[tailtickle]

Please could someone explain why a Breeder would charge more for a Pedigree Puppy to have "Papers" and less if "no papers"?

I'm confused by this. If someone is purchasing a Pedigree Puppy, surely the 'Papers' should not be an option?

Thanks,
tailtickle x

 

[Guest]

Please could someone explain why a Breeder would charge more for a Pedigree Puppy to have "Papers" and less if "no papers"?

I'm confused by this. If someone is purchasing a Pedigree Puppy, surely the 'Papers' should not be an option?

Thanks,
tailtickle x

That sounds like a very dodgy breeder.

My understanding is a pedigree dog is one where both parents are the same, recognised breed. A dog can still be pedigree without papers - it just means that the dog isn't registered with the KC. Of course, this makes it easy for people to pass dogs off as pedigree when they aren't, as there's no official documentation.

It cost very little to register a litter with the KC so breeders who charge more for KC registration are usually not ethical!

 

[Dogless]

I wouldn't go near a breeder who did that. Smacks of money making tactics to me. A decent breeder would register the whole litter and charge the same price for all of them as far as I'm concerned, complete with 'papers'.

 

[tailtickle]

Thanks McKenzie for your response. I must say the whole thing sounds odd to me. Hoped there might be a reasonable explanation for this.

If the puppies have Papers (hence the option) why would the Breeder choose to with-hold, and not expect they are automatically included with the Puppy?

Could it be a means to add to the price, which does not seem correct.

Even if the Puppies are not registered with the KC, wouldn't they have Pedigree Papers anyway, but the new Owners informed that they are unregistered. At least then the Owners (if they want to) perhaps could register their Puppy, or equally be able to look into their Puppy's ancestry.

tailtickle x

 

[tailtickle]

Thanks Dogless, just noted your reply too.


tailtickle x

 

[Dogless]

Thanks McKenzie for your response. I must say the whole thing sounds odd to me. Hoped there might be a reasonable explanation for this.

If the puppies have Papers (hence the option) why would the Breeder choose to with-hold, and not expect they are automatically included with the Puppy?

Could it be a means to add to the price, which does not seem correct.

Even if the Puppies are not registered with the KC, wouldn't they have Pedigree Papers anyway, but the new Owners informed that they are unregistered. At least then the Owners (if they want to) perhaps could register their Puppy, or equally be able to look into their Puppy's ancestry.

tailtickle x

Only the breeder can register the puppies as far as I am aware. I assume that the owners would have looked into their pup's pedigree before buying for health tests etc anyway? Seems a bit late after purchase.

 

[tailtickle]

Hi Dogless, Yes, thinking about it, I believe that is correct. An Owner could only register an individual dog without being able to include ancestry.

Hoping the Owner did do their 'homework' before proceeding, but now would be hesitant to cause new Owners any alarm!


Just wanted to try and understand the reasoning myself.


tailtickle x

 

[Dogless]

Hi Dogless, Yes, thinking about it, I believe that is correct. An Owner could only register an individual dog without being able to include ancestry.

Hoping the Owner did do their 'homework' before proceeding, but now would be hesitant to cause new Owners any alarm!

Just wanted to try and understand the reasoning myself.

tailtickle x

I don't believe an owner can register an individual dog either - pretty sure it has to be the breeder still.

 

[Dizzy Grace]

Is the reluctance to register a litter down to wanting to breed more than allowed by KC? So in their eyes to register this litter means they will lose money as they won't be able to register next?

Idk, just seems to me that if you're eligible to register the litter it should be registered. The KC rules are there to protect the bitch from unethical money making breeders.

 

[PennyGC]

Hi Dogless, Yes, thinking about it, I believe that is correct. An Owner could only register an individual dog without being able to include ancestry.

Hoping the Owner did do their 'homework' before proceeding, but now would be hesitant to cause new Owners any alarm!

Just wanted to try and understand the reasoning myself.

tailtickle x

Only the breeder can register the pups they breed... pedigree 'papers' are a pedigree (list of ancestors) AND the KC registration documents. Individual dogs cannot be registered on the KC breed register unless they're border collies who are ISDS registered or have ISDS registered parents (and these can be KC registered either by the breeder or by the owner... or the new route of health tests and assessment by a Championship Judge and higher fee.

There is no reasoning in selling half the pups in a litter with KC registration and half not, it's not expensive and good breeders will register the whole litter and sell the pups with 'papers' - ie KC registration. Any 'breeder' who doesn't should be avoided. There are reasons for selling unregistered pups ( a lot of fantastic 'working sheepdogs' or border collies (not KC registered) are bred and sold without KC registration

New owners can register their dogs on the KC working or pet register, but anyone can do this as long as they're not eligible for the breed register.

 

[2Hounds]

I always think those breeders are dodgy

I don't believe an owner can register an individual dog either - pretty sure it has to be the breeder still.

It is possible with racing bred greyhounds to register with KC at a later date, they are ear marked & registered with the greyhound studbooks rather than KC so pedigree is traceable.

 

[dandogman]

I think it only costs like £12 or similar, so I don't know why a breeder would only register half... doesn't make sense!

 

[Sleeping_Lion]

It currently costs £15 per pup to register, here's the KC link to FAQ's for registering a litter, and it is only the breeder who can register them onto the breed register, as has been said. Registering them onto the activity register isn't the same thing.

FAQs - Puppy Litter Registration - The Kennel Club

There is no good reason not to register pups, it's simply laziness, greed, or some ulterior motive that involves greed.

 

[Izzysmummy]

I wouldn't touch this type of breeder with a barge pole personally. I would also be dubious as to what "papers" actually come with these pups. I'm sure I've seen people come on the forum with a dog with "papers" that is actually registration with a fake pedigree club rather than official kennel club registration?!