Rainforest Coastal Labs

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: 1.In her response, she does not discuss her lies and fraudulent actions regarding her [redacted] dogs health clearances In her response, she does not discuss she put in writing days prior to the collecting of her *** dogs [redacted] that she would take in a female dogs of hers in ***I had a conversation with her on the phone a few days prior in how a few other breeders in the past had tried to collect [redacted] casually and not with full understanding in how they are to see to it the [redacted] is to be collected properly with a teaser female dog and with a Repro SpecialistA teaser allows maximum collection and not being done halfway! It was imperative to me that she saw to it there was a teaser female there SHE PUT THIS IN WRITING TO ME!! I did not realize this until we had received the [redacted] in and reviewed what was written on the formI called ***She ignored answering the question and still to date ignores answering the questionShe is a liarIf she was not going to take a teaser in, then I would've cancelled the breeding, not sent the deposit and found another [redacted] dog elsewhereShe knew this The documentation for this will be supplied to the Attorney General when they reach out in the next few weeks for the documentation and evidence to support the factsWe'll see how she squirms out of the question when under oath when the AG mediates thisThank you Revdex.com for recommending the Attorney General to meI will keep you apprised of how this works out so we can finish up this complaint thru the Revdex.com My Vet will supply in his words his views on the report received in by your Vet, my condition of my girl to be bred with, the question on [redacted] that the [redacted] makes in order to get ready for breeding, his explanation on his notations in my [redacted] file for Surgical vsTCI and why he chose to perform TCI [redacted] that day and also, why he questions many of the line items on the form received with the [redacted] that was filled out by the Vet from ***'s endHe will add his professional commentary on questioning the sending Vet in not using the machine that he had to analyze and count the ***This documentation will be sent to the Attorney General [redacted] tries to explain that Specialists in Repro feel it is suitable to send [redacted] without it being analyzed and just a visualMy Vet and other qualified Repro Specialists question why he did not put the [redacted] in the analyzerA few of these experts will supply written testimonials in why it is important to cover ones own butt in placing the [redacted] in the analyzer, how important you supply information to the female dogs owner with ALL info before sending it and as well, how important it is to have a teaser female there present at time of collecting [redacted] never picked up the phone and apologized She did offer the return of the deposit and along with that more conditionsI felt it was one more run aroundIf [redacted] had any integrity or character she would've taken in the teaser female dog, when not done she would've called me for a 'heads up', she would've been honest in her dog NOT being current and up to date on his health clearances as she lied to me about that, she would've looked into the number of [redacted] from her Vet SHE CHOSE when I asked her multiple times and she would've already sent the deposit backBut instead we go down the road for more head bangingIn lue of her lies, not performing and her Vet not performing I seek my deposit back plus expenses and losses To breed across the state lines requires both parties being team playersIn this case, I showed up to the tennis match and she was at the other side with a racquetball racquet and a set of heels onNot well equipped for a game of tennis and certainly not going to be a successful oneShe showed up to the party ill equippedSo, with that I am owed in all honesty full restitution She points out in her response with my doing other breeding's with other [redacted] dog owners that I have a bad reputation in requiring the [redacted] dog owner and their Vet they choose to perform the task to toe the lineInsulted? Why would I be? I and along with a long list of female dog owners are sick and tired of the [redacted] dog owners 'duping' the female dog owners, we lose money and the [redacted] dog owners pocket the depositsWe are tired of it!! It turns it into fraudI am not the only breeder seeking for the Attorney Generals across the US to look into how business is done in the dog world and how unfair it is for the female owner and how we carry all the risk, lose money and the [redacted] dog owners pocket the depositsThis is long overdue for this level of investigation to get performed in this breeding business [redacted] is known as a liarShe stands on a high pedestal and doesn't believe anyone sees thru her liesI have evidence that proves she lied! I just heard thru the dog world that she recently lied to another breeder about supplying one of her puppies to join a kennel that is known for breeding ' [redacted] 'I have that person willing to supply evidence she was well aware one of her pups was going to a kennel to breed for ' [redacted] 'Lying and deceptive So, Revdex.com I am clearly taking a stand here and desire my full restitutionI will get back to you once the Attorney General has had his mediation with both parties so we can add this information to this claim and onto Rainforest Coastal Labs fileIt shall be interesting to see how her stories change once under oathOr willing to perjure herself? Finally, [redacted] .....litter is spelled with T's Sincerely, [redacted] ***

