Collecting Puppy At 6 Weeks Old

In law, the seller has to return the deposit if she has not fulfilled her part of the contract. Easily said. But you can contact your local Trading standards for advice. But you can also threaten to report her to the Kennel club for breach of contract and parting the pups from their mother too early. That might make her sit up and take notice.

Kennel Club insurance will not cover you for anything. My sister in law bought a pup from a very good breeder and it turned out he had in-growing teeth that had to be removed at 12 weeks and then some adult teeth had to be removed when they came in. It cost her £2,000 and the KC insurance claimed it was pre-existing because the pup was born with the problem and would not pay. In this instance, the breeder offered to take the puppy back but she kept him and paid out.

I still advise you to leave well alone and find a pup from a responsible breeder that is the right age and well socialised. If you are really determined to have this pup, insist that you cannot take her before the 18th July when she will be 8 weeks old. Make any excuse you think is realistic or tell her the truth, that you are not prepared to accept a puppy that is too young to leave its mother. Whatever you decide, you have a hard decision to make. You must use your head and not your heart. It is worth remembering however that taking on this pup at 6 weeks could land you with 15 years of a problem dog, possible huge health costs and no end of issues to deal with. Are you in the position to pay out large vets bills if you find out that there are serious health issues. even if you do not get your deposit back which legally you should, £200 is a drop in the ocean where the lifetime costs of keeping a dog in good health are concerned.

If you do go ahead, I strongly advise you to get your own insurance and do not have the KC puppy insurance and not to take her on untill your own insurance is in place and you are sure that you are properly covered.

Sorry I cannot offer you encouragement to proceed.

Not sure why she want you to take her so early i can imagine only so she can have the money :blink: but this is why it is as much vital to vet your potential breeder as well as them vetting the puppies new owners,tbh as hard as it would be i would walk away and find a breeder with a higher degree of welfare for their dogs 6 weeks is too early imo in the last 2 weeks they learn so much both from the mother and litter mates and their surroundings and i would be very wary taking a pup on i am not saying it cannot work it is just my opinon good luck with whatever you decide :thumbsup:

Sorry I cannot offer any positive help, only another negative - my first ever whippet was kept in a stable, and til the day she died at 18, she never coould be housetrained.I agree with all the other advise, NO puppy should leave at 6 wweeks, unless exceptional circumstances,ie mum dies.Good luck with whatever you decide to do

40+ years ago, when I had my firt litter, 6 weeks was when pups went to their new homes. And I recall people grizzling when I wanted to run on couple of pups to decide on my keeper, and told the people who were waiting on the other one, they have to wait for another few weeks. They believed they will not be able to bond properly with 9 weeks old puppy.

Is this breeder an old lady? Some old people find it difficult to change the way they do things. That by itself does not mean that the puppy is not well reared.

I wonder what people mean by the term "reared in the house". Nobody in their right mind would have litter of pups, especially a large litter, to run loose all over their house all day long. I do have my pups born in the house, they sleep in the house, but once they start moving and pooing around, they go out, weather permitting , in daytime.

Is it possible that the pups are in the house, but go out at daytime? Surely, it is much preferable at this age, for pups to be outside during the day, playing in the sun and having a stable for shelter, than being kept in small pen inside the house? The crucial point whether the breeder spends most of the day inside or outside; that is how much human contact the pups have from birth till they go. If they did not have much contact, sooner they go to their new home the better.

On the face of it this breeder does sound bit iffy, but of-course, there may be some personal reason why this breeder needs the pups gone sooner than normally.

Frankly, to me all breeders who advertise their pups as coming with all sort of merchandise, sound iffy, or at least crass. They are offering a "deal"; as far as I am concerned if a person shops for pups to get the best deal, I do not want them to have one of mine. Blanket with the smells of their old home is really all that pup needs. Although, I always give the buyer few days supply of the kibble I am feeding at that moment.

If the pups look fat and healthy, with bright clear eyes and soft silky coats, I would just take her. And put the question "at what age can we have the pup" on your list for getting the next one

just make sure you keep the emails where the breeder is telling you all what you get with the puppy.

