Camp Run-A-Mutt

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Nearly everything [redacted] stated is a lieThey noticed everything wrong with my dog the day before I picked him up? I don't believe that I also have all the vet notes that say "bite marks cannot be ruled out"I have pictures of all the medications my dog needed after leaving their facilityI also have their signed contract that they are in breach of because they neglected my dog and failed to call me or anyone regarding this issueThere were no threats, nor liesNothing but the truth has come out of my mouth and I'm proud to back it up Regards, [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowNearly everything *** stated is a lieThey noticed everything wrong with my dog the day before I picked him up? I don't believe that I also have all the vet notes that say "bite marks cannot be ruled out"I have pictures of all the medications my dog needed after leaving their facilityI also have their signed contract that they are in breach of because they neglected my dog and failed to call me or anyone regarding this issueThere were no threats, nor liesNothing but the truth has come out of my mouth and I'm proud to back it up
Regards,
*** ***

named-flow="FLOW-2">The complainant [Owner] boarded her one-year-old pit mix [dog], here at Camp Run-A-Mutt for a total of days while she was out of the countryWhile with us, the dog had a great time, we noticed no injuries while giving him a bath before pick up and made sure to mention to the owner that we had noticed the dog making some wheezing noises while he slept the night of Saturday to Sunday morningWithin a few hours of pick up, the owner then began to make claims that the dog was attacked during his stay at CampAlthough we explained to her that the dog was never in any sort of altercation and reminded her we provide 24-hour constant supervision, she immediately began to threaten legal actionThat same day, she also launched an attack on our small business via social mediaShe posted completely untrue statements multiple times regarding the dog’s condition, both before and after visiting the vetsShe insisted the dog came home after being “mauled” at our Camp, with “open bloody wounds”, a “torn ligament”, “pink eye” and “kennel cough”, while asking friends to “help spread the word”She rallied a group of online friends to support these claims and encouraged them to leave negative reviews with the express intent of hurting our businessEven now, after receiving confirmation from two vets of her own choosing, as well as having knowledge of the dog’s pre-existing conditions, the customer continues to harass our business and spread untrue statements on public forums
The client picked up her dog at roughly around 8:a.mon 4/17/following a day stay at our facilityThe owner took her dog to vet #on 4/17/and, per the vet reports and a subsequent phone conversation, the dog was not limping, (the report states “gate” no tenderness or swelling to all legs) did not have pink eye, or any other type of discharge from either of his eyes, nor did he have bloody wounds or dog bitesThe “dog bites” and “open wounds” as stated by the owner were, per the vet, “allergic dermatitis” which means the dog encountered something in the environment that he was allergic toThe dog had previously been treated at Vet #for an unknown allergic reaction and hives on his body at a time prior to his visit with usDuring a phone conversation with vet #1, the vet stated she thought it could have been something we used to clean our beds withThe same vet also explained that this dog has what is referred to as a “compromised immune system” (diagnosed prior to his visit with us) and has been treated on more than one occasion for different skin issues, which the owner never informed us ofAfter visiting this vet, the owner chose to again speak out against us on social media continuing to make claims that her dog was “mauled,” “attacked by another dog” and “unsupervised.” Again all of these allegations have been proven to be completely untrue and, at this point, had also been confirmed for her by the vet of her choosing
During this same appointment the dog was noted as showing symptoms of “infectious canine tracheobronchitis” aka “kennel cough” which at the time was mild enough to not warrant treatment nor a chest x-ray
