UKC Forum Member
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: SW Missouri
Breeding in both registries I feel your grief there!!! That is why it is the responsibility of the BREEDER to make sure things are in place to prevent that from happening (as it is OUR responsibility as breeders). It is not the registry responsibility, it is ours as breeders.
That is why you UKC register the litter and either co-own the offspring or keep the papers until the purchase contract is complete; last check UKC still allowed the breeder to keep UKC papers until alter contracts and payment has been completed according to contract. This solves UKC and those of us that volunteer from having to deal with messes between breeders and buyers. AT LEAST if you do not want to UKC register the litter have enough respect to CO-OWN the dog with AKC so it is a moot issue that doesn't have a chance of ending up on the doorstep of others.
As an APBT inspector, MOH, and BSJ with UKC I deal with these issues a LOT!
We should NOT have to put up with being called everything in the book by buyers of pups/dogs out of UKC registered stock because the breeder didn't register the litter and went with another registry, making it HARDER (not impossible) to register the dogs. People get VERY ticked off at the messenger when they have to go back and trace everything and cannot get it done with the simple process, especially when they have litters or pregnant bitches.
I get VERY tired of repeating myself and taking the brunt from issues resulting from breeders too cheap to register their litters with UKC or think they are cheating the system and pulling something off on the buyers to protect themselves with the LEAST amount of effort/money possible. (this is NOT protecting themselves, it is called 'passing the buck') These are things that are the breeders responsibility to take care of, not anybody else having it pushed on us.
There are many good people out there that we aim to assist with registration issues! The problem is breeders NOT taking responsibility to cover their loose ends with buyers is creating MORE and MORE issues with the buck passing they are doing. I personally (as a breeder) see this as breeders not taking care of their responsibilities and not a registry issue.
I have w/h UKC papers until buyer contracts were completed (both alter and financial). I've also had people call and complain to UKC demanding their papers like it is their God given right to have them despite the fact that they had not met the purchase/alter agreement fully in the sales contract. They got nowhere with UKC and eventually got the altering done to get their registration paperwork.
UKC stands behind their breeders. AKC does NOT. AKC quit standing behind their breeders when they imposed the LR (I remember the days before LR). I have strongly felt that was a farse from the word go. A perceived easy out for breeders while AKC makes bank. Breeders had more control over their dealings w/o the LR. And that is a policy that I stand behind strongly with UKC! NO LR with UKC is something as a breeder I strongly protect because it gives me MORE control over what I produce.
Now days why do buyers have to adhere to alter contracts with breeders with AKC? A determined buyer wanting to breed will go to another registry BECAUSE the breeder HAS to provide registration by AKC (another gliche the can hurt breeders at the hands of AKC that people like to blame on everything other than AKC's screwed up LR program). If an AKC buyer doesn't feel the contract needs to be adhered to they STILL have registration papers to get registered in other registries AND they can still compete their dogs or produce non registered dogs. (which you know as well as I do how much designer breeds go for, not having registration or full registry doesn't stop people from breeding your offspring, just registering them)
Having your breeding stock UKC registered doesn't guarantee the offspring will not get FULL registeration with UKC, just makes it tougher and imposes on others in dealing with what the breeder should have taken care of with the litter. Having pups UKC registered and w/h the papers until the purchase contract is met or co-owning the offspring (any registry if you do not want to register UKC) you do not want to have FULL UKC registration are the ONLY ways to guarantee your pups don't end up producing UKC registered litters.
IT COST NOTHING EXTRA TO CO-OWN and EVERYTHING is set in stone between breeder and buyer right from the start (as it should be). That gets rid of the people at UKC and those of us that deal with registration issues on our own free time having to deal with upset buyers and getting caught up in registration issues the BREEDER should have had dealth with right from the start.
IF a breeder should register with AKC and not UKC, CO OWN the puppy on AKC papers. That IS the only way to guarantee that the puppy doesn't end up in the UKC breeding pool.
I like helping people with UKC registration needs. HOWEVER, I LOATHE having to deal with issues that were the responsibility of the breeder to take care of when they bred and sold the puppy that they passed the buck on the rest of us to deal with. As a breeder myself, it REALLY chaps my butt having to take grief from buyers whose breeders didn't tie up their loose ends and left things for others to sort through and deal with at our own expense.
These issues are so VERY easily prevented at the hands of the breeder that make life easier on EVERYBODY involved.
It ain't the bark, it ain't the growl, it's the bite that hurts!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged