Pet Parade

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/10/28) */ The client did purchase a puppy on 7/5/He was told the puppy had a leg injury and our vet deemed the puppy was ok, that he may have strained his legThe client has not been in contact with us since the purchase, with any complaint about the puppyThe puppy should have been to a vet for his next vaccination on 7/10/and the final shot on 7/24/per our recordsAt that time a Veterinarian would have been able to check the puppy for any injuriesThe client did sign a No Guarantee Contract stating The Pet Parade will not be responsible for any further costs regarding this puppy(Copies available) the Pet Parade did refuse to cover any bills pertaining to this puppy because of the signed contractSince this is the first time the puppy had been to a vet since the purchase, there is no way to confirm that this injury happened in our care Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/10/28) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Pet Parade is incorrect in several of their responsesFirst off, I have taken the pet to the Veterinarian several times since purchasing the dogI took the dog immediately to the vet after purchase, records can be providedSecondly, I in fact did contact Pet Parade yesterday (Oct) and spoke to the on duty manager who informed me that the reason they are denying any assistance is because they would not guarantee the breeder from which the dog came fromAny agreement signed in reference to the dog on the day of sale was with the understanding that it would pertain to future injuries/illnesses of the petI maintain that this is still part of the same issue while the business was in possession of the dog, and therefore is ongoingI am accepting half of the responsibility of the pet since he is now my dogThe nature of the injury raises concerns due to the severityHe was injured in such a way that has caused his bone to stop growing and requires surgery to correct the problemAs far as this pet concerned, Pet Parade was negligent in providing adequate care and therefore should own up to responsibility in providing care for the dogThat is of course unless this pet store does not care about the pets it sells and is a glorified puppy millAny responsible business owner should fulfill their obligations of providing a safe and healthy establishment for the animals that they are selling, which the Pet Parade has fallen short of this objective Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (3000, 11, 2015/10/29) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Once again you are mistakenThe injury sustained while in your care caused the dog's bone to stop growingThis is impossible to tell until the dog got olderObviously arbitration this way is pointless, it is obvious that you are unwilling to accept your portion of responsibility which speaks volumes to the business' integrity (lack thereof)I will be proceeding with my complaint directly with Revdex.com since you are unwilling to compromiseIt disappoints me that a business can be so short sighted as Pet Parade has demonstratedIn the mean time, I will be contacting an attorney for the possibility of small claims actionFurthermore, my experience will be shared at every opportunity presented as well as any and every forum I can find on Base Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/10/29) */ If you did in fact take the pet to the Veterinarian immediately (your words) after purchase, that vet would have caught the so called severity of the supposed injury and you should have contacted us immediately, not weeks and days laterThis leads me to believe the dog may have injured itself during this time to the severity you are speaking ofIf you read your contract it clearly states the Pet Parade will not be responsible for any further costs regarding this puppyYou were informed of the injury and told our vet did check it out and deemed it minorYou still purchased the dog and signed the contract

The owner of Junior contacted us the first time on Tuesday January 23,to tell us that the haircut is not what he wanted. He wanted a refund because he did not like the haircut, however we had went over how we were going to groom the dog and how short it was going to be and he agreed at
that time. Then on Friday January 26,he called and talked to a coworker and profusely yelled at her and said they had to take the dog to the vet and were going to get a lawyer involved. The owner said he would call back and talk to me, Wendy (manager) on Saturday. He called on Saturday and talked to the groomer who told him to bring the dog into The Pet Parade so we could look at the alleged cuts on the dog. He also stated at this time that the nails were not trimmed or buffed. The groomer and owner did not come to an agreement because the owner wanted him to pay the vet bills and groomer said he would like to look at the dog first and then discuss options with vet bill. The owner was not satisfied with that so he asked to talk to me again. I then told him that our protocol is that if someone takes their animal to the vet we will look over bills and discuss with the vet what happened to the dog and pay as we see appropriate. I then asked him again to bring the dog in so we could see the dogs alleged cuts and anus problems and take care of the toe nails for him. The owner refused to bring the dog in for us to look at so I told him there is nothing more we could do for them and would not groom the dog anymore. The owner also never provided a bill from a vet or would mention the vet he supposedly took the dog to. The Pet ParadeWendy *** (Manager)Amy *** (Owner)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/28) */
The client did purchase a puppy on 7/5/15. He was told the puppy had a leg injury and our vet deemed the puppy was ok, that he may have strained his leg. The client has not been in contact with us since the purchase, with any complaint about...

the puppy. The puppy should have been to a vet for his next vaccination on 7/10/15 and the final shot on 7/24/15 per our records. At that time a Veterinarian would have been able to check the puppy for any injuries. The client did sign a No Guarantee Contract stating The Pet Parade will not be responsible for any further costs regarding this puppy. (Copies available) the Pet Parade did refuse to cover any bills pertaining to this puppy because of the signed contract. Since this is the first time the puppy had been to a vet since the purchase, there is no way to confirm that this injury happened in our care.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/10/28) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Pet Parade is incorrect in several of their responses. First off, I have taken the pet to the Veterinarian several times since purchasing the dog. I took the dog immediately to the vet after purchase, records can be provided. Secondly, I in fact did contact Pet Parade yesterday (27 Oct) and spoke to the on duty manager who informed me that the reason they are denying any assistance is because they would not guarantee the breeder from which the dog came from. Any agreement signed in reference to the dog on the day of sale was with the understanding that it would pertain to future injuries/illnesses of the pet. I maintain that this is still part of the same issue while the business was in possession of the dog, and therefore is ongoing. I am accepting half of the responsibility of the pet since he is now my dog. The nature of the injury raises concerns due to the severity. He was injured in such a way that has caused his bone to stop growing and requires surgery to correct the problem. As far as this pet concerned, Pet Parade was negligent in providing adequate care and therefore should own up to responsibility in providing care for the dog. That is of course unless this pet store does not care about the pets it sells and is a glorified puppy mill. Any responsible business owner should fulfill their obligations of providing a safe and healthy establishment for the animals that they are selling, which the Pet Parade has fallen short of this objective.
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 11, 2015/10/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Once again you are mistaken. The injury sustained while in your care caused the dog's bone to stop growing. This is impossible to tell until the dog got older. Obviously arbitration this way is pointless, it is obvious that you are unwilling to accept your portion of responsibility which speaks volumes to the business' integrity (lack thereof). I will be proceeding with my complaint directly with Revdex.com since you are unwilling to compromise. It disappoints me that a business can be so short sighted as Pet Parade has demonstrated. In the mean time, I will be contacting an attorney for the possibility of small claims action. Furthermore, my experience will be shared at every opportunity presented as well as any and every forum I can find on Base.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/10/29) */
If you did in fact take the pet to the Veterinarian immediately (your words) after purchase, that vet would have caught the so called severity of the supposed injury and you should have contacted us immediately, not 16 weeks and 2 days later. This leads me to believe the dog may have injured itself during this time to the severity you are speaking of. If you read your contract it clearly states the Pet Parade will not be responsible for any further costs regarding this puppy. You were informed of the injury and told our vet did check it out and deemed it minor. You still purchased the dog and signed the contract.