Pet-Abuse.Com - Animal Abuse Case Details: Diseased puppies sold by licensed pet store

Cruelty Database » Case Details

Case Snapshot

Case ID: 8534

Classification: Neglect / Abandonment

Animal: dog (non pit-bull)

View more cases in GA (US)

Login to Watch this Case

Images for this Case

all 1 media files »

Diseased puppies sold by licensed pet store
Atlanta, GA (US)

Incident Date: Tuesday, Feb 28, 2006
County: Fulton

Disposition: Alleged
Case Images: 1 files available

Alleged: The Pet Company Stores

Case Updates: 1 update(s) available

The Georgia Department of Agriculture is investigating a pet store chain operating in metro Atlanta that is accused of selling infected puppies. A total of 151 puppies at six locations of The Pet Company were examined. Of those, 138 tested positive for Giardia, a parasite that can be transmitted between animals and humans. It's not clear how many infected dogs have been sold to the public. The state is seeking citations and fines against the stores.

The Pet Company operates at Cumberland Mall, Southlake Mall, Gwinnett Place, Town Center at Cobb, Arbor Place and the Mall at Stonecrest. The company is based in New Windsor, New York.

Symptoms include diarrhea, stomach cramps and nausea. They often appear one to two weeks after being infected and can last two to six weeks. Investigators are trying to determine the source of the outbreak.

Channel 2 tracked down the pet owner whose complaint led to the quarantine of several area pet stores. More than a hundred dogs were sold at Pet Company stores that have a highly infectious parasite. We went undercover today into one of the stores and found all the cages empty.

Four-month-old Keegan Rylee is a soft-coated Wheaton Terrier. He�s one happy and healthy puppy, but just a few weeks after they bought Keegan at a Douglas County pet store, Keegan�s family thought he was close to dying and couldn�t understand why. Dog owner Christy Baker says, �It's been traumatic it's been very, very emotional." Christy Baker and her children were ecstatic the day in February that they took home Keegan Rylee. They paid $800 for the puppy at the Pet Company -- whose six stores are under state quarantine following an outbreak of a dog parasite Giardia, which can travel between pets and humans. Within days of bringing Keegan home, the pup fell seriously ill. Baker says, "He wouldn't eat, he wouldn't drink, he wasn't very playful, he was very skittish, had diarrhea, when I took him in, his white blood count was elevated." Christy�s daughter Alicia Baker says, �I felt sad and emotional and pretty much afraid."

Christy spent hundreds of dollars at the vet and learned Keegan not only had Giardia but also Trachea Bronchitis. She sent a letter to Pet Company at the beginning of March 2006. Baker says, "And alert them to what he had and was contagious to other human beings, and from what I understand they continued to sell dogs." Baker says she asked the Pet Company to reimburse the nearly $800 she spent to get Keegan well again. Baker says, �I've very angry, feel they were doing a huge injustice to the public and these animals.� Ms. Baker says she is going to get her entire family tested for Giardia. The Pet Company has been ordered to treat the dogs and not sell them until they get well.

Case Updates

Lynn of Mount Laurel NJ (9/6/04):
When I entered the very crowded store, I was immediately drawn to a pug puppy. It had a large sign on its cage stating "Sorry, I can't play today." I saw that the pug looked very ill so I asked the salesman why he wasn't able to come out and he told my daughter and I that it had a cough. I have a dog and by looking at the pug I knew that the dog had more than a "cough." I asked when the pug was going to get medical attention, and he replied Thursday, which was four days away. The pug had already been sick for about three days. It was shaking and struggling for air. Another patron observed the poor condition of the puppy, and replied that the puppy didn't even look like it would make it through the night. I offered to hold the dog because the worker had mentioned they were understaffed and the dogs were not getting enough attention as needed. I have contacted a rescue group who will further investigate.

At the same visit to the Pet Store there was a six month old shih-tzu who looked extrememly forlorn. It appeared matted and ungroomed with knots all over its beautiful fur and it smelled of feces and urine. It also was rubbing its sore bottom on the hard floor for relief. I again approached the sales person about this neglect, and he said that the pet shop does not do any kind of grooming, and again stated how short-handed they were.

