Everyone's Opinion Is Needed!

[Boavoyage]

First, I want to thank everyone who is going to give some input for my question.

I buy a het from Mr. A
The het was bought by Mr. A from Mr. B
Who is responsible for my transaction if the het turns out normal?

To me, if I buy from Mr. A, then Mr. A is responsible for the transaction, since I paid Mr. A, not Mr. B. It doesn't matter if Mr. B gives full guarantee, live time guarantee, pictures or microchips the animal, etc..., that transaction is between Mr. A and Mr. B. It's just a back-up information for my transaction. I cannot hold anything against Mr. B, since he didn't receive the money from me, and he didn't send the animal to me.

What do you think? Thanks.

 

[crazycorn]

I think both Mr. A & B are in trouble but try and get your money back from Mr. A.

 

[John Apple]

The responsibility of selling you the 'hets' belongs to Mr A.
Mr. A should have been 100% sure he was selling you hets before he labeled them hets. That means he should have some documentation proving they are hets.
But if you are breeding hets for the same trait with two different lines [for that trait] you will get normal looking babies that carry both parents stuff. You might want to check your animals lineage

 

[dwedeking]

Mr A's the seller in your transaction. He's the one you have a beef with.

 

[WebSlave]

....if the het turns out normal?

First off, how do you KNOW positively that this animal is NOT het? How many times have you bred it and produced offspring.

I have purchased het animals before, and gotten all normals the first and second year, then FINALLY gotten what was expected on the third year. Mendellian genetics is just statistics and probabilities. There are NO absolutes. Realistically, when you breed hets together, it is possible that you will get anywhere from NONE to ALL homozygous animals.

If you are positive the animal is not het, at least talk to Mr. B about it and ask his take on the matter. If he can positively ID the animal and knows for a fact that it came from him, he may be able to consider the possibility that maybe he made a mistake. After all, this reflects on his reputation as well.

Bear in mind that there may be more behind the situation than is apparent.

As another "for instance", for a couple of years, I was breeding my Crimson corns and was real puzzled that I would breed Crimson to Crimson and get ALL, or some normal colored Miami phase in the clutches. I figured I had just screwed up and identified just a real nice brightly colored Miami Phase incorrectly as a Crimson. Turns out, there appears to be multiple Hypo genes floating around in that stock that I was not aware of. Of course that means that all bets are off when people are breeding Crimsons or het for Crimson that they got from me, and probably other people whose stock originated from me as well. Of course, on the flip side, I have been selling Miami Phase corns het for Crimson for YEARS that are likely double het for two different types of Hypomelanism.

Doodoo happens..... Everything in this stuff is not as cut and dried as we would like to think it is.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Just echoing the common sentiment.

Your transaction was with Mister A, he sold you an animal, he misrepresented it, intentionally or not.

Be certain to verify that the animal is not a het for the trait in question... very certain.

If Mister B is brought into it, it would have to be by Mister A. Unless there are guarantees that move with the snake for the duration of it's life, Mister B's only responsibility is to Mister A.

If it was unintentional, then it would be in the best interests of both A and B to work together to make the situation right, once the animal is identified as not carrying the genes it was represented to have, but the actual obligation lies only on the individual you made your purchase from.

 

[bpc]

John, could you define "het" for us. I'll assume for the moment you mean 100% het. Going by that definition, Rich is correct, even if you don't produce the desired homozygous recessive individuals, you do really have a legal leg to stand on.

Breeding a het to a homo. recessive should give you about 50% homo. recessive offspring (emphasis on should). But those are just statistics, nothing more. It is totally possible to get all phenotypically normal offspring.

I notice your name your screen name implies you may be working with boas, this makes things even more complicated. As you probably know there are different "strains" of albinism; in boas. So the het boa you buy may not be the "right" het. I seriously doubt with the numbers of albino boas being produced now that everyone who produces them knows exactly which "strain" they have. There are just too many.

Bottom line is - buying hets is risky - that's why it's cheaper to do so.

 

[Darin Chappell]

"Ditto" on what everyone else has said about making certain you have a non-het animal or that it is perhaps not just het for another strain of the desired trait. All of those considerations have to be taken into account before anything else can be started.