ID [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam- I am in receipt of your Revdex.com letter dated Friday March 16th indicating that the complainant had responded and the Revdex.com caseworker felt that this warranted some additional remarks from me To assist the reviewer and to keep the interaction focused on factsI will provide a final short summary of the facts and our positions 1) We were contacted by ***, who was interested in using our accomplished and high level-titled chocolate Labrador male ‘***’ for [redacted] services to her entry level-titled female ‘***’2) She asked us provide a [redacted] services contract that delineated our charges and responsibilitiesI provided her with a signed copyThe document specifies that in the event of a f**led liter, only a repeat [redacted] attempt would be offeredIn the event of a f**led litter, the female is not responsible for the remainder ($400) of the [redacted] fee3) All parties are aware of the simple fact that dog [redacted] , and especially by [redacted] , is inherently risky and even when everything is done perfectly-- sometimes the litter simply doesn’t takeThere are literally hundreds of medical reasons why this could be the case As everyone knows, this is true for humans as well4) [redacted] wanted to perform additional [redacted] testing beyond the usual testsWe agreed to collect and provide a DNA sample for testing at her non-refundable expensePer her report, [redacted] was clear for the additional [redacted] testing she had performedShe did not supply the actual testing data to us as she had verbally agreed to doShe later threatens to sue us if we use the testing to market [redacted] in the future5) [redacted] acknowledged receiving and reviewing the [redacted] services contract (by text and by phone conversation) and asked to proceedThe document specified a $deposit from the total $charge for the [redacted] We received her $payment, but she did not return a signed copy of the [redacted] service contract as requested6) [redacted] had the option to come to StLouis for the [redacted] or utilize [redacted] with either frozen or a stabilized fresh-chilled collectionAs someone who [redacted] dogs, she knows that each of these options have different associated costs and success ratesShe elected to use a stabilized fresh-chilled collection7) [redacted] discusses her desire for us to use a “teaser ***” during the collectionDuring the pre- [redacted] discussions I had at least phone and/or text conversations with [redacted] and did indicate that we accommodate her request to use a teaser female if one was available, but that this could not be guaranteedThis boils down to a simple straightforward fact-- females comes [redacted] about every 6-months and have just a few [redacted] daysSo for many or most collections, one is simply not av**lableShe understood and agreed to that on more than one occasion [redacted] was hopeful that one might be coming [redacted] ***, but knew that it would be impossible for anyone to guarantee that an in- [redacted] female would be available on a particular day—and coinciding exactly with her in- [redacted] female [redacted] acknowledged and accepted that fact but now wants to deny this8) The value of a teaser female relates solely to increasing the [redacted] collectionThis can be important in the case of an inexperienced [redacted] maleInexperienced males sometimes do not release the full [redacted] rich fraction of an [redacted] without a standing teaser female9) Despite ***’s statements to the contrary, [redacted] is an experienced [redacted] ***, having sired more than liters, including many **sIt is also widely accepted that high quality [redacted] can be collected from most males without the need for a teaser ***, especially if the male, like ***, has had multiple [redacted] collection previously10) Given the tight turn-around time required to collect and ship fresh collected ***, we placed ourselves, and our local [redacted] vet ‘on call’ for the week while aw**ting the progesterone testing performed on ***11) ***’s progesterone levels are followed and [redacted] notified us that she would like the collection performed ‘today’ and to send to her refrigerated by overnight **rThe timing of the [redacted] and procedure choice is a decision made by [redacted] and her vet12) The [redacted] collection is performed by [redacted] , and experienced DVM that provides quality [redacted] services (collections and [redacted] s) for many high-end competition dogs in the StLouis areaIt is performed at the time specified by ***13) The [redacted] is collected, stabilized and shipped per standard practiceThe assessment showed it to be high quality, as was extensively documented in the last response to the complainant14) The receiving ( [redacted] ) vet’s characterization of the [redacted] and notes that it is of good concentration and it used for a [redacted] **They describe excess material to reflux back out of the [redacted] 15) There is no explanation for why the vet records stated having discussed a surgical **, and yet [redacted] choses to use a TCI insteadThe vet records also note that her [redacted] female has a [redacted] 16) Any of ***’s stated concerns about not having a teaser female, or the [redacted] quality, number, concentration, motility/morphology are negated by the individual assessments by both vets17) After the **, [redacted] called to say that all went wellThat is why it is completely disingenuous to now raise the issues continued in her complaint, implying that there was a problem or deception at the timeHer distortion of the facts is not borne out in the contemporaneous medical records from both the collecting and [redacted] DVMs18) As a successful litter can make the female’s owner many thousands of dollars, the risk of a failed [redacted] does seem to fall disproportionately on the femaleBut [redacted] chooses to leave out some important details-- [redacted] owners make only a modest fee for a [redacted] , and have spent many thousands of dollars in training and competitions to obtain the titles and career successes required to be sought after as a [redacted] ***--and even then, only a small fraction of dogs turn out to be successful19) Causes of in [redacted] with males generally relate to the quality and function of the ***In this case, the facts are that [redacted] is an experienced highly successful [redacted] male, and his high [redacted] quality was assessed at the time of the [redacted] Therefore the focus is shifted to factors involving the female20) [redacted] is unwilling to disclose her females [redacted] record/details for reasonable comparison [redacted] later admits that [redacted] is on antibiotics, but does not stipulate the reason or source of infection21) ***’s collection, producing between 1.5-mls of the [redacted] rich fraction is considered by experts to be a successful collectionHer statement that [redacted] was sent “without it being analyzed” is also simply and misleadingThe DVM’s assessment, reflected in the medical records on both sides, showed it to be a good collection by standard [redacted] parameters (volume, quantity, concentration, morphology and motility) 22) ***’s accusations that there was collusion or bad behavior on the part of the vet performing the collection are the same as she raised in the original complaintThis has been addressed by her receiving/ [redacted] DVM’s records showing that the mls was of good [redacted] concentration and the volume provided is widely considered reasonable for [redacted] s23) We stand behind our written agreement to provide a second collection for a repeat [redacted] attemptWe also maintain our offer that was stated previously, that we would also be happy to refund the $deposit if [redacted] is willing to put this disagreement to rest, to include duplicate complaints designed to harass, such as the [redacted] filing24) [redacted] repeatedly has threatened to damage our reputation if we don’t pay her offWe have since learned of other [redacted] owners who have faced similar bad behavior from [redacted] (threatening to harm reputations unless money is paid, Revdex.com complaints, [redacted] , etc)Therefore this appears to be a repetitive behavior and speaks to ***’s character and perhaps raises the question of [redacted] issues25) I would seriously caution anyone thinking of doing business with [redacted] to first do their homework and take their due diligence very seriouslyAs more people learn about her tactics, I predict that she will find it increasing hard to find owners of quality [redacted] dogs willing to work with her Despite her disorganized hateful diatribe, I am sincerely sorry that the litter did not takeMy business success is predicated on facilitating high quality, and successful [redacted] sDoes [redacted] really think that [redacted] owners are out to take advantage of her? That would be a very short-sighted (and short-lived) business modelWe perform some female [redacted] s as well, so I certainly understand the perspective of both sides Sincerely yours, [redacted]

See attached

