail that the reality of how much can be included & fully outlined in such a contract. Contracts can be written that allow much freedom to the new co-owner while still protecting the breeder's interest. I think I've been completely misunderstood on this thread ... I hope this next bit helps.
I bred Birman cats ... I posted some pics of a few of my show cats here:
http://www.dogforum.org/showthread.php?t=5615
My co-ownership contracts gave all rights to the new owners as long as they complied with my breeding restrictions (approval of all studs or queens that animals were bred to, placement of offspring for breeding, etc.) they were free to pretty much do as they chose as long as they complied with our original agreement. They paid expenses, they got the fees for placement of kittens.
If I did want a kitten back from a particular cat, I would have pick of the litter from them unless they chose to keep the first kitten. If they chose to sell the first kitten, I had first option to BUY the kitten from them at a price no higher than what I sold the cat for (if same sex, if not same sex a max price was noted). My contracts stated I would have approval for all future offspring placements to show or breeding homes. All discussions about what types of homes I considered appropriate were handled in "theory" before they ever got the cat. They knew the types of restrictions & I have to say I never had to deny anyone because the contract clearly outlined my goals & our agreement to those goals.
Some cats I required that they show the cat to a certain level in competition (gaining at least "X" title) or return the cat to me so that I could show the cat to that level to later be returned to them after gaining that title. I wanted my show quality cats to gain their titles & if the new owners weren't able or willing, they were to give me the opportunity to do it for them. In addition, if I "demanded" a cat be returned to me so that I could show it, we would split expenses for that as both of us would gain from the cat having its title.
Cats needed to be kept in certain conditions ... no cages (unless they were studs & if so, they had to be of a minimum size & had to be walk-ins, etc). The contract outlined all those things.
I had very strict contracts but the basics were 100% on the new "co-owner". I think this is completely reasonable to have your expectations in writing. There was no intent on my part to limit the new co-owner from doing anything that wasn't clearly discussed prior to the cat going to the new home.
In the case of a pet quality kitten ... they had 100% control as long as the cat was maintained in proper conditions & received proper care (indoor only, speedy vet care, etc) & the cat was to be returned to me if they could no longer keep them.
My worst case of a "sales contract" for a breeding cat turned into supplying pet stores with kittens from my breeding cat. This was strictly prohibited in my "sales contract". I went to court ... I lost ... the judge threw it out based on the fact that the new owner had paid for the cat & all its expenses & the cat was in her name. It was a nasty battle & I had no control. That new owner was "kind enough" to call me & tell me if I still wanted my cat back (after it was no longer of value to her) I could retrieve her from her local shelter. Which, of course, I did ... poor cat was in horrible condition. That was what cured me from "sales contracts" and turned me toward "co-ownership".
RagTyme Boxers
03-14-2007, 12:26 PM
BMom-
That may be true. I know nothing of the rare breeds. In Boxers Co-Ownerships are often misused and more times then not go bad. Mostly because the one of the main reasons they are used is so the breeder can maintain exclusive breeding rights while offsetting the cost of showing and raising the dog onto the new owner.
I was not trying to argue, honest, I wa just trying to show that they are not always a good thing.
KatzNK9
03-14-2007, 12:38 PM
A contract is only as good as the agreement that is made and the good intentions and integrity of those who enter into the contract. I think the reason most co-ownerships go sour is because not enough forethought goes into writing the contract & discussing its terms prior to its execution. Not everybody in this world has integrity or good intentions & many people get burned by the unethical among us.
skunkstripe
03-14-2007, 12:42 PM
From where I am sitting (which admittedly is VERY far away) it sounds like it might be worth the money to have an attorney look over any contracts.
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 12:46 PM
BMom-
That may be true. I know nothing of the rare breeds. In Boxers Co-Ownerships are often misused and more times then not go bad. Mostly because the one of the main reasons they are used is so the breeder can maintain exclusive breeding rights while offsetting the cost of showing and raising the dog onto the new owner.
I was not trying to argue, honest, I wa just trying to show that they are not always a good thing.
Man it sounds like it! Thanks for the tip off! I know you are not argueing- just showing me what happens in another breed. I accept it as such. My sister also has a rare breed- ( Leos) and co ownership is also common, and no where near the situation you described in boxers.
MY step son wants a boxer. Hasn't picked out one yet, but I will pass this information onto him to look out for. After all- all he wants is just a pet..
KatzNK9
03-14-2007, 12:46 PM
From where I am sitting (which admittedly is VERY far away) it sounds like it might be worth the money to have an attorney look over any contracts.
EXACTLY! Luckily, I worked for a large law firm & after telling my tale of woes about my "sales contract" dispute, the attorneys I worked with helped me come up with language for various different circumstances & I could just insert "this or that" wording as applicable to any given cat & the contract that went with it.:)
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 12:48 PM
From where I am sitting (which admittedly is VERY far away) it sounds like it might be worth the money to have an attorney look over any contracts.
BOY- after reading what ragtyme said- I would agree. OUr breed is trusting of each other and doesn't use each other to further their own pups without them paying the expenses is how I read this..
This sure did turn into an interesting discussion didn't it???
KatzNK9
03-14-2007, 01:02 PM
This sure did turn into an interesting discussion didn't it???
Yes, it did! I hope that it helps somebody in the future to make sure they make good decisions & only enter into contracts having full agreement & knowledge of their scope regardless of the type of contract. I'm also very glad to see that this topic, although being disputed with some vigor, has remained friendly & with good intentions.
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 01:04 PM
Yes, it did! I hope that it helps somebody in the future to make sure they make good decisions & only enter into contracts having full agreement & knowledge of their scope regardless of the type of contract. I'm also very glad to see that this topic, although being disputed with some vigor, has remained friendly & with good intentions.
Man - you are not kidding! Sure did show both sides of the coin didn't it?
lassie
03-14-2007, 01:06 PM
well i would never co own and certainly wouldn't entertain getting a bitch on terms.lots of breeders do this in the UK and to me it encourages a "novice" person , who maybe has no idea what they're letting themselves into, breed.
borzoimom
03-14-2007, 01:09 PM
well i would never co own and certainly wouldn't entertain getting a bitch on terms.lots of breeders do this in the UK and to me it encourages a "novice" person , who maybe has no idea what they're letting themselves into, breed.
Well I am definitly not a novice. Its made to keep the lines. Its totally amazing to me how others can have such a bad situation. wow!