- Report: #916487
Complaint Review: NORTH COUNTRY MUDDIGGER BULLDOGGES
| NORTH COUNTRY MUDDIGGER BULLDOGGES PO BOX 834 DERBY VT 05829
DERBY, Vermont United States of America |
|
NORTH COUNTRY MUDDIGGER BULLDOGGES KIM & TODD GRAY DEAF PUPPY DERBY, Vermont
*General Comment: Information is important
*General Comment: NOt Right
*General Comment: Emotions
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 07/24/2012 06:44 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/NORTH-COUNTRY-MUDDIGGER-BULLDOGGES/DERBY-Vermont-05829/NORTH-COUNTRY-MUDDIGGER-BULLDOGGES-KIM-TODD-GRAY-DEAF-PUPPY-DERBY-Vermont-916487. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on NORTH COUNTRY MUDDIGGER BULLDOGGES
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
Search Tips#1 General Comment
Information is important
AUTHOR: jock - (USA)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, January 03, 2013
The breeder and the buyer reached a resolution in this case. I witnessed the agreement. The situation was a miscommunication. It was extremely unfortunale. This is what prompted the "Emotions" posting.
Research suggests that training is possible for a deaf dog. The seller did offer to make the buyer happy. The buyer did not follow through in this case. The original report was misleading.
I am not the buyer or seller. The original post is misleading and contains distortions of fact. These sellers tried to resolve the issues and make the buyer happy.
#2 General Comment
NOt Right
AUTHOR: Lisa - (United States of America)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, January 03, 2013
#3 General Comment
Emotions
AUTHOR: jock - (United States of America)
SUBMITTED: Friday, November 16, 2012
This is fueled by advise from bystanders who freely offer their opinion for better or worse. Based on this advise, the consumer takes every thing that happens as evidence that a seller is bad or evil. This may lead to a totally skewed position.
My suggestion is that buyers and seller focus on their interests and avoid villification of the other person. Villification interferes with resolving the problem because it adds a personal dimension that muddys the resolution process. The first thing to do is to step back. Remember there is nothing perfect in this world. If you feel angry, try to avoid attacking.
No one likes to feel attacked. Feeling attacked often leads to counter-attack. This attack strategy goes on in many situations and leads to broken lines of communication. I understand that it is tempting to attack and blame- we are human; however, we must ask ourselves if this is the best strategy that will help us resolve the problem.
Often times people write about a situation without consideration of their contributions to it. In this case, I believe that the sellers acted in good faith to correct the problem. It sounds like the buyers attachment to the dog and imagination about what would happen to the deaf dog contributed to the problem because it created some mixed feelings for them.
I would buy a dog from these sellers. I would be clear about the breed of dog and why I wanted the dog. I would make a clear written agreement about the sale and any terms that would relate to an exchange or refund that were conditional to the purchase prior to the transaction.

