Breeder Contract Questions

[NorCalAl]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Greeting all - I made an agreement to take three animals a seller had on Craigslist. Rather than pay straight out, I suggested a breeders contract. I would purchase a male and attempt to breed the females. Within 48 hours of taking them home, I noticed markings and wrote the seller about them. She assured me they were not problems. Since I was new with the breed, I accepted the answers. I purchased a male and began the process for breeding.

The problems I noticed on the females all increased. I continued to email the previous owner asking about them. She then told me the smallest one needed special care including handfeeding. I began to investigate the markings I had noticed and was told by three reputable breeders that the problem was severe and most likely, while treatable, it would be fatal. I again wrote the previous owner who said she worked in a facility that bred these animals and would ask about it. She wrote later to tell me none of the other people had heard of the problem. During this period, I talked to local experts and consulted forums. The local breeders all stated, in emails to me, they would euthanize the carriers as they could infect all others. At that point, the smallest of the group passed away.

I contacted the seller, explained about the death and the reports from the local experts as well as directed her to check online resources. I then suggested, since she worked in a facility that bred these animals, that we unwind the contract with no admission of fault on either side and no further obligations. She agreed.

When I arrived at her place of employment, her managers looked at the animals and agreed they had the disease. They said it could be treated there. When I asked for her signature on the contract termination, the seller then informed me they weren't her animals - they were her boyfriend's and she would not sign the termination. I then took back the two animals and left, but not without talking to her boyfriend on the phone.

On my way home, he sent several insulting and demanding emails, stating they were his animals and I would deal with him from now on. I informed him that my agreement was not with him.

So, sorry for the book length backstory but -
1) Do I have a valid contract or should I simply return the animals to them and allow them to try to sue me? Would they prevail? I have all emails and pictures from day 2, proviing all I said.
2) Should I treat the animals (treatment would exceed the cost/value of the animals)? I have in the contract that if they needed vet care, only vet care up to the value of the animals would be considered.

I would like to unwind this as the treatment is rarely successful, the disease is highly contagious and could spread to my other animals and I feel I was lied to and no contract exists. I would like to simply return the animals to the seller. Suggestions are very welcome.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

1. We cannot prove whether you had a valid contract or who owned them. 2. See your contract.

It sounds like you need a lawyer.

 

[NorCalAl]

I realize we cannot prove who owned them. I have emails from the 'owner' (boyfriend) stating he was the owner. Wouldn't that mean she had no authority to sign a contract?

And what about selling the animals already sick? I have photos and the emails stating this from day 2.

 

[NorCalAl]

No other opinions here?

I'm asking because the advice i've been given from several breeders is to euthanize the animals - not treat and certainly not breed. (These are bearded dragons, value is $100 each).

I'd really like some opinions about whether, since the seller didn't actually own the animals, if the contract is then valid. OR if the contract is void because the animals are sick?

Any help here?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

No other opinions here?

I'm asking because the advice i've been given from several breeders is to euthanize the animals - not treat and certainly not breed. (These are bearded dragons, value is $100 each).

I'd really like some opinions about whether, since the seller didn't actually own the animals, if the contract is then valid. OR if the contract is void because the animals are sick?

Any help here?

You don't need opinions, you need facts. You have not supplied the ones needed to answer your question.

 

[justalayman]

explain the terms of this "breeder's contract".

as to ownership: whether the guy or the girl actually owned them, it would appear the girl was given the right to sell the animals (his agent). If he wants to argue that point, he can do so in court.

as to anything more specific, as you were asked before and as I have asked; what does the contract say

 

[NorCalAl]

I apologize. I thought I'd already written more than I should. What could I provide because I sincerely want to solve this issue.

I saw an ad on CL for three bearded dragons. Answered the ad then left it as the price was too high. Seller kept writing, finally stating she was moving and had to have them out of the house as she could not take them to new place. At that time, I offered a breeders contract. It stated I would take the females and attempt to breed. If the breeding was successful, the seller would be entitled to half the first clutch, up to a total return, per clutch of $300. In other words, if all three females were bred successfully, the babies were sold and at least $600 was produced per clutch, the seller would receive $300 per clutch. If not, after 5 months, the seller would receive $100 per female.

I added clauses for health of females (if the female was not yet healthy enough, in other words, big enough, she would not be bred) and for reasonable vet care (which I defined as $100 per animal).

After two days, I emailed the seller stating there were markings on the animals that I could not identify. Some looked like burns, some like they did not shed properly. As the animals were kept in the dark for several days prior to me picking them up, they were not at full color on that day and those markings weren't visible. The seller replied that they were normal and probably a result of them being in the dark. I was inexperienced with dragons and accepted the answer.

Over the next two months, I talked to experienced, local breeders and the subject of these markings came up. They told me they were symptoms of a disease called "yellow fungus". Once I determined, through these local breeders, that it was likely the problem, I began asking what should be done. While all suggested there were treatments, there were no cures and all local breeders suggested the animals be euthanized - they would not breed them.