Ann of West Babylon NY (4/23/04):
On March 26, 2004 my family fell in love with an Australian Shepherd at the Pet Company in Bayshore, NY. We bought the dog that week and although we thought we had a healthy dog we bought the Peace of Mind Warrenty for an additional $90. The Pet Company gives you 14 days to bring the dog to the vet and if the dog is considered "unfit to sell" by the vet they will reimburse you for vet visits and/or refund the cost of the dog. Well, after finding out that my puppy had a double ear infection, collapsed trechea, and respitory infection I didn't know what to do. I almost returned the dog but I worried about the poor thing going back there. The Pet Company has agreed to pay the $166 in vet bills I had for the original infections but I have not received any word from them in weeks. The Pet Company sold me a very sick dog, one their vet signed off on and said was healthy. There needs to be strict restrictions put on the Pet Company and other mall pet stores. I paid almost $1000 for this sick dog and have not received any retitution.

Sheryl of Union NJ (4/21/04):
On 12/16/2003 I purchased an Australian Shepherd for $688.88. I took the puppy to the vet to find out that she had kennel cough and an umbilical hernia. It took 3 months to get a refund for the medication for kennel cough. I am still waiting for the refund for the umbilical hernia. I also paid $29.99 and was told by the salesperson that was a charge for the registration of the puppy. Just now I am finding out that was a charge to have her microchip activated. Seven months later it is still not activated. I asked for the registration papers to be issued and mailed to me. After 4 months they are telling me that the dog is not registered and that on the bottom of the original bill it states Not Registered. When I bought the dog the sales person never told me or pointed out that the puppy was not registered. At that time, I was handed 5 different forms to sign, including an Addendum to Limited Warranty Know Your Rights-A Statement of New Jersey Law Covering the Sale of Dogs and Cats which was signed and dated. That led me to believe that the dealer was going to register the puppy for me. Once again I was told that I should have stood there and read all the correspondance before I signed it. I am shocked that a company can sell a nonregistered puppy for full price. This purchase has been one nightmare after another. I feel that the sale was misrepresented.

Amanda of Collingswood NJ (4/5/04):
I stopped into the Pet Company to purchase ferret food. I was under the assumption that the store was a pet supply store. However, to my disappointment, it contained twenty tiny wire cages, most contaning two to three dogs per cage. One puppy was being kept seperate in a exersize pen in the middle of the floor. He was shivering and was exposed to the cold tile floor with no blankets or newspaper to lay on. Upon questioning one employee as to the breed of the dog, she replied "purebred dachshund". This puppy, which appeared slightly undernourished, was of a dachshund build, small and lean, with beagle-like ears that hung almost to the floor and the dog was covered in dalmation-like spots that were red and brown. Being an active member of the AKC and the daughter of two professional hound judges, this clown-like dog resembled no physical qualities of a dachshund whatsoever. This dog was most certainly the product of several cross breedings and looked scared, cold and sickly, as did each and every dog in the store.

Josephine of Atlanta (10/27/03):
On August 21, 2003, I purchased a female Pekingese puppy, along with a peace of mind extended warranty from The Pet Company at South Lake Mall in Morrow Georgia. The puppy has been ill, not eating and having difficulty breathing since I bought her home. I took her to Banfield Pet Hospital on 8/23/03, and she was prescribed a cough medicine and antibiotic. I was told that it appeared to be a cold and or kennel cough and with the medication it should clear it up within two weeks. Well, it didn't clear up and I recently found out that she has chronic tracheal bronchitis with associated congestion of the sinuses. I was further told that I should anticipate enormous cost for test and treatments. On Saturday, October 25, 2003, around 5:00 PM I went into The Pet Company to turn in my paperwork to file a claim for an exchange due to her diagnosis. I had previously spoken with the district manager Ray Reedy on 10/21/03 and was informed that I needed to bring in documentation and that I should also get a diagnosis from another vet. I gave my paperwork to the store manager Joey and he said since I had a diagnosis on the puppy he needed to call Ray to see what needs to be done next. When he returned he told me that I waited too long to bring the paperwork in and that I needed to bring it in within fourteen days so they couldn't help me. Then I asked about the extended warranty I purchased on the puppy bringing her total cost up to $920.08, then he told me that it only covers "hereditary" health problems and there was nothing he could do. I became upset and reminded him that at the time of purchase he assured me that with the warranty if there is ever a health problem with the puppy within a year or accidental death within two years that there would beabsolutely no problem with me getting another puppy and that they work with all their customers. He told me that it didn't matter what he said, it only matters what's in the contract and I should have read it before I signed it and they can't just let people keep a puppy for two whole months and return it. I told him this was totally unacceptable, that I hadn't even received my paperwork or registration papers for the puppy yet and he asked me to leave his store, I refused and he called mall security as well as the Morrow police department. After security and the police arrived I was informed that this was a civil matter, that I needed to calm down and go to the magistrate court of Clayton County on Monday morning to file a civil claim. I have also discovered that I'm not the first person that had to be escorted out of the store over a problem with a puppy purchase and or warranty.