ID [redacted]   Dear Sir/Madam- I am in receipt of your Revdex.com letter dated Friday March 16th indicating that the complainant had responded and the Revdex.com caseworker felt that this warranted some additional remarks from me.    To assist the reviewer and to keep the interaction focused on facts. I will provide a final short summary of the facts and our positions.   1)      We were contacted by [redacted], who was interested in using our accomplished and high level-titled chocolate Labrador male ‘[redacted]’ for [redacted] services to her entry level-titled female ‘[redacted]’. 2)      She asked us provide a [redacted] services contract that delineated our charges and responsibilities. I provided her with a signed copy. The document specifies that in the event of a f**led liter, only a repeat [redacted] attempt would be offered. In the event of a f**led litter, the female is not responsible for the remainder ($400) of the [redacted] fee. 3)      All parties are aware of the simple fact that dog [redacted], and especially by [redacted], is inherently risky and even when everything is done perfectly-- sometimes the litter simply doesn’t take. There are literally hundreds of medical reasons why this could be the case.  As everyone knows, this is true for humans as well. 4)      [redacted] wanted to perform additional [redacted] testing beyond the usual tests. We agreed to collect and provide a DNA sample for testing at her non-refundable expense. Per her report, [redacted] was clear for the additional [redacted] testing she had performed. She did not supply the actual testing data to us as she had verbally agreed to do. She later threatens to sue us if we use the testing to market [redacted] in the future. 5)      [redacted] acknowledged receiving and reviewing the [redacted] services contract (by text and by phone conversation) and asked to proceed. The document specified a $400 deposit from the total $800 charge for the [redacted]. We received her $400 payment, but she did not return a signed copy of the [redacted] service contract as requested. 6)      [redacted] had the option to come to St. Louis for the [redacted] or utilize ** with either frozen or a stabilized fresh-chilled collection. As someone who [redacted] dogs, she knows that each of these options have different associated costs and success rates. She elected to use a stabilized fresh-chilled collection. 7)      [redacted] discusses her desire for us to use a “teaser [redacted]” during the collection. During the pre-[redacted] discussions I had at least 5 phone and/or text conversations with [redacted] and did indicate that we accommodate her request to use a teaser female if one was available, but that this could not be guaranteed. This boils down to a simple straightforward fact-- females comes [redacted] about every 6-9 months and have just a few [redacted] days. So for many or most collections, one is simply not av**lable. She understood and agreed to that on more than one occasion. [redacted] was hopeful that one might be coming [redacted], but knew that it would be impossible for anyone to guarantee that an in-[redacted] female would be available on a particular day—and coinciding exactly with her in-[redacted] female. [redacted] acknowledged and accepted that fact but now wants to deny this. 8)      The value of a teaser female relates solely to increasing the [redacted] collection. This can be important in the case of an inexperienced [redacted] male. Inexperienced males sometimes do not release the full [redacted] rich fraction of an [redacted] without a standing teaser female. 9)      Despite [redacted]’s statements to the contrary, [redacted] is an experienced [redacted], having sired more than 40 liters, including many **s. It is also widely accepted that high quality [redacted] can be collected from most males without the need for a teaser [redacted], especially if the male, like [redacted], has had multiple [redacted] collection previously. 10)  Given the tight turn-around time required to collect and ship fresh collected [redacted], we placed ourselves, and our local [redacted] vet ‘on call’ for the week while aw**ting the progesterone testing performed on [redacted]. 11)  [redacted]’s progesterone levels are followed and [redacted] notified us that she would like the collection performed ‘today’ and to send to her refrigerated by overnight **r. The timing of the [redacted] and procedure choice is a decision made by [redacted] and her vet. 12)  The [redacted] collection is performed by [redacted], and experienced DVM that provides quality [redacted] services (collections and [redacted]s) for many high-end competition dogs in the St. Louis area. It is performed at the time specified by [redacted]. 13)  The [redacted] is collected, stabilized and shipped per standard practice. The assessment showed it to be high quality, as was extensively documented in the last response to the complainant. 14)  The receiving ([redacted]) vet’s characterization of the [redacted] and notes that it is of good concentration and it used for a [redacted]. They describe excess material to reflux back out of the [redacted]. 