Australian Pet Shop Must Pay Family $8,000 for Sick Puppy

Life With Dogs is reader-supported. We may earn a small commission through products purchased using links on this page.

4.22.15 - Australian Pet Shop Must Pay $8,000 for Sick Puppy1

Sheree and Tara with Monte.

 

At Life With Dogs, we always tell people “don’t shop – adopt.”  But many who want a pet don’t live and breathe this motto the way we and our fans do.  When an Australian couple bought a Cavoodle from Pets Family in Melbourne, they were devastated by the horrific condition he developed.  The store offered to replace him, but his moms said that a family member can’t be replaced, and now the shop has to pay up.

“He’s not just a pet, we call him our little man,” Tara Mackey told the Herald Sun.  “He is part of the family.”

She and Sheree Bolton bought eight-week-old Monte from Pets Family in January 2014.  Within a few short weeks, their precious pup developed breathing trouble and began screaming in pain.  Vets operated on him, but were unable to pinpoint the disorder.

The manager of the pet shop offered the women a refund or a replacement dog.  But that’s not what they wanted, because they adamantly believe “you get a pet for life.”

Eventually little Monte was diagnosed with portosystemic shunt, a congenital condition where blood bypasses the liver and continues to circulate through the body without being filtered and cleaned.

He survived a life-threatening surgery, but will always have lasting effects from the disorder.

A tribunal determined that a refund was not enough, and ordered Pets Family to pay the women $7884.40 for Monte’s medical bills.

“It’s not like a car where you can go and get another one,” explained Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Senior Member Stella Moraitis.  “I can’t ignore the fact that when you sell a dog, you sell a member of the family.  If a child gets sick you don’t take it back to the hospital, do you?”

 

44 thoughts on “Australian Pet Shop Must Pay Family $8,000 for Sick Puppy”

  1. I’m a little confused as to how a dog coming down with a medical condition like that is the shops fault. Was it because how he was treated while in the store? Or was it just a condition?

    Reply
    • Basically a breeder is responsible for selling healthy puppies, and it was a condition that the puppy was born with – not a result of environment. Look up pet lemon laws for more information – its to discourage people from indiscriminately breeding without paying attention to the genetic health of the dogs.

      Reply
  2. I’m a little confused as to how a dog coming down with a medical condition like that is the shops fault. Was it because how he was treated while in the store? Or was it just a condition?

    Reply
  3. Great to hear that decision being handed down by the courts which now sets a precedent for other similarly affected pet owners! Hopefully it will discourage pet shops once and for all from supporting the obscene puppy and kitten farming industry!

    Reply
  4. Great to hear that decision being handed down by the courts which now sets a precedent for other similarly affected pet owners! Hopefully it will discourage pet shops once and for all from supporting the obscene puppy and kitten farming industry!

    Reply
  5. I’m not exactly sure why the vets operated on the puppy trying to figure out what’s wrong… When you see a dog not growing normally and do pre-anesthetic blood work with liver values through the roof seems like a easy enough thing to diagnose… Not that the puppy mill store shouldn’t have to pay for the puppy to get the care it needs but why wasn’t it diagnosed almost immediately … That’s like a human complaining of chest pain go-to diagnoses heart attack .. Liver shunts aren’t so abnormal that a doctor would easily miss diagnosing it with a simple blood test and confirming with an ultrasound

    Reply

Leave a Comment