My first goal was to exchange the puppy and get a new healthy one, but after the horrific confrontation when I only wanted to file a claim, at this point I would like a refund so I never have to deal with them again, but if it's not possible for a refund a new healthy puppy would be satisfactory. Princess Pearl is sick and I don't feel it is fair to me and my family to have to continue to endure the emotional and financial stress of caring for a puppy we've only had for 8 weeks. I really would like to be able to return her as soon as possible before we continue to get too attached.

Katie of Rahway NJ (5/15/03):
I purchased what looked like a healthy Jack Russel Terrier from The Pet Company in Edison, NJ in Feb 2003. A few weeks later when I took him to the vet, the Doctor noticed that his skin was a little red and gave me antibiotics in the event that it was bacteria. Upon returning to the vet for a check up, the puppy had gotten much redder, had lost some hair in spots and was itchy. The doctor immediately diagnosed him with sarcoptic mange. This disease is from parasites - mites that get under the skin and it is contagious. The doctor, who is affiliated with this particular Pet Company told me that I should bring the bills to the pet store and that I should be reimbursed for the treatment of this version of mange. I did as he said and a few weeks later followed up with the Pet Company to find out if the reimbusement forms were submitted. They were - and they were denied. After having given me a long speech before I bought the dog about all the guarantees and protection I have if the dog gets sick, they now tell me that it has to be a hereditary disease in order for them to cover the costs. My question is ... Where did these parasites come from to begin with? They weren't in my house because I have another dog who is perfectly healthy. The mites get spread from animal to animal and young puppies can be susceptible if they are kept in infested cages and are poorly nourished. My only conclusion is that he contracted these parasites from unclean conditions in the pet store, or from another animal that was there. Three months later, he is still not well and is not responding to treatments. My vet wants to refer me to a dermatologist but I cannot afford to continue paying these bills. I plan to take as much action as necessary to get my money back...both medical bills and the cost of the dog. So far I have only contacted the Pet Company once and they refused to pay for the medical bills. I have spent well over $100 so far and the dog is still not well.

Caryn of Bardonia NY (3/21/03):
The Pet Company in Paramus NJ knowingly sold me a sick dog on 12/05/02. I purchased a Yorkie for $2,000 and to date have spent over $6,000 in medical bills. "Shayna" has been hospitalized twice and has been diagnosed with pneumonia, bronchitis, an upper respiratory infection, an ear infection and e-coli. Shayna is still under treament. I have sent numerous request for reimbursement and have been denied. Total out of pocket expense including medications, doctor and hospital fees, loss of work and more exceed $10,000.