The following day, on 4/18/the owner’s sister took the dog to a different vet, and again the vet report states that the dog walked with a “gait” (walk), had no discharge from either eye, but did dispense eye drops for a “slight eye irritation.” The dog again on that visit was not treated for the cough, because his lungs sounds were normalThe vet did address a previously known and previously treated growth on the Lt front pawThe dog’s vital signs were all within limitsSkin was noted as “scabbing and hives on neck and body.”
On 4/19/the owner returned to Vet #1, and told Vet #that Vet #had diagnosed the dog with “pink eye” (reported in Vet #notes, and reported as not true by Vet #2)Again Vet #confirms “no ocular or nasal discharge” (no eye or nose discharge) “no evidence of conjunctivitis” (pink eye or eye infection.)
All the dog’s vital signs were within limitsBecause the owner stated the dog’s cough had been worse overnight and complained of green nasal discharge and bumps along his trunk, Vet #prescribed antibiotics for the “infectious tracheobronchitis”, but still felt that the dog did not need a chest x-rayVet #also recommended that the owner use a prescribed medicated shampoo for the dog’s skin problems, the report states the owner said she already had this medicated shampooHad we been made aware of this, we would have been more than happy to use a prescription shampoo she provided to bathe her dog before leaving
On Monday April 25th, I received an email from the owner requesting to be reimbursed for vet billsI asked her how the dog was doing and inquired specifically about his limpShe explicitly stated in the email that his “torn ligament was ruled out by the second vet.” When I pointed out that the dog did not have “pink eye” she also acknowledged that as well
The client has now moved on to claiming that we were in “breach of contract” because we did not notify her or her emergency contacts of her dog’s change in health conditionWe noticed on Saturday 4/16/that the dog had started to develop a rash under his neck and faceIt did not require emergent treatment and the owner was scheduled to pick up the dog the next dayHad we known of his previous skin allergies we would have liked for her to provide us with the dog’s medicated shampoo, instead we used our regular shampoo, which potentially made his rash worseIt is not unusual for clients with dogs that have skin problems to have us use their special shampoo when we give them a bathDuring the dog’s day stay none of the staff, nor myself, or husband noticed any type of limp and this has been verified by both vetsNeither did we notice any discharge from the dog’s eyes, which again, was supported by both vets on all visitsWe did inform the owner on Sunday morning at pick up time that the night shift had heard him wheeze a couple of times during the early morning hours
Had the owner been reasonable and open to discussing the situation, we would have been more than willing to work with herUnfortunately, after all the backlash, threats, and hate mail instigated by the owner’s social media activity, as well as a surprise visit from the Humane Society at her request and now the Revdex.com, we feel this would be a matter better handled with legal representationThe owner, from the beginning, has been attempting to extort not only the money spent on her dog’s day stay here, but also payment for all vet visits
Unfortunately, at only one-year-old, a dog of this age that already has a compromised immune system and has previously been treated for Giardia, Coccidia, Mange, Hives of unknown origin and bloody diarrhea, may not be the best candidate for boarding at a cage free facility for such a lengthy stayHad we had been informed of this by the owner, our first step would have been to consult his vetUnfortunately, none of this was disclosed to usThe owner claimed the dog was in perfect health on his intake paperwork- with no medical history noted- completely disregarding his health and safety, to ensure he would be able to board with us
Here at Camp Run-A-Mutt we truly care for the health and well-being of the dogs in our careWe strive to maintain an open line of communication with all our customers, but unfortunately our efforts have been hindered in this specific instance due to the threat of legal action and the insistence from the owner to handle this on a public platformWe welcome the Revdex.com to visit our Camp at any time, we have always maintained an open door policy, we also have live feed cameras for the owners, or you to be able to check on their dogs during business hours, and we would like to thank you in advance for taking the time to understand the day by day logistics of how this complaint came to be
Please see the attached documentation from both veterinarians as well as social media and email activity from the client