I informed the seller of this. About this time (all of this, from discovering it was a serious problem until the death of one of the animals, was a week), one of the females passed from the disease. I told the seller they were sick. She then informed me she worked for a very large breeder of dragons and the breeder had never heard of the disease. ( As I will show, when I visited the seller at her place of employment, the breeder made clear that they treat for the disease frequently and it is well-known to them. ) She did not want to unwind the contract. I suggested then that I would do as the local expert breeders had suggested and euthanize the animals. I had purchased a male and I am concerned he will get the disease if I do not euthanize.

After my email informing her of my plans, she insisted I do not euthanize. I asked again for her to agree to terminate the agreement, sent her a termination agreement and she agreed in email. We made plans to meet at her employers the next day.

I met her at the breeder and they looked at the animals and agreed they had yellow fungus. The seller had talked to her boyfriend, someone I had not heard of before this and told me he was the owner of the animals and not her. He would not allow her to sign the termination agreement. She called him and handed me the phone. As he was very upset and yelling, I simply said I had no agreement with him, did not know him and would not discuss it with him.

She refused to sign the agreement and we left.

The boyfriend then began writing me emails, stating he was the owner, not her. He made many insulting, juvenile statements and then said he would not permit termination. I told him in writing, again, the agreement was by and between his girlfriend and me and he was not part of it. I told him that was my last contact with him.

All this time, I tried to take the high road, never insulting. I never placed blame or guilt or suggested they did anything deliberately. I just wanted to return the animals to her. Her employer stated they could treat them and that we should not breed them.

So, is the contract between myself and the seller (who did not own the animals, but had told me she did) valid? Am I obligated to the minimum conditions of the contract which would be to pay them the $300 at the end?

I am more than happy to scan the contract and provide that and I have and have kept every single email - and I do all "talking" by email, never phone. What could I provide to help you with your suggestions?

I feel like I was lied to here - she did not own the animals, but didn't tell me. She did not tell me nor admit they were sick when I asked questions. She works for a large (15,000 animals) breeder and SHOULD HAVE KNOWN prior to the transfer about the health of the animals. I feel she did not live up to the terms of the contract - to provide animals healthy enough for breeding.

Any suggestions?

 

[justalayman]

So, is the contract between myself and the seller (who did not own the animals, but had told me she did) valid? Am I obligated to the minimum conditions of the contract which would be to pay them the $300 at the end?

It would take effort as you would have to prove it but it sounds as if the girl was given the authority to act as the bf's agent, that is, if she wasn't the actual owner. If you do that, the contract would be enforceable. What did the guy say about the girl selling them if they weren't hers?

What would you like to do here?


what is the claimed owner wanting to do (the guy)?

what does the girl want to do?




and obviously you need to keep the females and the male separated and take precautions so you do not transfer the disease to the male.

 

[NorCalAl]

What I would like to do here is return the females to the seller. Since I've been told the treatment is effective less than 50% of the time and would exceed the value of the females, I don't want to be out the extra money.

He wants me, and has written me emails stating this, that I should "get to breeding", even though he understands (or at least has been told) that they are diseased. The final day of the contract is listed as Thanksgiving, 2012. So he makes veiled threats as to collecting on this day. His last communication ended "Thanksgiving Day!" This is the claimed owner.

The girl, the one who transferred them to me and signed the contract, initially said, in response to my offer of a termination agreement, that she was ok with that. She now, since the boyfriend intervention, does not respond to my emails.

I separated the animals two days after getting them. She kept all three girls together (which is most likely how it spread). There is no real agreement among breeders about keeping groups of females together. My guess the real disagreement is due to space considerations rather than what is best for the animals. I purchased individual cages for each and kept them that way.

I felt that, given the fact that it was a 'breeding contract', that since they can't be bred while diseased and, since they were given to me diseased and that they only way I could profit is by at least trying to breed, that the contract isn't valid. Don't both parties have to get something from a contract for it to have validity? If the only thing I 'get' is the costs associated with their care and the additional costs of obtaining the male (not the seller's fault, obviously), then where is my consideration in this?

I can not, of course, prove she knew when she transferred them that she 'knew' they were diseased. She does work for a breeder of the very same animal and has had years of experience with them, so I find that she didn't know tough to believe. But wouldn't the contract be in bad faith if the desired end was breeding and they supplied sick animals?

I wrote her some very convincing arguments to taking them back. There is no win-win here. There are several lose-lose. But the only situation where both parties are at some kind of parity is with them taking the animals back. Then I'm not forced to either euthanize or treat and she can treat for free at her employer. They told us that she could treat and keep them there.

Unfortunately, the boyfriend is a 21 year old jerk who wants to show off what a tough guy he is. There's the sticking point. I've pointed out to him that he and I have no agreement - only she and I.

 

[justalayman]

Don't both parties have to get something from a contract for it to have validity?

yes, and in your contract, you get the lizards and the seller gets money.

Arguing the girl knew of the fungus will be very difficult, if you can do it at all. Being able to prove it could possibly give you an argument in attempting to rescind the contract. As to the guy; unless he works for the breeder or is trained concerning lizards, why would he know what yellow fungus is?