"J" of Atlanta writes (1/14/03):
Purchased two AKC dogs in July 2002 from a local Pet Company store in Georgia. Immediately took dogs to vet. Dogs were diagnosed with kennel cough and earmites. Dogs were treated. The first round of vet bills was submitted to the Pet Company via forms they require you to fill out, at the store of purchase. These were sent in. No further word received nor reimbursement. Dogs required further treatment. I visited the Pet Company Store... and was given number to contact at head office about the reimbursement and ongoing bills. Left message with United Pet Supply (head office)...no return call. Dogs continued to require treatment for various things (ear infections, stomach problems, etc.) Documented and detailed all vet bills incurred for sicknesses since the date of purchase of dogs. Faxed this to United Pet Supply to the attention of Linda Cabe. Meanwhile, disputed the purchase of the dogs with AMEX. Left message on United Pet Supply's answering maching. No return call. Refaxed and recalled merchant (UPS) several times.
AMEX disputed item five times with merchant, and United Pet Supply (merchant) will not return calls nor respond any differently than they did during the first response to AMEX. AMEX can do nothing further to assist me. To date, I have not received the registrations for these dogs. I just FINALLY received a reimbursement check from United Pet Supply this week for the initial vet bills ($86.25)submitted back in July, this after both AMEX and I badgered them with disputes, faxes, and calls. I did some research on the internet ... it appears my dogs may have come to United Pet Supply via way of Hunte Corporation in Missouri, who has been on the firing block with animal activists for "puppy milling" for quite some time.

United Pet Supply keeps pushing this "peace of mind" warranty in our faces. Fact of the matter is ... they are not living up to it. The dogs are supposed to be checked out by a bonafide vet before being sold to the public, and should be free of illness. They also agree to reimburse the customer for vet bills incurred OUTSIDE of normal care (i.e. for illness that dogs had when leaving store). United Pet Supply has suggested that I return the dogs for a refund? I'm certain the Animal Rescue organizations, Humane Society, etc. would approve of that response...NOT. I am not going to return the dogs after nursing them along for six months. I have requested reimbursement for additional vet bills and a pro-rated reimbursement for the dogs. The vet bills amount to $218.66 additional. I have asked for reimbursement on the dogs of $1428.00 for ongoing medical treatment. Purchase price was 1480.50. As I mentioned prior, returning the dogs is not an option. Thus, if nothing comes of this other than an awareness to the public of United Pet Supply's practices, and where they are obtaining their pets from (puppy mills, wherever), then so be it.

Kristina of Hammonton, NJ, writes:
It is an ongoing problem I am having with this company, First my husband, two sons and myself went to the pet store in Vorhees, NJ, to purchase a dog. Instantly we fell in love with a miniature pinscher but he was too overactive for us because we had a 7-month-old and a 25-month-old so we told the sales associate that we would need a calmer dog. The sales associate told us he was only like this because he has been in a cage for so long and that he was great for children. So we purchased him that night, we also purchased a book on the dog. Within the next week I read the book and it said that this particular breed is not good with children.
So I searched the Internet, which also says the same thing. The dog has still not settled down and we've had him for over 4 months. I feel that when an associate states something about an animal they should know their facts. I called and spoke to a manager about this and his response was sorry we don't have a refund policy. The next confrontation I had with the company was when purchasing the dog we signed an agreement stating that if we did not receive the registration papers by 120 days from the day of purchase we could return the dog and get a refund. Well, when the 121st day came we called the store and told them the situation and the store manager said that is 120 business days my husband says, "120 days." So he asked for the district manager, they said he was on vacation and gave us the number for the home office. He then called that number. The women there stated the papers got sent out over 2 weeks ago so he asked for the next position up she said it was the president of the pet company, So we got his number and extension my husband left a message with him. He never called back. We were left with a dog that was total opposite of what the sales associate told us he would be. The company broke a legal contract they had with us.

Source: Consumer Afair News - September 6, 2004
Update posted on May 13, 2006 - 9:28AM

Back to Top

References

- March 28, 2006

« GA State Animal Cruelty Map

Not sure what these icons mean? Click here.

Note: Classifications and other fields should not be used to determine what specific charges the suspect is facing or was convicted of - they are for research and statistical purposes only. The case report and subsequent updates outline the specific charges. Charges referenced in the original case report may be modified throughout the course of the investigation or trial, so case updates, when available, should always be considered the most accurate reflection of charges.

For more information regarding classifications and usage of this database, please visit the database notes and disclaimer.

Site Map ¤ Disclaimer ¤ Privacy Policy

Diseased puppies sold by licensed pet storeAtlanta, GA (US)

Case Updates

References

Diseased puppies sold by licensed pet store
Atlanta, GA (US)