Bad Guy My experience with Underground Reptiles

[GMTIRRILL]

Yeah, there is no concept of personal responsibility is there?

i have not absolved the buyer for personal responsibility in this. since you pulled out only this qeustion did you not see that i agreed that the husbandry was wrong in the same post?

 

[SquamataMississauga]

I understand that but still do not think that it killed the animal.

I agree

There are many things that sound like the op was not ready for this animal.

I don't think the setup she was using during quarantine was nearly as bad as everyone is suggestion, also most of the poor assumptions that were put out there were said to be false

One major thing is the treatment or lack thereof of the mites.

She stated she did kill a majority of the mights using the Zoomed brand (as expected), then was waiting for the "Mite Kill" solution from the seller. It got "Lost in the mail" so had to wait longer. I'm not sure if she used the zoomed brand again or waited for the sellers solution, could have a bit to do with why the snake died

Also I think that any quarantine should mimic the correct conditions ans saying that the wrong setup was just temporary is still wrong. And finally if they thought the solution killed the animal why isn't there a vet report??

I'm not even sure if the vets could determine if it killed the snake or not.

 

[chollowell]

I treated the snake with zoomed for 3 days like said on the bottle. Then stopped for a couple of days. Then treated for another 3 days. Then took a break for a couple of days. Then when their mite spray arrived I used it and he perished.

 

[Xaila]

I'm not gonna touch the other parts of this story, but sending out any sort of chemical in an unlabeled container and without a list of ingredients sounds like a pretty irresponsible idea. It's not a thing that would stop me buying from a seller, but it's the sort of thing that can come back and bite you in the rear. If it were me I would've been asking exactly what the 'mite killer' was before even receiving it.

 

[Durke]

Maybe when you used their mite spray, it had a bad reaction with the previous mite spray you used on the snake? I dunno.

 

[gluttony]

Shipping unmarked chemicals through the mail, is Illegal.( I am sure the proper channels will be notified,knowing this lot. As a parent I believe a fine or reprimand of some sorts is in order)

Filming the use of said chemicals in use, means squat to anybody, stop deluding yourself.

As for the care sheet, these days almost everyone has access to the internet, or owns a smart phone of some sort, so there is no excuse for not being up to speed with what ever you are buying. (it would be nice if these so called PROFESSIONAL reptile breeders or pet stores would provide them but like everything else, paper costs money and lets face it the snake business is not really a money maker so they cant afford a 15 cent copy)

In my experience buying farmed or w.c almost always ends in tragedy, not to mention buying from pet STORES that offer wholesale or w.c. ESPECIALLY from a state that is inundated with problems with reptiles.

Good luck and I hope you learned your lesson, if it sounds to good to be true it usually is....btw you could have purchased the same snake from a reputable breeder or even at a reptile show for around the same price, I am positive that with 13 years experience you have heard of these.

 

[David Reid]

In my opinion, if you send a snake infested with mites, YOU ARE ON THE HOOK for ANY health problems that snakes gets over the next few weeks. YOU should have had the snake sent back and YOU should have delt with the mites.

To the buyer, you should have paid more for a Captive Bred GTP from a reliable source. That, or maybe start out with an Amazon Tree Boa....buying WC or "Farmed" animals sounds like a great money saving that never ends up that way.

Dave

 

[Addie_P]

Does anyone else find it a little strange that this place actually has an established protocol for when they ship out mite-infested snakes? This is apparently such a common occurrence, that they have concocted their own "mite-killer" for just a situation.

Obviously this doesn't really explain why the snake died, but still just something that all potential buyers should probably think about before dealing with Underground Reptiles.

 

[chollowell]

I agree and the mistake won't be made again. When I called asking about him when I saw the listing. They said he was very healthy and well established. I would have never gotten him had I known they only had him for 3 weeks. Then to stress him more with shipping to me and the mites and so on. Like my husband has said a painful and heart breaking lesson learned. I hate underground refused to contact us back after requesting to speak with the owner and so on. Our request was Friday for him to contact us. Thought it would be a priority.