The problem with all of that is that it will cost you time, effort, and money to defend yourself.


The way I see it, you are on the hook for up to $500. That would be the $100 medical limitation (on the remaining 2) (paid to a vet , not the seller) and the $100 if there is no breeding earnings per lizard. I'm not seeing much of a way out of that. If you do not treat the animals, the seller can argue you were the reason they could not be bred and seek $700 ($300 from each of the surviving lizards and $100 for the deceased lizard) from you.

Unless you have something in that contract that addresses the possibility should any of the lizards die, you are still on the hook for $100 for that one.

So, either plan on ponying up the $300 if after 5 months the lizards could not have been bred or attempt to negotiate something with them.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

The way I see it, you are on the hook for up to $500. That would be the $100 medical limitation (on the remaining 2) (paid to a vet , not the seller) and the $100 if there is no breeding earnings per lizard. I'm not seeing much of a way out of that. If you do not treat the animals, the seller can argue you were the reason they could not be bred and seek $700 ($300 from each of the surviving lizards and $100 for the deceased lizard) from you.

I disagree. If experts say no amount of treatment will cure them to breed safely, the $100 vet allowance is mute. In regard to the $300, does this contract have ANY conditions where you can argue you do not owe the $300?

 

[justalayman]

I disagree. If experts say no amount of treatment will cure them to breed safely, the $100 vet allowance is mute. In regard to the $300, does this contract have ANY conditions where you can argue you do not owe the $300?

it isn't always fatal. There is no way to know if it is fatal other than treat it and wait. If the lizard dies, it was a fatal infection. If it doesn't, well, it wasn't.

the problem with not treating it is; there is no way to know if the lizard would die if it had been treated. That means the lack of treatment could be why the lizard dies. Since there is a possibility the lizard would be fine, the seller can claim that the reason he didn't get $300 instead of $100 is because of the failure to treat the lizard.

If it was always fatal, sites like this wouldn't bother to provide a treatment regimen since it would serve no purpose. In fact, if you have multiple lizards, keeping the lizard around only to wait for it to die would unnecessarily risk infecting every other lizard you have.



http://www.reptaid.com/yellow%20fungus.html

at this site that deals with bearded dragons, there are many threads about yellow fungus. While I only read a few, I haven't seen anybody speak about death. In fact, they seem to be pretty optimistic about treatment.

http://www.beardeddragon.org/bjive/search.php

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I know nothing about bearded dragons. I know a lot about the supplements referred to. Pau D'Arco is often used very successfully by humans for toe nail fungus. The grape seed is legendary as an antioxidant. I'd like to thank justalayman for coming up with those links. I suggest OP invest in the XL and read the entire thread on that forum for supplemental tips.

This is a win-win for him. He has a loss, that he can turn into a gain and at the same time, gain experience tending the BDs'.

 

[NorCalAl]

As much as I don't want to admit it, I know you're right.

I can't prove she knew - even if I did ask her two days later. And if she was his agent, something I didn't even know could be done, then you're doubly right and there's no reason to expect he knew.

I do have letters from a number of reputable breeders that say they won't attempt to cure or treat, they will simply euthanize. I'm going to talk to the local reptile vet tomorrow and see what can be done, for a reasonable fee. Since I do have a clause in the contract that says I'll expend no more than the value ($100) in vet bills, I will make that effort.

What's terrible is I thought I'd done a decent job writing up the contract and that I'd protected myself. Sigh.

Thank you very much for your opinions and commentary. Just call me Ben Dover. Ouch.

 

[NorCalAl]

it isn't always fatal. There is no way to know if it is fatal other than treat it and wait. If the lizard dies, it was a fatal infection. If it doesn't, well, it wasn't.

the problem with not treating it is; there is no way to know if the lizard would die if it had been treated. That means the lack of treatment could be why the lizard dies. Since there is a possibility the lizard would be fine, the seller can claim that the reason he didn't get $300 instead of $100 is because of the failure to treat the lizard.

If it was always fatal, sites like this wouldn't bother to provide a treatment regimen since it would serve no purpose. In fact, if you have multiple lizards, keeping the lizard around only to wait for it to die would unnecessarily risk infecting every other lizard you have.



http://www.reptaid.com/yellow%20fungus.html

at this site that deals with bearded dragons, there are many threads about yellow fungus. While I only read a few, I haven't seen anybody speak about death. In fact, they seem to be pretty optimistic about treatment.

http://www.beardeddragon.org/bjive/search.php

I initially replied before you posted this. A couple of things: From the second line in the Reptaid site: "It is a very contagious disease, and, unfortunately current medical treatments are often ineffective. In most cases the treatment fails and the animal dies." The site then goes on, of course, to recommend their product. I intend to get their product tomorrow and begin treatment. It also states it will take months. That's actually fine with me. I'm in this for the long haul and certainly want to have the best for these guys (and all my herps - I have other lizards and torts and...). I appreciate you doing this research.

The site does seem a bit contradictory, however, within those first few statements.

I'm reading through the thread now at beardeddragon.org. I am a member there already.

Thanks again, both of you, for the comments, suggestions and the research.