:luck: :luck: :luck: :luck: :luck: :luck: :luck:

The fact remains that this breeder has not reared the pups in the way she said she would.

The vet check is importiant. Has the breeder had the pups wormed?

If you decide to proceed, I would advise that you have a proper insurance policy in place (Not KC) and that you have a written agreement that the pup can be returned if any existing health defects are found by your vet prior to the pups 1st vaccination at 8 weeks. Tell her you require this from her when you make payment as the vet check has not yet been done

Two possible delaying tactics : Your existing dog could transmit a canine desease to your pup and it will be two weeks before the 1st inocculation which extends the risk peroid. OR You will not take the pup untill the KC papers are ready to go with it. She will not have these yet.

Despite the last advice, this breeder sounds 'Iffy' and her dogs could carry some congenital problem or defect which may explain why she is not having them vet checked. 3 of my rescue whippets have heart murmers AND they are all KC registered.

Hard decision to make, I would wlak away but it is easy for me to say :luck:

I meant to add with regard to the post before mine, that one reason pups are kept with mum till 8 weeks nowadays is because mum provides antibodies that protect the pups. Because pups are vaccinated at 8 weeks this lessens the risk of the pup being infectied with a disease during 2 weeks away from Mum's milk. Puppy mortality is much lower these days and the policy of keeping pups with Mum till 8 weeks is probably a big factor in this.

Re. the posts above ... not all breeders have their pups vet checked before they come to you, some prefer you to arrange the check with your own vet ... you're probably going to do this anyway and one less trip to the vet in the early weeks is probably a good idea. What a responsible breeder will do is accept that if the vet check throws up a problem the pup is returned.

I wouldn't worry too much about heart murmurs either, poor Eve's is a very unusual situation. But do be aware that some vets who don't specialise in running dogs will think they hear a heart murmur in a whippet where there isn't one. A whippets heart is built to pump a lot of blood when running flat out and at rest can sound decidely iffy. If your vet ever does suspect a murmur get a second opinion from a specialist, preferably based on more than just auscultation (listening through a stethoscope), before you assume that your dog has a problem.

All that said I would still think that on this occasion your motto should perhaps be if in doubt don't. Sorry, I know how disappointed you will be, but maybe better that than a pup you struggle with.

If the pup has had it's dew claws removed then it would be checked over by the vet at that time . If it hasn't had it's dew claws removed then why not ? If it has had its dew claws removed but not by a vet , why ?

A lot of experienced breeders don't take pups to the vet for dewclaw removal Alison ... done the right way at the right time it is very straightforward.

Annie , it's the equivalent of having your thumb removed and should always be done by a vet :blink:

I agree with all the excellent advice given and do not think it right to let the pup leave mum at 6 weeks. Has the breeder actually given any reason as to why she wants it to go so early?

I do remember times many, many years ago when it was perfectly normal for pups to go to their new homes at 6 weeks. A lot has changed and we have far more knowledge nowadays.

But I do know if it was me and I had seen the pup and decided on having it that I would find it very difficult to change my mind and walk away. My heart would rule my head. :- :- I would also be thinking that if I didn't take the pup, where will it end up. At least with the OP it will have the proper care it needs, rather than ending up in the wrong hands and be a rescue dog in the future.

A very difficult situation and I hope you make the right decision for you and your circumstances. :luck: :luck:

Hula said:

Annie, it's the equivalent of having your thumb removed and should always be done by a vet :blink:

Click to expand...

Alison, I know, but it very often isn't ... I could never do it myself, but I have seen it done three times, twice beautifully and far less stressfully than if the pups had been dragged off to a vets surgery ... suckling pups were on and off the teat before they knew it, barely squeaked and were liberally iodined or whatever and sterile surgical scissors used.

I tried to edit my post to add a bit but couldn't .

We had Bobby, our Collie X, at a very young age. He was handed in to the vet by a well-meaning social worker who had visited a house and was concerned the family weren't coping. He was barely weaned (probably 4 weeks old). I fostered him, and ended up keeping him :- and he is now 11 years old. He has always been very fit and healthy and rarely needed to see a vet. He does have issues with fireworks, thunder, gunshot etc and we will never know if his early removal from mum had any bearing on this.

