I had a former co owner register a litter online without my written permission and things aren’t good between us due to that and other things.
I called the AKC and was told that they suspend and or fine people for doing this.

I was just wondering if the AKC actually follows through when there is this type of deception?

Below is from the AKC web site stating their policy:

The AKC Board of Directors approved a policy change in July, 2003 to require only one owner of a co-owned dam to submit an application online. The owner submitting the application is required to have written permission of all the co-owners of the dam and be able to support the permission to the AKC upon request.

And why are you looking to stir up trouble about it now?
Did you sign the individual puppy registrations?
What is with people?
I just don't get the nastiness!!

There are plenty of suspended/fined people for this in the back of each issue of the Gazette. I believe it seems to be $500/6mo per occurance is the trend.

What gives you or anyone that I'm trying to stir up trouble? I'm trying to inform myself about the rules.
Did this post hit a nerve Annon Breeder? I want to make sure I don't get taken advantage of again so don't judge unless you know all the specifics please.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

And why are you looking to stir up trouble about it now?
Did you sign the individual puppy registrations?
What is with people?
I just don't get the nastiness!!

No nerve here, but thanks for asking!
Your OP indicated that you are interested in revenge for something that sounds like it's done and over with.
You are calling yourself "Former Co Owner" so by that I would assume all papers have been signed off, including the litter in question?
You did not answer about signing off on the puppies, if you did sign off, why the beef now?
How many dogs did you/do you co own with this person?
Ever registered a litter online that was co owned yourself? Could you be subject to the same spiteful behavior?
Something just seems out of sorts here.

This rule is about the ONLY thing the AKC will do about co-owner problems. It is very strong leverage for you. And yes, they will suspend and fine.

If there is something you are contractually owed from the co-owner, be it money, a puppy, or something else, send a certified letter to that person detailing your requirement, and give them a specific time period to respond, or you will file your complaint with the AKC.

I even have a letter on file from my daughter permitting me to register litters online, and she lives here.

Annon Breeder find someone else to pick a fight with. Please refer to Jill's post at the top of this page. I won't induldge you. I asked a question and you are twisting it all out of proportion. But thank you for your interest.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

No nerve here, but thanks for asking!
Your OP indicated that you are interested in revenge for something that sounds like it's done and over with.
You are calling yourself "Former Co Owner" so by that I would assume all papers have been signed off, including the litter in question?
You did not answer about signing off on the puppies, if you did sign off, why the beef now?
How many dogs did you/do you co own with this person?
Ever registered a litter online that was co owned yourself? Could you be subject to the same spiteful behavior?
Something just seems out of sorts here.

All I asked for was more information.
You asked your question in a manner you thought you'd get the answer you were looking for but there has to be more to it.
Don't come on a public forum asking for advice if you are not willing to answer questions!

I keep hand written letters on file granting permission for me to register all co owned litters online with the akc. I also issued letters of permission from me to other breeders to allow them to register any co owned litter with me. The akc takes this very seriously and Nancy is correct it's the only think the akc can do to help out when ownerships go bad. I see all kinds of people getting fined and suspended for registering a litter without having written permission. You just can't jump online and click away without the other owners permission anymore. This has been enforced for a long time at least 2 or 3 years.

Annon Breeder is out of line on this one and being nasty.

Not being nasty at all. Just really sick of people coming on this forum, airing their dirty laundry and trying to start trouble!

Annon breeder, you are starting trouble, nobody mentioned any names, they just requested information and it's information that others could learn from.

I think it is wrong when a co owner takes it on themselves to register a litter behind the co owners back. Very wrong. There needs to be something done about this. Maybe to not let co owns be registered on line anymore. You have an agreement with who you co own with and they should follow the verbal or written contract. I would contact AKC. If they do this what else will they do ? Your word is you, do you want to keep respect from others or not. Don't think she is nasty at all. Just asking what can you do when you have trusted someone and they don't stand up to their agreements.

Breeder Two: No..... I believe "Co owner no more" is just asking if anyone has had experience with the AKC following up on this "type of deception", not "what can you do when you have trusted someone and they don't stand up to their agreements". Please read the posts correctly.