 

[evansnakes]

I do not have a dog in thsi fight but am really really taken aback by the statements underground reptiles made about their "mite spray". What kind of retailer would sell a home made, undisclosed, unlabeled drug or chemical to their customers? What class. Products like proventamite are made in a laboratory by a licensed, degreed chemist/scientist and has been researched in a lab and tested and approved by a thrid party and the US government at enormous expense to the creater. BUT for you guys it is ok to take another product (since we know you did not design a new chemical compound) like maybe ivermectin or nix or something else and dillute it in water and resell it to the public? That is illegal in a number of ways. Off label use of drugs and chemicals is illegal to sell to the public without government approval. You cant take somebody elses' hard work and slap your own label on it and say you created it. That is just bs.

 

[Fangthane]

Does anyone else find it a little strange that this place actually has an established protocol for when they ship out mite-infested snakes?

...As is standard practice at our store we immediately offered to send out a free bottle of mite kill and discount her next order with us...

That, in itself, is a fairly alarming admission. Unless you somehow buy into the idea that mites aren't a big deal, the fact that they have an actual protocol for when a customer complains about a mite-infested snake is a little mind-blowing. It seems like a situation where an ounce of prevention would be worth a pound of cure. If you're consistently sending out snakes with parasites, maybe it's time to make some changes in how you do things. Saying whatever needs to be said to make the sale, and then trying to fix it later when the customer complains about a sub-par specimen, doesn't seem to be a very customer-friendly way of doing business.

 

[Teatime]

Really glad I saw this thread. I was heavily considering getting a snake from them, but knowing how mites can spread to absolutely everything, I will be staying away.

 

[Focal]

Sorry to leave everyone in the dark but I do not work on Saturday and Sunday the store is closed. Mrs. Hollowell ordered this particular snake 2 weeks ago. This particular snake had been in our care just over 3 weeks. Each week had fed for us and by all accounts appeared to be in perfect health(including mite free). I believe it was about a day after she received it Mrs. Hollowell informed me that though she was very happy with the snake, and it appeared healthy, she did believe it may have few mites on it. She told us she was treating it with mite off by zoo med. As is standard practice at our store we immediately offered to send out a free bottle of mite kill and discount her next order with us. We do not ask for pictures because most will lack a camera strong enough to picture the animals and quite frankly even if the person was mistaken, I'd rather give away a free bottle of mite kill and a discount than lose a customer. For whatever reason the first bottle was lost in the mail, so we sent a second bottle. Mrs. Hollowell informed me that the snake was doing well and eating for her and that she was going to use the mite kill solution to get rid of the mites. The next message I heard from her is that the snake was dead and that could not possibly be her fault because she had been working with reptiles for 13 years. As is standard practice we asked for pictures of the snake and of the setup she kept in. We received a picture of a snake, which appeared to be mite free(although the camera was not close enough to confirm). We then received a picture of what appears to be a 10 gallon glass aquarium with an infrared light, heating pad and pine shavings for the substrate. She also informed me that the chondro was also kept at about 45% humidity but sprayed twice daily. I also pointed out in her picture that cage appears near a window, another big "no,no" when housing animals in glass aquariums. I then informed Mrs. Hollowell via a phone conversation that this was not standard or proper procedure for housing Green Tree Pythons. She once again reiterated her many years of experience at which time I explained that Chondros can give even the most expereinced reptile enthusiast trouble especially given the need for very specific husbandry requirements. I again apologized to Mrs. Hollowell and informed her that we could not replace the animal free of charge, do to the improper setup and the fact that under no circumstances can we guarantee an animal after two weeks of being in her care, which by her own testimony said that the snake was doing well. So as a gesture to help Mrs. Hollowell we are offered to give her another snake below wholesale pricing if she made the necessary changes to her enclosure. It should also be noted, not as a point to add any validity to either her side or ours, but as a character reference, that since speaking to Mrs. Hollowell on Friday, at which time I made this offer, and at which time she showed no displeasure, that her and her Facebook friends have gone out of their way to speak ill and slander our company. This can be seen simply by viewing our page and reading the comments and searching how the people are tied together. As always we are open to suggestions and thoughts. I attached a picture of the cage setup she sent us.

I think a full refund should be in order for the reasons listed below.

You stated that you can not guarantee an animal that has been in her care for two weeks and died. The animal was declared unhealthy the moment she reported mites regardless of how long the stall was for mite treatment to arrive, whether it went missing in the mail or not. This animal died during the treatment process but remember, it arrived to the party as UNHEALTHY and I believe immediately reported.

