BHB reptiles "het" didn't prove out, won't fix it

Originally Posted by ozz465

Brian has to make it right , but to the original buyer, if it came with a pic id and guarantee that may be a different story.

I have a problem with this and I agree with Chris.

Unless stated in a seller's TOS, if an animal switches hands before being proven, that genetic guarantee should still be in place. Now, I do not know about the paper work obtained with this animal, if any at all, and the whole situation is a bit of a mess, but a bad het. is a bad het. regardless of how someone ended up with it.

I was not aware that gurantees of genetics applied only to the original buyer. That just seems absurd to me.

If you produce an animal and claiming it as something, it better be that.

Cliff had four more eggs hatch from this male to another het hypo female as well just recently... Three spiders and a normal...

Originally Posted by ShadowAceD

I was not aware that gurantees of genetics applied only to the original buyer. That just seems absurd to me.

If you produce an animal and claiming it as something, it better be that.

And if an animal changes hands three times...four times....ten times...is the original breeder responsible to make some huge "compensation" to each of those prior owners for all possible "lost opportunities"? Equally absurd to me.

This debate will likely derail the thread and should probably be spun off into the general business discussion forum.

Originally Posted by JudyC

And if an animal changes hands three times...four times....ten times...is the original breeder responsible to make some huge "compensation" to each of those prior owners for all possible "lost opportunities"? Equally absurd to me.

This debate will likely derail the thread and should probably be spun off into the general business discussion forum.

No, Cliff is owed nothing. The animal should have been held onto until the eggs hatched (an important step in proving an animal). Whoever is the first one to put the animal in a situation to be proven is the one who should be compensated. However, it should only be the initial purchase price of the animal or an animal of equal value (ideally not a hatchling).

The reason being ... while all those eggs did make it to full term, you do not know, had their been any of the "hypos", if they would have survived. Something could have happened to them. Something can always happen to them, so monetary compensation for potential losses that cannot be proven or substantiated is not logical.

Originally Posted by ShadowAceD

No, Cliff is owed nothing. The animal should have been held onto until the eggs hatched (an important step in proving an animal). Whoever is the first one to put the animal in a situation to be proven is the one who should be compensated. However, it should only be the initial purchase price of the animal or an animal of equal value (ideally not a hatchling).

I could totally stand behind that reasoning. Now...if the owner of the suspect het refuses any reasonable compensation as not being "good enough"....what then? I do believe that is the situation that has been presented here.

What resolution do you want exactly?

At this point, from September 14 to September 28 I did get Brian to respond to a few of my emails and we tried to work a deal out. Brian wanted to just give me a credit for the lone animal that didn't prove. I think that's an absurd thing to offer as what I'm out are the lost clutches. Not only did I have the potential to make 09 Honeybees but I also missed any shot at multiple gene crosses with the new co-dom. It's not just the monetary loss but a real setback for the co-dom project. I don't feel a 2010 animal or two makes up for what was lost but I wanted to compromise and get this behind me.

Again - what did you pay for the animal, and what EXACTLY did Brian offer in value?

Trying to figure out what you consider to be reasonable compensation as the second owner of this animal.

Well see unless Photo Genetic Paperwork has followed the snake how do we know one of the sellers didn't accidently switch the Spider Het Ghost with a Poss Het Ghost or just a normal spider. So without photo paperwork its kinda a lost cause. I sold some things het this and het that. Always made sure they had paperwork or a written receipt at least. But if it transfered hands after that. The seller had to let me know ahead of time so he can make sure I have on file who it is going to and make sure they are the same snakes I sent him/her.

I did get paperwork with the Spider from BHB but like most large scale breeders it didn't come with a photo ID.

But again this is all besides the point. Brian already agreed that his het didn't prove out and agreed to make a deal with me. This was done in May and I was told I'd be compensated in July or August when his stuff hatched out. He never followed through with anything he told me and that's what this post is about. Period.

I knew there were going to be some BHB cheerleaders here but really sheeple give me a break. I've got emails from Brian telling me he's going to send me an inventory list to pick an animal from, which he never does, and you guys are trying to go back in time and figure out a way that he doesn't have to honor what he told me.

This is the reason people don't like Fauna and the BOI. It's this hive mind mentality where despite all the evidence people are still going to side with whoever is 'popular'. I don't really get it and I wasn't looking forward to making the post for just this reason.

I don't stand to gain anything from making this post and certainly plenty to lose. If Brian was going to follow through he probably isn't going to now. I only made this public because I felt I had no other option. I tried and tried and tried (40+ emails and plenty of phone calls over six months!!!!) to work something out but if he ignores my emails and won't contact me what else am I supposed to do??

The way I see it, the OP SHOULD get something better than a 2010, but if that is all he can recieve, he should at least get a morph 2010 pertaining to the breedings he planned, not just another het.

This is my opinion.

However, if all the OP is looking for is a cash compensation that goes above what he paid for this animal, I have to say he is SOL.

The reasoning behind that is, like I said, no guarantee the hatchlings would have been free of defects or lived. There is no actual lost value because there was no value to be had. You cannot make up a figure of money where none actually existed.

Originally Posted by JudyC

I could totally stand behind that reasoning. Now...if the owner of the suspect het refuses any reasonable compensation as not being "good enough"....what then? I do believe that is the situation that has been presented here.

As I understand it, that's not the situation. The situation is, the OP hasn't been offered any compensation at all.