Would the puppy cope okay in the long run - probably yes

Should the breeder be insisting you collect the puppy at 6 weeks - most definitely not

The earliest we let our puppies go is a couple of days before they are 8 weeks old if it happens that the date corresponds with a convenient time for the new owner to collect. We would never dream of insisting that they had to pick the puppy up on a certain day, never mind when a pup was only 6 weeks old.

It is a big deal for a little puppy to leave his mum and litter mates and to go off to his new family. Therefore, the collection day should be tailored to suit the new family and the arrangements they have in place for the settling in period. Yes, several of our current litter will be collected by their new owners as soon as the 8 week mark comes up, but several others are staying an extra week or two until the perfect time comes for their new owner to collect them. For example, we have one puppy staying on an extra couple of weeks until his new owner returns from their annual holiday. My point is, a good breeder shouldn't be wanting the pups out of the door at the earliest opportunity.

Yes, by 6 weeks, a litter is hard work and you do start to look forward to the day that they all start to leave home! However, this is something a breeder should be aware of when they take on the huge responsibility of breeding a litter. Welfare of the pups and allowing them the best start with their new families is the most important thing.

It annoys me greatly when i hear stories like this. We are prepared to bend over backwards to accomodate the new owners and fit in with them with regards collecting their puppies. However, this is no hardship or chore as we ensure that the pups all have excellent homes to go to. It is worth putting the effort in to make sure they get the best.

Incidentally i also don't agree with this demanding of large deposits up front.

I had someone contact me about one of Ruby's litter just after they were all born. We'd got homes for all of ours but this lady told me that she'd enquired about another litter and the breeder had insisted on £200 to be sent immediately in order to book a puppy. With the timing - i bet it's the same person you've booked your puppy from. I told the lady it wasn't on and she's now waiting for a puppy from a reputable breeder instead. If you thoroughly vet your owners and know that you're happy with the home and that they're genuine - there should be absolutely no need to be insisting on deposits. You soon get a feel for whether someone is committed to having one of the puppies or not. We do not take deposits.

If i were you i'd phone the breeder - tell them that you do not feel that it is acceptable for you to be collecting a puppy at just 6 weeks old and that it is not normal practice. Say for this reason, you want your deposit back.

Good post Jo, There should be no need for a deposit, after all if the new owner has misgivings for whatever reason I wouldnt want them to have a puppy anyway. id much rather hold on until the right home came up

jayp said:

Good post Jo, There should be no need for a deposit, after all if the new owner has misgivings for whatever reason I wouldnt want them to have a puppy anyway. id much rather hold on until the right home came up

Click to expand...

I certainly agree with that.

I never take deposits for exactly that reason; I would n ever want anybody to take my puppy just because they already paid a deposit. And it has another advantage; if by any chance i realise later on that the buyer was not quite as suitable owner as they presented themselves, I can tell them that they are not getting the pup. And if I had not taken deposit, there is nothing much they can do. Solicitor once told me that if I accept a deposit the dog is legally theirs and can insist on having him.

I collected my lurcher pup at just 42 days old on 22nd December last year. I'd never taken a pup under 9 weeks before and was very concerned about his welfare. When I chose him at 3 weeks he was looking well and plump like he should be. When we collected him he was quite thin and had not been getting his fair share of the food the breeder was putting out for the pups.

I started him on a dried puppy food with Spillers puppy milk, 3 meals a day - 6am, 11.30am and 6pm. He thrived and is now a very healthy 7 months old, well grown for his age/breed. I bought him a fleece kennel dog bed that he could get right inside with a giant rabbit toy (bigger than him) to cuddle up to and he was fine.

6 weeks is too young but I'm glad I didn't leave him there any longer to become more under nourished.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

eve said:

I meant to add with regard to the post before mine, that one reason pups are kept with mum till 8 weeks nowadays is because mum provides antibodies that protect the pups. Because pups are vaccinated at 8 weeks this lessens the risk of the pup being infectied with a disease during 2 weeks away from Mum's milk. Puppy mortality is much lower these days and the policy of keeping pups with Mum till 8 weeks is probably a big factor in this.