Not understanding what the issue about registering a litter online (no matter who agreed to what and how) could be!?
Individual puppy registrations NEED ALL co owners actual signatures!
So what if the co owner has applied for online registration? Now all she has are a bunch of UNSIGNED, USELESS papers

Sounds like all is not settled and over since she has not signed off on a litter she co owns that someone tryed to register without her approving it. Sounds like maybe she wishes the actual co own was over.

Now you're reading into it to much
I actually asked that very question in hopes of getting an answer but it was not responded to.
There's 2 sides to every story
Sounds like we're not getting all the info, only what this co owner wants us to hear

Just read the question and don't worry about what it "sounds" like.

As per the question at hand, I know what your talking about, I went thru something similar. I ended up getting a attorney who wrote the other co-owner a letter stating until things were settled, there was too be no registration on the litter, this letter also went to the AKC and it was assigned a case # and that was that. As far as I know the puppies were not registered with AKC because I refused to sign the papers until other co-owner issues were settled.
So, Annon, unless you have gone thru this your self, you don't have room to give advise!

is why even bother register then litter online? You would need to get the co owners signature to even make them AKC reg, so where is the "deception" unless they forged your signature

I'd imagine it helps when you don't have to make 2 or 3 people sign two separate sets of papers in a period of 8 weeks.

What's not been clearly discussed here is that the AKC can and will register a litter or dog even without the co-owner's signature if the registration doesn't disrupt the integrity of the stud book. The AKC won't get involved with co-ownership disputes. It takes some extra time though and a bunch of communication with the AKC.

HOWEVER, the AKC WILL and DOES enforce the rule about having a co-owner's letter on file to do online registrations, just as it investigates, fines and suspends those who forge signatures. The litter and pups may still get registered, but the offending individual will also get fined and/or suspended.

It seems that unscrupulous co-owners find it easy to ignore that little rule and do the online registration on the sly, assuming they won't be called on it. It takes too much time to go through the AKC process, and they want to register and sell the puppies with papers, not wait weeks or months for the process to go through the AKC.

I know of several instances where this happened, and when the co-owner threatened action with the AKC, suddenly all of the co-ownership issues were resolved.

Your right on that one Nancy!

Yes Nancy, you're right except for the part about co owners ignoring the part about written permission.
Regardless of how and where the litter is registered, ALL co owners signatures are still needed to make any registration official. So it would do no good to get the applications knowing the co owners were not going to sign

Annon - AKC can and does register without the co-owner's signature, as I said. If the dispute with the co-owner doesn't have anything to do with the parentage of the puppy/litter, AKC will waive the co-owner's signature requirement. It's not automatic - you have to contact the AKC.

Oh I know that nancy. But the vague part of it is, if they are saying you need written permission to do an online litter application, however they can and will register a litter/individual pups without a co owners signature, they are contradicting themselves aren't they?

On the face it might seem like a contradiction, but really it is not. The AKC only enforces their own rules, and makes exceptions that fit with the mission of maintaining the integrity of the stud book. They don't enforce co-ownership agreements, contracts, etc. That's outside of their mission.

An individual has two choices if the co-owner refuses to sign to register the litter/pups.

One (the high road) is to take their case to the AKC and get them to waive the co-owner signature requirement.

The other (the low road) is to break AKC rules, either by forging a signature or registering online without written permission. If the co-owner files a complaint, the AKC will fine and suspend that individual for breaking AKC rules.

Either way, the litter/pups will probably end up being registered.

So why even bother with a co-own when you can do anything you want without the agreement of the other party?

I do get that Nancy. However my question is, if one co owner is told by the other to go ahead and register the litter as a whole on line, verbally or otherwise (just for argument), and then BOTH co owners proceed to sign off on the individual puppy registrations, as per agreement - Whats to stop one co owner from later "claiming" that the other co owner did not have permission to register on line?
I would think that a signature on actual papers would supersede any later claims of "deception", no?
If not, then I'm betting there are many disgruntled co owners out there who would drudging up old business when they annoyed at someone, right?