15)  There is no explanation for why the vet records stated having discussed a surgical **, and yet [redacted] choses to use a TCI instead. The vet records also note that her [redacted] female has a [redacted]. 16)  Any of [redacted]’s stated concerns about not having a teaser female, or the [redacted] quality, number, concentration, motility/morphology are negated by the individual assessments by both vets. 17)  After the **, [redacted] called to say that all went well. That is why it is completely disingenuous to now raise the issues continued in her complaint, implying that there was a problem or deception at the time. Her distortion of the facts is not borne out in the contemporaneous medical records from both the collecting and [redacted] DVMs. 18)  As a successful litter can make the female’s owner many thousands of dollars, the risk of a failed [redacted] does seem to fall disproportionately on the female. But [redacted] chooses to leave out some important details--[redacted] owners make only a modest fee for a [redacted], and have spent many thousands of dollars in training and competitions to obtain the titles and career successes required to be sought after as a [redacted]--and even then, only a small fraction of dogs turn out to be successful. 19)  Causes of in[redacted] with males generally relate to the quality and function of the [redacted]. In this case, the facts are that [redacted] is an experienced highly successful [redacted] male, and his high [redacted] quality was assessed at the time of the [redacted]. Therefore the focus is shifted to factors involving the female. 20)  [redacted] is unwilling to disclose her females [redacted] record/details for reasonable comparison. [redacted] later admits that [redacted] is on antibiotics, but does not stipulate the reason or source of infection. 21)  [redacted]’s collection, producing between 1.5-2 mls of the [redacted] rich fraction is considered by experts to be a normal successful collection. Her statement that [redacted] was sent “without it being analyzed” is also simply false and misleading. The DVM’s assessment, reflected in the medical records on both sides, showed it to be a good collection by standard [redacted] parameters (volume, quantity, concentration, morphology and motility) 22)  [redacted]’s accusations that there was collusion or bad behavior on the part of the vet performing the collection are the same as she raised in the original complaint. This has been addressed by her receiving/[redacted] DVM’s records showing that the 8.5 mls was of good [redacted] concentration and the volume provided is widely considered reasonable for [redacted]s. 23)  We stand behind our written agreement to provide a second collection for a repeat [redacted] attempt. We also maintain our offer that was stated previously, that we would also be happy to refund the $400 deposit if [redacted] is willing to put this disagreement to rest, to include duplicate complaints designed to harass, such as the [redacted] filing. 24)  [redacted] repeatedly has threatened to damage our reputation if we don’t pay her off. We have since learned of other [redacted] owners who have faced similar bad behavior from [redacted] (threatening to harm reputations unless money is paid, Revdex.com complaints, [redacted], etc). Therefore this appears to be a repetitive behavior and speaks to [redacted]’s character and perhaps raises the question of [redacted] issues. 25)  I would seriously caution anyone thinking of doing business with [redacted] to first do their homework and take their due diligence very seriously. As more people learn about her tactics, I predict that she will find it increasing hard to find owners of quality [redacted] dogs willing to work with her.   Despite her disorganized hateful diatribe, I am sincerely sorry that the litter did not take. My business success is predicated on facilitating high quality, and successful [redacted]s. Does [redacted] really think that [redacted] owners are out to take advantage of her? That would be a very short-sighted (and short-lived) business model. We perform some female [redacted]s as well, so I certainly understand the perspective of both sides.   Sincerely yours, [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
1.In her response, she does not discuss her lies and fraudulent actions regarding her [redacted] dogs health clearances.
2. In her response, she does not discuss she put in writing 2 days prior to the collecting of her [redacted]...

dogs [redacted] that she would take in a female dogs of hers in [redacted]. I had a conversation with her
on the phone a few days prior in how a few other breeders in the past had tried to collect [redacted] casually and not with full understanding in how they are to see to it the [redacted] is to be collected properly
with a teaser female dog and with a Repro Specialist. A teaser allows maximum collection and not being done halfway! It was imperative to me that she saw to it there was a teaser female there.