Click to expand...

Pups get their immuninity from their mum in the first day or so after birth. In any case many breeders nowadays wean their pups completely long time before they are 8 weeks old. I allow my bitches to suckle their pups as long as they want to; but most stop by 6 weeks. I do agree, it is better to keep pups with their mum and sibling till at least 8 weeks, actually I tell people they can collect mine at 9 - 10 weeks, but that is not the question here.

The question is whether taking pup at 6 weeks will have serious implication for the OP. The only one I can see is the insurance.

As i already said; it really is not so dificult to examine a puppy. The only thing that vet can do, which most of us cannot, is to listen to the heart, but that does not guarantee that the pup does not have a heart problem. Some heart problems cannot be diagnosed by an ordinary vet just by listening with stethoscope, and as others said vets often misdiagnose heart murmur in Whippets as they are not familiar with the breed.

Seraphina said:

eve said:

I meant to add with regard to the post before mine, that one reason pups are kept with mum till 8 weeks nowadays is because mum provides antibodies that protect the pups. Because pups are vaccinated at 8 weeks this lessens the risk of the pup being infectied with a disease during 2 weeks away from Mum's milk. Puppy mortality is much lower these days and the policy of keeping pups with Mum till 8 weeks is probably a big factor in this.

Click to expand...

Pups get their immuninity from their mum in the first day or so after birth. In any case many breeders nowadays wean their pups completely long time before they are 8 weeks old. I allow my bitches to suckle their pups as long as they want to; but most stop by 6 weeks. I do agree, it is better to keep pups with their mum and sibling till at least 8 weeks, actually I tell people they can collect mine at 9 - 10 weeks, but that is not the question here.

The question is whether taking pup at 6 weeks will have serious implication for the OP. The only one I can see is the insurance.

As i already said; it really is not so dificult to examine a puppy. The only thing that vet can do, which most of us cannot, is to listen to the heart, but that does not guarantee that the pup does not have a heart problem. Some heart problems cannot be diagnosed by an ordinary vet just by listening with stethoscope, and as others said vets often misdiagnose heart murmur in Whippets as they are not familiar with the breed.

Click to expand...

spot on.

I agree 6wks is too early, however i took ownership of a pup just under 7wks old. She suffered no ill effects at all and fitted in with my other dogs no problem. There may be reasons why things have changed with the breeder, if it were me i'd call her and have a chat, the breeder may infact be quite happy to hold onto the pup for another week or two. She/he may be quite willing to put your mind at rest and answer your questions/concerns.

As someone said earlier, there is an insurance company that will cover the pup from 6wks old. I personally have never had a problem with the KC insurance and have had a claim or two paid out no questions asked.

I have always taken my pup to my vet for a health check/vaccination as soon as i have got them anyway so wouldnt matter to me if breeder hadnt done this already.

I, like others have said, couldnt walk away from the pup i'd chosen. once the bonding process has begun for me thats it. I couldnt live with myself not knowing where the little mite had ended up. I do however understand what others are saying in that i/you would be funding the 'dodgy' breeder. To me the pups welfare would be paramount and if things were bad i'd want the little one out of there. Its no different to 'rescuing' and paying for a dog/pup etc off one of 'those' websites where they advertise them as 'ideal mothers' and 'ready for mating'

I really do wish you all the best, make sure you are happy with what you decide to do and follow your instincts. Please talk to the said breeder, things can so easily be misconstrued over email etc. :luck: :luck: :luck: :luck:

maggiemay2 said:

Its no different to 'rescuing' and paying for a dog/pup etc off one of 'those' websites where they advertise them as 'ideal mothers' and 'ready for mating'

Click to expand...

There is currently a whippet bitch for sale on a well-known site (due to ill-health) but it says she has already had 2 litters of 9 and 10 and is a wonderful mother. :- Also an Italian Greyhound bitch has had pups in past, due in season next month. Very sad and one wonders where these may end up.