Anonymous wrote:That was pretty crappy to take a dog and get rid of it. Would you do that to your child? Ask for proof and yes, you should pay as part of that adopt fee is you making sure that the shots were up to date like you claimed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a shakedown. And how are you supposed to know what their city does or doesn't accept?
+1 It would be one thing if they were asking for the $100 adoption fee to go toward the shots (I still would say no). But they're asking OP to pay to get their dog current according to their municipality's codes -- that is unequivocally their job as the dog's owners.
Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a shakedown. And how are you supposed to know what their city does or doesn't accept?
Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a shakedown. And how are you supposed to know what their city does or doesn't accept?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did you share vet/shot records with them before adoption? If so, not your problem.
We didn’t, but we sent a copy after the first email. They claim their city won’t accept that, the shots need updating in 2020.
Anonymous wrote:Did you share vet/shot records with them before adoption? If so, not your problem.
Anonymous wrote:Long story short, after dealing with severe allergies with our son, we decided it was in his best interest to re-home our dog. We spent a lot of time interviewing interested parties through a no-kill Facebook group, who advised we charge $100 to be sure the dog went to a good home, which we in turn donated to the group. Anyway, new owners were a nice family with acreage for the dog, and it was a nice fit. Fast forward a few weeks and they are claiming their city says the dog needs updated shots, and we should have done this for 2020. They want us to pay now and keep harassing us with emails asking for $200 for the shots. This isn’t our responsibility, is it? As far as our records and city were concerned, the dog was up to date and good to go. Thoughts?