SHE PUT THIS IN WRITING TO ME!! I did not realize this until we had received the [redacted] in and reviewed what was written on the form. I called [redacted]. She ignored answering the question and still
to date ignores answering the question. She is a liar. If she was not going to take a teaser in, then I would've cancelled the breeding, not sent the deposit and found another [redacted] dog elsewhere. She knew this.
The documentation for this will be supplied to the Attorney General when they reach out in the next few weeks for the documentation and evidence to support the facts. We'll see how she squirms out
of the question when under oath when the AG mediates this. Thank you Revdex.com for recommending the Attorney General to me. I will keep you apprised of how this works out so we can finish up this complaint
thru the Revdex.com.
3. My Vet will supply in his words his views on the report received in by your Vet, my condition of my girl to be bred with, the question on [redacted] that the [redacted] makes in order to get ready for breeding, his
explanation on his notations in my [redacted] file for Surgical vs. TCI and why he chose to perform TCI [redacted] that day and also, why he questions many of the line items on the form received with the [redacted]
that was filled out by the Vet from [redacted]'s end. He will add his professional commentary on questioning the sending Vet in not using the machine that he had to analyze and count the [redacted]. This documentation
will be sent to the Attorney General.
4. [redacted] tries to explain that Specialists in Repro feel it is suitable to send [redacted] without it being analyzed and just a visual. My Vet and 4 other qualified Repro Specialists question why he did not
put the [redacted] in the analyzer. A few of these experts will supply written testimonials in why it is important to cover ones own butt in placing the [redacted] in the analyzer, how important you supply information
to the female dogs owner with ALL info before sending it and as well, how important it is to have a teaser female there present at time of collecting.
5. [redacted] never picked up the phone and apologized.
6. She did offer the return of the deposit and along with that more conditions. I felt it was one more run around. If [redacted] had any integrity or character she would've taken in the teaser female dog, when not done she would've
called me for a 'heads up', she would've been honest in her dog NOT being current and up to date on his health clearances as she lied to me about that, she would've looked into the number of [redacted] from her Vet SHE CHOSE
when I asked her multiple times and she would've already sent the deposit back. But instead we go down the road for more head banging. In lue of her lies, not performing and her Vet not performing I seek my deposit back plus
expenses and losses.
7. To breed across the state lines requires both parties being team players. In this case, I showed up to the tennis match and she was at the other side with a racquetball racquet and a set of heels on. Not well equipped for a game of tennis and
certainly not going to be a successful one. She showed up to the party ill equipped. So, with that I am owed in all honesty full restitution.
8. She points out in her response with my doing other breeding's with other [redacted] dog owners that I have a bad reputation in requiring the [redacted] dog owner and their Vet they choose to perform the task
to toe the line. Insulted? Why would I be? I and along with a long list of female dog owners are sick and tired of the [redacted] dog owners 'duping' the female dog owners, we lose money and the [redacted] dog owners pocket
the deposits. We are tired of it!! It turns it into fraud. I am not the only breeder seeking for the Attorney Generals across the US to look into how business is done in the dog world and how unfair it is for the female owner and
how we carry all the risk, lose money and the [redacted] dog owners pocket the deposits. This is long overdue for this level of investigation to get performed in this breeding business.
9. [redacted] is known as a liar. She stands on a high pedestal and doesn't believe anyone sees thru her lies. I have evidence that proves she lied! I just heard thru the dog world that she recently lied to
another breeder about supplying one of her puppies to join a kennel that is known for breeding '[redacted]'. I have that person willing to supply evidence she was well aware one of her pups was going to a
kennel to breed for '[redacted]'. Lying and deceptive.
10. So, Revdex.com I am clearly taking a stand here and desire my full restitution. I will get back to you once the Attorney General has had his mediation with both parties so we can add this information
to this claim and onto Rainforest Coastal Labs file. It shall be interesting to see how her stories change once under oath. Or willing to perjure herself?
Finally, [redacted].....litter is spelled with 2 T's.
Sincerely,
[redacted]