Hooked on Fish and Corals - Parasites

Originally Posted by IslandLizards

It's good to know that you only care about your personal $ and want to buy a animal that is in 100% health and care not about any that you may and most likely could nurse back to health yet easily can pass judgement upon others.
3. We have a common agreement as well in that you are the exact person we would refuse service too.

If you purchase an animal that you know is less than 100% you are taking a risk. Each person decides for himself whether to take on a risky purchase.

You would refuse service to Laura, who is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, just for expressing her opinion?

Originally Posted by Lucille

If you purchase an animal that you know is less than 100% you are taking a risk. Each person decides for himself whether to take on a risky purchase.

You would refuse service to Laura, who is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, just for expressing her opinion?

Never stated anything about her knowledge or experience so not sure why you even mentioned that...
We would because she assumed our knowledge and experience without any facts to backup her claim that we should educate yourself on proper reptile care and husbandry before you call yourself a "company".
That is all.

Yes it is known you take a risk when making ANY purchase whether you know there are defects or do not know. That is why it is up to the merchant/manufacturer to clear any doubts on the condition of said item(s). Unfortunately not everyone is out to do the right thing and would rather get the sale and deal with any repercussions later.


I'm not here to go back and forth on why I shouldn't have made the purchase, or why the seller sold the animal. I'm not here to compare my level of knowledge with others' either. I'm just here to warn others of the merchant based on the documents I provided. If someone sees this and wants to do business with them then so be it, not my problem, its just an FYI.

I have a mixed perspective. On the one hand, imports come with risks and show offerings are basically variants of "speak now or forever hold your peace" situations (for both sides of the transaction) most of the time to me. Imports for adding new blood or new localities, for some kinds of keeping and some kinds of projects, are part of herpetoculture. While I think it might be great if we were already beyond that or if there would be no further need/use, some things are simply not at that stage yet for individual hobbyists and the species/localities involved.

So while I understand the desire to add new blood, the situation was perceived to be at least somewhat iffy upon examining the animal at the show. Also, having been around the block myself, I trust the data delivered by my eyes more than the data delivered by my ears (unless I hear negative respiratory indicators, I guess) when inspecting an animal in person while talking to a vendor. For example, when people tell me an import has been "treated three times" (or whatever), is "a chowhound" (or whatever), and is "heavy as a brick" (or whatever), I just assume that such noise is all crap and proceed as if the animal needs full adjustment and establishment to have a chance of surviving. I can get lucky with trust, but I am more likely to eventually get burned with trust.

That said, if the account as described is how things went down at the show, there would have been some misrepresentation involved in the description regarding the animal's establishment status or testing/treatment history. After being burned once and having had one or two near misses, I quickly learned to limit faith and take extra precautions. Also, the buyer was passed around to various representatives that prolonged concerns of not being dealt with, so I understand the delay leading to dissatisfaction.

All in all, I would have looked at the prospect of buying this animal as a pure risk and would have not believed any health status claims. If looking iffy to me at a show, I would either accept the risk and let come what may or move on without buying because I would not want to add to my bucket of headaches. I understand why the buyer has and is airing his grievance, though, and it might not have come to that if 1) there was no (alleged) misinformation and 2) communication/response from the vendor had been more rapid, complete, and conclusive.

Appreciate your comments Nickolas.
Thank you for basing them on presented facts and not assumptions.

I see errors on both sides, but I will almost always side with the person who tries to save an animal.

The OP saw an animal in less than optimal condition, and decided to try to nurse it back to health. Commendable; I've done it countless times, over the past 40+ years.

I understand the delay in getting a vet appointment too. Both my dogs' vet, and my herp vet are booked several days out. I've taken snakes to ER facilities, but have found that even if they advertise that they treat reptiles, it's hit or miss, depending on which vet is working that shift.

As for the seller, it sounds like yet another peddler, only interested in money, while the animals pay for that greed with their lives.

I see this: Buyer knowingly bought animal not 100% healthy-appearing. Believed vendor at expo, that animal was in their care for months, and fecals were clear. Didn't want to wait for the owner to call, on the evening that he said he would, to discuss the issues.

Seller brought sick animal, that they had for only a week, to an expo. Lied to buyer about date of possession of animal, and parasite testing. Won't give seller any kind of concrete decision as to what, if any, compensation they are willing to give. Keeps saying they're "busy".

Should the buyer receive compensation for knowingly buying an unhealthy animal? Maybe.

