Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/16/2023

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  BLUF: This breeder failed to adequately disclose a known defect prior to sale of a product despite opportunities to do so prior to sale. The breeder acknowledged the failure. However they have elected not to make me whole with total repayment citing the contract which was breech with the failure to disclose. The breeder offered another puppy in the next liter which is not the same as the puppy purchased. The wait time for the purchased puppy was 13 months due to size. We purchased a large labradoodle and the upcoming liters are small to medium. There is also a significant lack of trust with further business transactions. My outcome resolution is $482.72 due to the breeder’s breech of contract.
  
  I entered into a contract with Shadow Pines Labradoodles ***** **22. I had done a great deal of research on the type of dog that would be right for our family and the breeder that we would use. We waited a year for the size and type of dog that we desired. We were offered several puppies throughout the year but they were small to medium. Only one liter of the large breed was available to us. This liter was born in ******** *** 2023.
  
  We went down for puppy selection on ***** ** 2023 and were torn between two. Together we decided on a ********* *****. On ***** 22nd, we picked up the puppy. Per the contract the puppy was evaluated by a veterinarian that was also carefully selected and has copious experience with doodles. This veterinarian determined that the puppy would more likely than not need eye surgery in the future and would need eye drop three times a day. Communicating with the breeder revealed that the eye condition was diagnosed and evaluated prior to selection. The breeder determined for herself and me that this was “minor.” Our vet suggested return of the puppy or a specialty consult. We spent $2600 for the product, $114 for evaluation, gas and unquantifiable emotional labor during this process. We returned the puppy after the vet visit.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/21/2023

  The customer
  applied for a puppy by submitting a puppy application on ***** *** 2022. On her application you will see that her desired size of a puppy at
  maturity was either a medium between 35-45lbs or a standard between 50-60lbs. My
  contract, which this customer signed, states a customer can remain on our Master
  Reservation List and they may transfer their deposit for up to but no more than
  three consecutive litters. This customer passed on more than three litters, any
  of which would have produced puppies maturing to the customer’s desired size. Although
  my contract states that after passing on three litters their deposit will
  expire, I accommodated this customer and continued to contact her with each new
  litter announcement. She never gave me a reason for turning down all of the
  litters offered in the past. Finally she was willing to move forward and select
  a puppy from my most current litter. 
  
  Although the
  qualifications for returning a puppy per my contract were not met, I graciously
  refunded the customer the price of the puppy, minus the $300.00 non-refundable
  deposit.  I knew after our text
  conversation on April **** the customer was not going to be happy
  regardless of any options I offered. These options included paying for a correction
  surgery if one was needed, or a replacement puppy of the size she requested.
  The waiting time for a new puppy was not discussed because she didn’t want to
  go with that option. Her claim that I gave her a time frame of 13 months to get
  another puppy is false. In fact the customer stated in her text message that
  she would be ok to keep the puppy she purchased if I would pay for all expenses
  related to the right eye without a cap, along with me traveling to her house
  daily to administer the puppy’s mid day eye drops. Both of these requests were
  totally unreasonable. Therefore the best outcome for both the customer and me
  would be for her to return the puppy. I even drove 40 minutes to meet the
  customer after 9:00 pm on April **** to collect the puppy, trying to
  help her cut down travel time. Once the puppy was in my possession, I promptly
  refunded her $2300.00 via ****** per her request. During the last phone
  conversation I reminded her of the non-refundable deposit and that her refund
  would be $2300.00 not $2600.00.   Later that evening she contacted me via text
  and was not happy that ****** deducted $68.77 from the $2300.00 refund for the
  transaction fee. She informed me that she didn’t like that but stated she
  received the money. Three days later on April ****, the customer
  emailed me requesting more money, part of which was the $68.77 ******
  transaction fee. I contacted ****** and was informed that the transaction fee
  is the sellers responsibility not the buyers, therefore a refund of $68.77 was
  sent to the customer’s ***** account. The total amount refunded was $2368.77.
  
  The customer
  stated in her complaint that there was a breach of contract however that is not
  the case. My contract states that I agree that the puppy is in good health at
  the time the buyer takes possession and the puppy was in fact in good health at
  that time. The puppy showed a slight tearing in her right eye a couple days
  before her 6 week vet exam. I requested my vet to thoroughly examine the
  puppy’s eye to make sure that it was fine. At that visit my vet didn’t mention
  anything about the eye having an Entropion. This is a condition, I now know,
  where the eyelid can roll inward causing the lashes to touch the eye, which in
  turn could cause tearing. My vet repeatedly assured me that the puppy’s eye was
  fine and there was nothing to worry about. My vet was so sure of the eye that
  it was not mentioned in the vet exam record. The customer received this vet
  record in the puppy’s folder the day she picked up the puppy at 8 weeks of age.
  My vet never suggested the tearing was caused by a condition of concern, and
  because it seemed to have cleared on its own, as my vet said it would, I did
  not mention this to the customer.
  
  When the
  puppy was returned to me, I quickly made an appointment with my vet and took
  the customer’s vet records with me. At this second vet visit the word Entropion
  was mentioned to me by my veterinarian for the very first time. Once again I
  was informed that the puppy is fine and that my vet feels strongly that she
  will outgrow the Entropion. He also stated that the eye medication was not
  needed and shouldn’t be administered as previously suggested by the customer’s
  vet. At this visit my veterinarian documented on the puppy’s updated record
  that she was completely healthy and ready for her new family.
  
  All of our
  new puppy owners know per the contract they signed that the puppy must be taken
  to a veterinarian of their choice and at their expense within the first 3 days
  of possession to confirm that the puppy doesn’t have any life-threatening
  hereditary defect. The customer’s vet at her visit on April **** stated
  the puppy has an Entropion in the right eye; however this is not a life-threatening
  hereditary defect nor did the vet state in her record that it was. Her vet also
  stated per the customer’s text messages that Entropion is not common in this
  breed. The customer’s vet stated on the vet report that if she doesn’t outgrow
  it she would need surgery. Per our phone conversation, the customer said that
  her vet told her she was too young to have the eyelid correction should it be
  needed. She also stated that the puppy could outgrow it.
  
   I gave this customer a refund and took the
  puppy back even though the contract requirements for a return and refund were
  not met. I acted in good faith in all my dealings with the customer. I feel
  that I have been more than gracious and have done everything in my power to end
  our breeder/customer relationship peacefully.