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Nearly everything [redacted] stated is a lie. They noticed everything wrong with my dog the day before I picked him up? I don't believe that  I also have all the vet notes that say "bite marks cannot be ruled out". I have pictures of all the medications my dog needed after leaving their facility. I also have their signed contract that they are in breach of because they neglected my dog and failed to call me or anyone regarding this issue. There were no threats, nor lies. Nothing but the truth has come out of my mouth and I'm proud to back it up.
Regards,
[redacted]

The complainant [Owner] boarded her one-year-old pit mix [dog], here at Camp Run-A-Mutt for a total of 9 days while she was out of the country. While with us, the dog had a great time, we noticed no injuries while giving him a bath before pick up and made sure to mention to the owner that we had...

noticed the dog making some wheezing noises while he slept the night of Saturday to Sunday morning. Within a few hours of pick up, the owner then began to make claims that the dog was attacked during his stay at Camp. Although we explained to her that the dog was never in any sort of altercation and reminded her we provide 24-hour constant supervision, she immediately began to threaten legal action. That same day, she also launched an attack on our small business via social media. She posted completely untrue statements multiple times regarding the dog’s condition, both before and after visiting the vets. She insisted the dog came home after being “mauled” at our Camp, with “open bloody wounds”, a “torn ligament”, “pink eye” and “kennel cough”, while asking friends to “help spread the word”. She rallied a group of online friends to support these claims and encouraged them to leave negative reviews with the express intent of hurting our business. Even now, after receiving confirmation from two vets of her own choosing, as well as having knowledge of the dog’s pre-existing conditions, the customer continues to harass our business and spread untrue statements on public forums. The client picked up her dog at roughly around 8:30 a.m. on 4/17/16 following a 9 day stay at our facility..The owner took her dog to vet #1 on 4/17/16 and, per the vet reports and a subsequent phone conversation, the dog was not limping, (the report states “normal gate” no tenderness or swelling to all legs) did not have pink eye, or any other type of discharge from either of his eyes, nor did he have bloody wounds or dog bites. The “dog bites” and “open wounds” as stated by the owner were, per the vet, “allergic dermatitis” which means the dog encountered something in the environment that he was allergic to. The dog had previously been treated at Vet #1 for an unknown allergic reaction and hives on his body at a time prior to his visit with us. During a phone conversation with vet #1, the vet stated she thought it could have been something we used to clean our beds with. The same vet also explained that this dog has what is referred to as a “compromised immune system” (diagnosed prior to his visit with us) and has been treated on more than one occasion for different skin issues, which the owner never informed us of. After visiting this vet, the owner chose to again speak out against us on social media continuing to make claims that her dog was “mauled,” “attacked by another dog” and “unsupervised.” Again all of these allegations have been proven to be completely untrue and, at this point, had also been confirmed for her by the vet of her choosing.    During this same appointment the dog was noted as showing symptoms of “infectious canine tracheobronchitis” aka “kennel cough” which at the time was mild enough to not warrant treatment nor a chest x-ray. The following day, on 4/18/16 the owner’s sister took the dog to a different vet, and again the vet report states that the dog walked with a “normal gait” (walk), had no discharge from either eye, but did dispense eye drops for a “slight eye irritation.” The dog again on that visit was not treated for the cough, because his lungs sounds were normal. The vet did address a previously known and previously treated growth on the Lt front paw. The dog’s vital signs were all within normal limits. Skin was noted as “scabbing and hives on neck and body.” On 4/19/16 the owner returned to Vet #1, and told Vet #1 that Vet #2 had diagnosed the dog with “pink eye” (reported in Vet #1 notes, and reported as not true by Vet #2). Again Vet #1 confirms “no ocular or nasal discharge” (no eye or nose discharge) “no evidence of conjunctivitis” (pink eye or eye infection.) All the dog’s vital signs were within normal limits. Because the owner stated the dog’s cough had been worse overnight and complained of green nasal discharge and bumps along his trunk, Vet #1 prescribed antibiotics for the “infectious tracheobronchitis”, but still felt that the dog did not need a chest x-ray. Vet #1 also recommended that the owner use a prescribed medicated shampoo for the dog’s skin problems, the report states the owner said she already had this medicated shampoo. Had we been made aware of this, we would have been more than happy to use a prescription shampoo she provided to bathe her dog before leaving. On Monday April 25th, I received an email from the owner requesting to be reimbursed for vet bills. I asked her how the dog was doing and inquired specifically about his limp. She explicitly stated in the email that his “torn ligament was ruled out by the second vet.” When I pointed out that the dog did not have “pink eye” she also acknowledged that as well. The client has now moved on to claiming that we were in “breach of contract” because we did not notify her or her emergency contacts of her dog’s change in health condition. We noticed on Saturday 4/16/16 that the dog had started to develop a rash under his neck and face. It did not require emergent treatment and the owner was scheduled to pick up the dog the next day. Had we known of his previous skin allergies we would have liked for her to provide us with the dog’s medicated shampoo, instead we used our regular shampoo, which potentially made his rash worse. It is not unusual for clients with dogs that have skin problems to have us use their special shampoo when we give them a bath. During the dog’s 9 day stay none of the staff, nor myself, or husband noticed any type of limp and this has been verified by both vets. Neither did we notice any discharge from the dog’s eyes, which again, was supported by both vets on all 3 visits. We did inform the owner on Sunday morning at pick up time that the night shift had heard him wheeze a couple of times during the early morning hours.   Had the owner been reasonable and open to discussing the situation, we would have been more than willing to work with her. Unfortunately, after all the backlash, threats, and hate mail instigated by the owner’s social media activity, as well as a surprise visit from the Humane Society at her request and now the Revdex.com, we feel this would be a matter better handled with legal  representation. The owner, from the beginning, has been attempting to extort not only the money spent on her dog’s 9 day stay here, but also payment for all 3 vet visits. Unfortunately, at only one-year-old, a dog of this age that already has a compromised immune system and has previously been treated for Giardia, Coccidia, Mange, Hives of unknown origin and bloody diarrhea, may not be the best candidate for boarding at a cage free facility for such a lengthy stay. Had we had been informed of this by the owner, our first step would have been to consult his vet. Unfortunately, none of this was disclosed to us. The owner claimed the dog was in perfect health on his intake paperwork- with no medical history noted- completely disregarding his health and safety, to ensure he would be able to board with us. Here at Camp Run-A-Mutt we truly care for the health and well-being of the dogs in our care. We strive to maintain an open line of communication with all our customers, but unfortunately our efforts have been hindered in this specific instance due to the threat of legal action and the insistence from the owner to handle this on a public platform. We welcome the Revdex.com to visit our Camp at any time, we have always maintained an open door policy, we also have live feed cameras for the owners, or you to be able to check on their dogs during business hours, and we would like to thank you in advance for taking the time to understand the day by day logistics of how this complaint came to be. Please see the attached documentation from both veterinarians as well as social media and email activity from the client.