Is the seller looking unethical, treating animals as merely stock, to be sold as soon as possible? In this case, it appears that way.

I guess we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.

Originally Posted by Insomniac101

I see errors on both sides, but I will almost always side with the person who tries to save an animal.

The OP saw an animal in less than optimal condition, and decided to try to nurse it back to health. Commendable; I've done it countless times, over the past 40+ years.

It can be commendable, but this animal was not the recipient of a random act of kindness, this is a critter of a type that the buyer had specifically been seeking and so buyer may have had an incentive to buy when he might have ordinarily passed on the purchase.

Originally Posted by IslandLizards

Yeah it was a import I have been looking to get for a while

Much weight hinges on the claim the buyer said the seller made, that fecals were clear. Buyer has not yet included proof that seller made this claim

Originally Posted by Insomniac101

I see this: Buyer knowingly bought animal not 100% healthy-appearing. Believed vendor at expo, that animal was in their care for months, and fecals were clear.

.
All who say that vendors should not sell animals they know are ill are 100% correct. Did this vendor know? Buyer claims that symptoms could have simply been stress.

Originally Posted by IslandLizards

At the time the animal was in decent shape..

If so, vendor may have thought that as well.
In fact at this point we do not know the cause of death. It could be husbandry, it could be parasites. From the report fecals were positive for more than 30 parasite eggs, but there is no cause of death listed.


There is still the issue of the seller's poor communication, and that is a valid complaint.

Originally Posted by Lucille

In fact at this point we do not know the cause of death. It could be husbandry, it could be parasites. From the report fecals were positive for more than 30 parasite eggs, but there is no cause of death listed.

You are correct. I didn't have a blood test done postmortem so we will never be 100% sure if it was something else that caused it but realistically speaking we can safely presume it was from the parasitic infection.

Originally Posted by Lucille

If so, vendor may have thought that as well.
In fact at this point we do not know the cause of death. It could be husbandry, it could be parasites. From the report fecals were positive for more than 30 parasite eggs, but there is no cause of death listed.

If they had a fecal like stated then they would have known and had no doubt it was healthy...correct?

Originally Posted by Lucille

It can be commendable, but this animal was not the recipient of a random act of kindness, this is a critter of a type that the buyer had specifically been seeking and so buyer may have had an incentive to buy when he might have ordinarily passed on the purchase.

Im actually glad you brought this up. This was in part an act of kindness as well though as there were three other choices to choose from from two other vendors all at the same monetary price point. I picked this specific one due to its health but based on the sellers responses to my inquiries thinking there was no major ailment. You may be correct in your statement with my predetermined disposition on buying that specific locale regardless of the events though but part of my purchase was based on its health. If I wasnt looking for that specific locale I honestly can say I wouldn't have purchased it or any for that matter. If it was given to me for rehabilitation then I would have taken him but I am just a fella, not rockafella so I usually don't spend money on something I don't want or need.

Originally Posted by Lucille

Much weight hinges on the claim the buyer said the seller made, that fecals were clear. Buyer has not yet included proof that seller made this claim

Unfortunately here the only proof is my word along with my wife's who was present and possibly any other random passerby who overheard the conversation between myself and the seller. You can take that how you like.

Not sure why you seem to have an axe to grind here Lucille.....................

Originally Posted by Phil Bradley

Not sure why you seem to have an axe to grind here Lucille.....................

I am actually trying to lookout both sides. I feel for anyone who buys a critter from a show and gets it home and it is ill, but if the critter looked ill at the show perhaps passing on the sale might have been the better choice.

Originally Posted by Lucille

I just don't feel like we are at the 'fast one' stage yet.

Seller

Sold an import with parasites, buyer alleges that seller cited a clean test
They were willing to talk to you
They dropped the ball in communicating

Buyer
Bought know critter was an import and did not look well
Says critter progressively ill and looked worse but vet care was delayed for 5 days

It seems to me that if the buyer has said he is willing to take a partial refund, what we need is an offer from the seller. Since it is now here, I think it best that buyer notify seller and both parties can try to come to terms here in the BOI.

Lucille is correct, but taking it a step further. I doubt that the buyers credit card company would accept that as a acceptable chargeback. You always had the opportunity not to accept the purchase, and you chose to take the risk. Now you have blamed the seller, blamed yourself and have filed a claim for a refund. I think this whole thing could have been avoided by using your good vibes and passed on it.