Underground Reptiles is very familiar with mites, correct? You guys/gals are very experienced, have dealt with them more than the average hobbyist and deal with many wild collected specimens. Selling a WC animal within three weeks is a flat out disregard for your customer. You know this, I know this, and probably hundreds of other viewers know this. You didn't even let the mites run a full cycle before sending this animal off. Regardless of your practices, this is your fault that an UNHEALTHY snake was sent to the party.

The details and way you responded are alarming. When she mentioned mites, you didn't want to see pictures because they can't be accurate, however, when the snake died, you use her pictures to say no mites were present when A) you know this UNHEALTHY snake was in the treatment process and B) pictures are not dependable, right? You can also make a quick number of assumptions to clean your hands of the transaction (strike five or six at this point) like the pine and window. Well, the pine appears wrong and I know your not going to tell us that window is on the East or West side of the house without being there, right? Did you think it could quite possibly be a window to another part of the house, since it's probably open and has a power cord running out of it. You've tried to wash your hands based on your assumptions, when the only fact that remains from all of this was that Underground Reptiles sent out an UNHEALTHY snake.

You try to deny her refund because her enclosure doesn't meet your standards, BUT YOUR GUYS STANDARDS INVLOVE SENDING OUT SNAKES WITH MITES, WITHOUT TREATING THEM, WITHOUT PUTTING THEM THROUGH QUARATINE.

I'm appalled that you guys went into such detail to inspect her picture for reasons not to refund her when you guys CLEARLY did not spend the same attention to detail on this snake before it was sold and shipped out. This transaction alone has cost you at least two customers for life. Maybe you should start including mites in your Terms of Service so you'll have a better reason for not giving a damn about your customers.

And I think the stongest nail in the coffin is your facade:

As always we are open to suggestions and thoughts

Quickly followed by:

 

[Focal]

As far as Mrs. Hollowell goes we did everything we could and went above and beyond to appease her, even after she set up the animal incorrectly.

No you didn't. Your customer received an UNHEALTHY snake and a mystery solution that she believes killed her snake.

She set up the animal incorrectly, but you failed to quarantine, failed to inspect, failed to please, failed to make sure the mites made a full cycle, failed to solve the problem that YOU started.

As far as providing everyone with care sheets I will definitely take that advice into consideration, but also keep this in mind how does the smaller breeder keep up with such standards, some of which don't even have a website?

Are you kidding me? You guys have a staff, a website, and a huge facility and can't even keep up with the simple standard of sending out a healthy snake. The last thing you guys need to do is worry about a care sheet. You have other fires to put out.

Also consider that I have bought, for my own personal collection, animals from some of the largest breeders in the country and cannot recall ever receiving a care sheet even when they did not know who I was.

Did they come with mites?

 

[Focal]

All animals have a live and healthy arrival guarantee. We cannot offer any guarantee after the arrival.

Straight from Underground Reptiles website and TOS. I don't think many would agree that receiving a mite infested snake qualifies as healthy. Or is the guarantee that you guys guarantee it will be the buyers responsibility to correct an UNHEALTHY snake.

 

[Focal]

As far as providing everyone with care sheets I will definitely take that advice into consideration

That's funny because your TOS states:

Photos, descriptions and care sheets posted on our web site are the exclusive property of Underground Reptiles, and may not be used or reused without our specific, written permission.

However, the link for your caresheets is disabled:

http://www.undergroundreptiles.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=173

 

[Lucille]

I do not have a dog in thsi fight but am really really taken aback by the statements underground reptiles made about their "mite spray". What kind of retailer would sell a home made, undisclosed, unlabeled drug or chemical to their customers? What class. Products like proventamite are made in a laboratory by a licensed, degreed chemist/scientist and has been researched in a lab and tested and approved by a thrid party and the US government at enormous expense to the creater. BUT for you guys it is ok to take another product (since we know you did not design a new chemical compound) like maybe ivermectin or nix or something else and dillute it in water and resell it to the public? That is illegal in a number of ways. Off label use of drugs and chemicals is illegal to sell to the public without government approval. You cant take somebody elses' hard work and slap your own label on it and say you created it. That is just bs.

I do think that if this is the picture of what this buyer received, whatever the substance was needed more than a penned 'Mite-kill' on the outside. For one thing, if a product is labelled 'Mite-kill' it appears to me as if it is probably intended to be used as a pesticide.



