Retaining "partial ownership"????

I have been looking online at some exotics and i have come across statements in the sale terms saying that the seller retains "partial ownership" of the animals sold... I have NEVER heard of this. You can not sell, give away or breed the animal. Their reason for this is so that if at any point you decide you no longer want the animal, you are to return it to the seller at your expense, and for no payment. Basically, you are to "Give" the animal to them for free if you dont want it anymore... you cant sell it in a classifieds, or give it away... it is basically theirs and you are renting it in my opinion.

Is this even LEGAL in any way? can a breeder do that? I have never heard of such a thing. To me it seems like a way for the breeder to corner the market and cut down on competition.... Thoughts???

Several people can own one animal, it happens all the time in racehorses. And, as far as retaining part ownership, the two parties are free to put what they want into a contract Many rescue adoption contracts, for instance, have clauses that the dog or cat must be returned to a rescue rather than sold if the new owner can no longer care for the critter..

You are free to negotiate as well, you can simply draw a line through that part of the contract if you do not like it. If the seller will not accept negotiations, go elsewhere. There is a lot of competition out there, don't settle for terms that you don't want in a sales contract.

Remember that to enforce any breached part of a contract either party must take time and money and sue the other party, so even if a party has a right, enforcing it may be expensive.

Thanks Lucille.... Thats what i was thinking. I just have a problem paying out good money for something and someone telling me that if i decide i dont want it 5 years down the road, i have to give it back.... it's kinda like a lease or a long term rental... Silly in my opinion! But i absolutely see where your coming from. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Lucille

Several people can own one animal, it happens all the time in racehorses. And, as far as retaining part ownership, the two parties are free to put what they want into a contract Many rescue adoption contracts, for instance, have clauses that the dog or cat must be returned to a rescue rather than sold if the new owner can no longer care for the critter..

You are free to negotiate as well, you can simply draw a line through that part of the contract if you do not like it. If the seller will not accept negotiations, go elsewhere. There is a lot of competition out there, don't settle for terms that you don't want in a sales contract.

Remember that to enforce any breached part of a contract either party must take time and money and sue the other party, so even if a party has a right, enforcing it may be expensive.

I would do it for a Rescue, because the prices they charge are way below "normal" fees. However, if I am paying $$$$$ there is absolutely no way am I GIVING it back to the person I purchased from.

I have walked away from a lot of animals in which I had an interest, because of such clauses. One dog breeder had a clause in his contract that stated that he would do unannounced inspections; and if any number of situations was found (including the dog being restrained outside, ie tied, on a run, or in a kennel; or outside unattended, including in a fenced yard) ownership of the animal would be immediately forfeited to him & he would take possession. Refusing to admit him into the home for such an inspection was considered a violation of the contract. Are you kidding me????
If I purchase an animal, I feel that it is mine. If I decide to sell it, or give it away, at some point; I don't want to hear a peep about my decision; especially not from a person that did the same thing (which is how I came to have that animal in my care in the first place)....and I'm darn sure not going to agree to inspections - especially unannounced inspections.
If those are the terms, and they are non-negotiable, look elsewhere.

My thoughts exactly! If i am dishing out good money for an animal, i dont see how or why the breeder, that made a profit off me purchasing that animal should ahve ANY say in what I do with that animal as long as I am assuring that I am giving the animal a good home. Not like i am throwing it in the trash or the pound.... Not that i would anyway, but really... ridiculous. I really do think it is thier way of maintaining a monopoly on that animals breeding by keeping people having to go to just them to get it.

Thant being said, thats all for the input!

About the only time I can see those terms being reasonable is when it comes to animals that should not be used as breeding stock. I'm thinking about kinked, blind, or animals with other unwanted traits that are sometimes sold as pets only for a steep discount. In that case the agreement would be the breeders way of keeping the animal out of the breeding population, and assuring the animal is not flipped for profit or otherwise resold to someone looking to breed it to make a quick buck.

I'd tell them to take a hike. I wouldn't feel like even bothering to negotiate.

Originally Posted by paulWTAMU

I'd tell them to take a hike. I wouldn't feel like even bothering to negotiate.

I agree!

Even if they had the above outlined situation (Garweft), I would still be looking for another seller. I doubt that I would even purchase from someone that was keeping/selling "deformed" animals even if it was to lable them as "pet" quality. Pet quality to me is dim colors or such...not deformities.

***If a business had that kind of issue (deformities) coming from their bloodlines, I would definitely pass. especially if it's so many that they need to put up a different kind of TOS like this.