Dog owner loses fight to force breeder to refund euthanised puppy

A Queensland man has lost his legal battle to force a puppy breeder to refund him $11,000 for his baby bulldog – after it had already been euthanised.

A Queensland man failed in his bid to force a breeder to refund his deceased dog and pay its vet bills.

A Queensland man has lost his legal battle to force a puppy breeder to refund him $11,000 for his baby bulldog – after it had already been euthanised.

Benjamin John Stanton, from the Brisbane suburb of Manly, took British bulldog breeder Kerri Ann Palmer, trading as KJR Bulldogs, to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal to ask for his money back.

Mr Stanton claimed he paid $5000 for the female puppy on July 25, 2021 but that within 10 months he learned she had a hereditary knee problem known as “luxating patellas” and breathing difficulties which would potentially require surgery.

But before he could have the kneecaps and possible Brachycephalic Obstructive Airway Syndrome surgically corrected, the puppy was euthanased in May 2022 because she had a painful bowel obstruction.

Mr Stanton told the tribunal that he took the puppy to the Redlands Veterinary Clinic in May 2022 after he noticed she “wasn’t really being able to walk … her back legs weren’t working”.

A report from the Redlands Veterinary Clinic stated that the dog may need corrective airway surgery in the future, confirmed bilateral patella luxation, said there was a reduced range of movement in her hips, spinal pain; pathology in the middle section of her spine, the decision states.

The case was first heard in September 2022 and Mr Stanton’s claim seeking $11,000 from Ms Palmer was dismissed by the adjudicator because the primary reason for the vet treatment and then euthanasia was bowel obstruction and not a hereditary condition.

The bowel obstruction was not covered by the KJR Bulldogs puppy guarantee, the tribunal concluded.

The guarantee was for “all life altering ‘hereditary’ defects excluding hip and elbow dysphasia”.

For Mr Stanton to claim on the guarantee for the luxating patellas issue he was required to notify Mrs Palmer of the issues and give her a vet report, but this could not be done because the dog was put down shortly after it was assessed by the vet.

Mrs Palmer had offered Mr Stanton to refund half the purchase price or give him another dog, but Mr Stanton rejected this and took his case to the tribunal instead.

Mrs Palmer did not get an opportunity to have the dog examined independently.

The $11,000 he sought included the $5000 purchase price and $6000 in vet bills.

He sought leave to appeal and in a decision handed down on March 19, QCAT Member Richard Oliver declined to allow Mr Stanton to appeal stating the adjudicator had not made a mistake.