(49) “Pesticide” means any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any insects, rodents, nematodes, fungi, weeds, or other forms of plant or animal life or viruses, except viruses, bacteria, or fungi on or in living humans or other animals, which the department by rule declares to be a pest, and any substance or mixture of substances intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant; however, the term “pesticide” does not include any article that:
(a) Is a “new animal drug” within the meaning of s. 201(w) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;
(b) Has been determined by the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services not to be a new animal drug by a regulation establishing conditions of use for the article; or
(c) Is an animal feed within the meaning of s. 201(x) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act bearing or containing an article covered in this subsection.

487.041 Registration.—
(1)(a) Effective January 1, 2009, each brand of pesticide, as defined in s. 487.021, which is distributed, sold, or offered for sale, except as provided in this section, within this state or delivered for transportation or transported in intrastate commerce or between points within this state through any point outside this state must be registered in the office of the department, and such registration shall be renewed biennially. Emergency exemptions from registration may be authorized in accordance with the rules of the department. The registrant shall file with the department a statement including:
1. The name, business mailing address, and street address of the registrant.
2. The name of the brand of pesticide.
3. An ingredient statement and a complete copy of the labeling accompanying the brand of the pesticide, which must conform to the registration, and a statement of all claims to be made for it, including directions for use and a guaranteed analysis showing the names and percentages by weight of each active ingredient, the total percentage of inert ingredients, and the names and percentages by weight of each “added ingredients’








TITLE XXXII
REGULATION OF PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS CHAPTER 487
PESTICIDE REGULATION AND SAFETY VIEW ENTIRE CHAPTER

487.025 Misbranding.—
(1) A pesticide or device is misbranded if its labeling bears any statement, design, or graphic representation which is false or misleading in any particular.
(2) A pesticide is misbranded if:
(a) It is an imitation of, or is offered for sale under the name of, another pesticide.
(b) Its labeling bears any reference to registration under this part.
(c) The labeling accompanying it does not contain instructions for use which are necessary and, if complied with, adequate for the protection of the public.
(d) The label does not contain a warning or caution statement which may be necessary and, if complied with, adequate to prevent injury to living humans and other vertebrate animals.
(e) The label does not bear an ingredient statement on that part of the immediate container, and on the outside container or wrapper, if there is one, through which the ingredient statement on the immediate container cannot be clearly read, of the retail package which is presented or displayed under customary conditions of purchase.
(f) Any word, statement, or other information required by or under authority of this part to appear on the labeling is not prominently placed thereon with such conspicuousness, as compared with other words, statements, designs, or graphic matter in the labeling, and in such terms as to render it likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary conditions of purchase and use.
(g) It is injurious to living humans or other vertebrate animals or vegetation, except weeds, to which it is applied, or to the person applying such pesticide as directed or in accordance with commonly recognized practice.
(h) In the case of a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant, when used as directed, it is injurious to living humans or other vertebrate animals, or vegetation, to which it is applied, or to the person applying such pesticide. However, physical or physiological effects on plants or parts thereof shall not be deemed to be injury when this is the purpose for which the plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant was applied in accordance with the label claims and recommendations.
(i) Any ingredient which is present in amounts which are not likely to be effective when used according to directions is given undue prominence or conspicuousness, as compared with ingredients which are present in effective amounts, in its labeling. Such ingredient shall appear only in the ingredient statement.
(j) It is found to be ineffective when tested in the laboratory.
(k) It is found by the department to be of short measure.
History.—s. 1, ch. 65-457; ss. 14, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 1, ch. 73-63; s. 1, ch. 79-210; s. 1, ch. 82-106; s. 1, ch. 82-167; s. 15, ch. 84-338; ss. 3, 37, ch. 92-115; s. 5, ch. 94-233; s. 475, ch. 97-103; s. 11, ch. 2000-154; s. 24, ch. 2004-64.
Note.—Former s. 487.021(37).

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2010/487.025


Did the spray kill the critter? I don't know. But if you have concerns about the spray you certainly can call and talk about it:

 

[chollowell]

I still have the bottle and can send Some of it in to be tested.

 

[Darwin]

That does not look like the same window at all. Also, there is a noticeable lack of door on either side of the window in the top picture as well as a change in wallpaper. Am I wrong?

Other people have pointed out inconsistencies in your story as well.

 

[chollowell]

Here. That was the opposit side. So here you go this is the actual "window" as you see it between two rooms. I only had a picture of the opposite side at the time.