Please Donate Toward The Purchase And Keep FR Up And Running!
The owner had moved and did not update chip information but the city's animal welfare department did not check with the originating veterinarian before adopting the dog out. The two are now fighting over ownership and it has escalated to threats, possible loss of a business and likely court action. The new owner says: "It appears I have lost everything, and I sure as hell am not going to return the dog."
This article article is free to read at the link.
Ping!
“Lost everything”? a bit dramatic.
They should let the dog choose.
</King Solomon reference>
I’m sorry but this new owner is a professional dog trainer and she didn’t give the dog back to its rightful owner. Whats wrong with that picture? You should give the dog back immediately with no hesitation after you are presented with proof of ownership and just be glad you reunited it with its owner.
You know, the original owner had the dog for 7 years. Having dogs, I know the bond that is forged in one year, let alone 7 years. The second owner adopted her dog only over a couple months ago. The orginal owner had lost her dog, and was heartbroken. The new owner had also lost her dog recently, and so she is very familiar with the pain of losing a pet. She should give the dog back to the original owner. I would give the dog back to the original owner as I’d hope someone would do if the shoe was on the other foot and it was my dog of 7 years. I think it’s selfish. There are so many dogs in need of a home that will be euthed. She can rescue one of them.
NM list PING! Click on the flag to go to the Free Republic New Mexico message page.
(The NM list is available on my FR homepage for anyone to use. Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
Glad to see that the dog at least is alright!
woof
Here is a link to the petition. It explains the original owners case. There is also info at krqe in a bit titled Tasha tug of war. Feel horrible for Rachel and her dog.
http://www.change.org/petitions/city-of-albuquerque-give-back-a-dog-that-was-wrongfully-adopted-out
Rachel and the Hills are going to mediation. Perhaps things will work out. =)
I would like to make some statements regarding my dog Tasha and Cindy Hill. When fights like this occur, it usually is because there are two sides of the story. Everyone knows my side. I wanted my dog back. I want to make the record clear that Cindy Hill has her side as well. She did nothing wrong. She legally adopted a dog in the City Shelter that, had she not been adopted by someone, would have ...been killed. Cindy saved Tasha’s life. I did a number of things wrong, and it is only fair that these be put on the record.
First, of course, I failed to update the chip information. The chip company had my old cell phone number. Second, I now understand that Cindy and her husband consider the contact information I obtained I used to be confidential. I should not have obtained that information as I did. When I used it, they felt threatened. More importantly, I made the mistake of bringing a friend with me when I went to their home. My friend acted totally inappropriately at their door. If they had not felt threatened before that visit, they most certainly would have as a result of the visit. I am not at all surprised they called 911 as a result of what was said. It was clear to me, also, that Tasha was very comfortable with Cindy. I am very grateful for the good care she received at their home. They are good people who saved her life.
I realize that my actions in creating this entire confrontation, including the petition, internet postings and other publicity which targeted Cindy professionally made a bad situation worse. I was in attack mode, as were my friends and family. I fully understand why Cindy and her husband felt besieged by my actions.
With hindsight, I can see I should have done things very, very differently, and I apologize to Cindy and Mark Hill for that.
Rachel Herring