However, assuming that it is true that the animal you have purchased is not het for the strain for which you were told it was het, then, and only then, you should approach Mr. A to settle the issue. That sale he made with you had an implied contract for a delivery of goods (the genetics), and if he did not deliver those goods, then he is alone responsible. Granted, he may then go back to Mr. B for support or restitution, but that will have to be on him.

As an aside, I would make absolutely certain that you have some sort of a paper trail identifying the animal and your specific breeding trials all outlined, before I went to Mr. A, though. Even if he is the most honest person in the world and the most easy going, he will appreciate your professionalism. If he isn't, your case will just be that much more fortified.

 

[Boavoyage]

Thanks to everyone who has input in this thread. The reason I started this thread because recently I have run into two situation:

1. I saw an ad for a double het for _ _ _ boa w/ a good deal from a perspective seller (Mr. A). I contacted him asking who's the original breeder and if he guarantee on the genetic. Mr. A said that he got her from Mr. B, who was not a big player in the market, and that's the reason why he let her go cheap because there is risk involved. Any problem is between me and Mr. B. I responsed to Mr. A that since I pay him and the snake was bought by me from him, Mr. A shall be hold responsible. Mr. A disagreed, and I just dropped the transaction, since he sounded rediculous to me.

2. I bought a het for piebald ball python from a trustworthy seller (Mr. A.) two weeks ago. She came receipt from Mr. B stated that she was microchipped and guarantee for life on her genetic. Then, I found out from this site Mr. B had some rap sheets on bad deals in the past. So I nailed and pounded Mr. A since I was nervous. After alot of "heat" exchanged, I decided to give Mr. B a benefit of the doubt. Also, Mr. A gave me his personal guarantee on top of Mr. B's guarantee, and said that he will make right to me if she turns out bogus.

I just want to find out if I am so skeptical, if I am wrong about who is responsible for my deal, because to me if I pay Mr. A, then I will go after him. Don't bother to send me to someone else. So again, I appreciate everyone. This site is very helpful to me.
P/s: When I said het, it means 100% het. Otherwise, I will said poss. het.

 

[HerpVenue]

In both instances Mr. A is responsible.

As far as yor first situation.....
I can't believe Mr. A would tell you to take it up with Mr. B
Mr. A is responsible for the animals Mr. A sells

 

[Boavoyage]

That's why I didn't deal with him. And believe it or not, he has been in the market for a while, too, and had the ball to tell me if there is any problem, it will be between Mr. B and I.

 

[HerpVenue]

And believe it or not, he has been in the market for a while, too, and had the ball to tell me if there is any problem, it will be between Mr. B and I.

I could bie a het pibald from Big breeder.
Sell you one of my normals while telling you it is a het from big breeder.
Then tell you to take it up with big breeder if it is not a het.

That reasoning is just way off to me.

 

[bpc]

John, hypothetical question. How do you plan on proving the animal is not a het? I hope you realize there is absolutely no way to that. Until the genome is constructed, the genes in question isolated, your snake tested, it's genome compared to the known albino genome (assuming albino is what we are talking about), and the genes in question not matching, you have NOTHING to go on. Medelian genetics are just statistics not guarantees.

In fact, the only thing you can prove, is that the animal is a het. And even that could be argued hypothetically. Good luck!

 

[Darin Chappell]

I understand that Mendelian genetics gives us probabilities rather than certainties. However, you better believe I would have a huge problem with someone who sold me a "het" that consistantly through only normal looking babies when crossed with an animal homozygous for the desired trait!

Brian is right that there is no real way to prove an animal is not het for something, but after several documented breeding trials, the odds are so greatly against the animal being het for that trait, that it would behoove the breeder/dealer to swallow some pride (and profit) and take the animal back with a full refund rather than suffer the consequences of having a ticked off customer, IMHO. That is what I would do, anyway.

 

[Boavoyage]

Well,
The het I have in question is a het piebald ball python. As by now, I have a 100% het piebald male from a reputate breeder (Snakekeeper) that I planned to use to prove her out. I know there is still question behind if I breed him with her and the whole litter are normal. I just hope that I am doing good with my boa this year and the market on piebald will drop a little that I can afford to get a male piebald ball python (2003 or 2004), and I will use that male to prove her out instead of the het male I have right now. Unless we have several line of piebald ball python, I think I should have some luck to prove her out with a litter of 4 eggs resulting from a male pied to a female het, right?
In regard of the other breeder who was going to sell a double het for snow but didn't want to take the responsible (told me any problem is between me and the one that he got the double het in trade), I passed on the deal.
Thanks everyone for helping me out. Sometimes, I just wonder if I am so skeptical as some kind of pain on the neck to deal with, so, I just want to hear from you guys' opinion.

 

[bpc]

John,

het to het gives a 25% chance of piebald.

het to piebald gives 50% chance of piebald.

The other to remember here is, many times we're not talking about one gene that gives us these wierd offspring. Most traits are polygenic, meaning it takes several genes to cause the recessive trait(s) we desire. What's to say that the set of genes that produces one of these wierd phenotypes doesn't also produce sperm cells with smaller tails? It all comes down to which sperm cell finds which egg. So if the "regular" sperm have longer tails they have an advantage and therefor would probably fertilize more eggs.

Another thing is, these traits are caused by mutations in the DNA. Things like deletions, inversions, duplications, etc. What's to say they can't mutate again? Maybe even back to the original wildtype genotype.

I know I'm going to the extreme here, but I want everyone to understand that playing the het game is VERY risky. That's why hets are so much cheaper. These risks are assumed by the buyer and there is NO legal recourse, none. We are still years away from that. If you think about it, every single normal phenotype animal produced is a "possible het" for something, so be very careful whom you buy from. And make sure you (AND THEY!!!) understand what it means to call something a "het."

 

[Boavoyage]

What's to say that the set of genes that produces one of these wierd phenotypes doesn't also produce sperm cells with smaller tails? It all comes down to which sperm cell finds which egg. So if the "regular" sperm have longer tails they have an advantage and therefor would probably fertilize more eggs.

What's to say that the set of genes that produces one of these weird phenotypes doesn't also produce spem cells with LONGER tails?

What's to say that the sperm with longer tail have an advantage, but not the one with shorter tail?

I know I'm going to the extreme here, but I want everyone to understand that playing the het game is VERY risky. That's why hets are so much cheaper. These risks are assumed by the buyer and there is NO legal recourse, none.

so be very careful whom you buy from

If these risks are assumed by the BUYER, then who cares whom you buy from...

Do you know what are you talking Brian??

 

[Boavoyage]

Well,
I understand buying het is very RISKY. In fact, our life is very risky. But it doesn't stop us from trying to success, from getting better, doesn't stop our society from evolution. Nothing is a 100% win-win situation, and we have to deal with it, because it's REAL LIFE. I chose people (Mr. A) to deal with, but it doesn't control anything. He may buy, trade, or broker from others (Mr. B). In my opinion, if I paid Mr. A, then I go to him if there is any problem/question in the future. Everyone involves in the transaction should be responsible at some degree at some point. If Mr. A claimed that the animals he sold are 100% het, he should be certained that the animals are 100% het, or else don't claim it. While I need a legal stand to prove the het I bought is not het, should the seller also need a legal stand to prove that the het he sold indeed is a het? For instance, if I buy a het from Mr. A, which was produced by a trustworthy, reputated breeder, he should have some type of document such as picture or receipt from the original breeder to cover his @$$, shouldn't he? But if Mr. A sold me a het that he obtained from Mr. B, who is a big scammer that never produces any het at all, why do I (the buyer) need a legal stand while the seller doesn't even have a legit legal stand? Is it because of "innocent until proven guilty?" If it is, was the seller already guilty of MISREPRESENTED when he sold me a 100% het that he was not certain that if the animal indeed was 100% het?

 

[bpc]

John, the point I am trying to make is: you can't prove the negative. There is no way to prove that an animal is not a het.

It's like this new terror alert level thing President Bush has come up with. If they raise the level and nothing happens everyone feels good because, "See, we raised our awareness level and stopped those nasty terroists!" But hes covered both ways because even if something does happen he can say, "See, I told you so!"

Someone sells you a "het," it produces recessive babies. Great, see, I told you so. It doesn't produce recessive babies. Well, try again next year, it could still happen. You can complain all you want but he's still right, it could happen next year.