Ellen Degeneres under fire for giving away dog

[Mysticchic]

Does anyone know of a place to write to about this. My Mom (who runs a rescue for Bearded Collies) wants to write to someone about this. I told her to write Ellen Show and she said no. She wants to write to someone else (I have no clue who). Any suggestions?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Does anyone know of a place to write to about this. My Mom (who runs a rescue for Bearded Collies) wants to write to someone about this. I told her to write Ellen Show and she said no. She wants to write to someone else (I have no clue who). Any suggestions?

Good question, Mystic. I would say they have a union (it is California after all.). LOL JK

I would think the rescue has to be licensed under state guidelines, but I could be wrong about that. She could write the board who oversees licensing which should be listed under the local government headings such as their city hall for whatever city. I would think a well placed letter in the city's editorial section might be a good idea, too. (I hope Ellen sent in a complaint to the BBB!)

She might call Animal Control for that city and ask them. They would probably know where to send complaints against such businesses.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

SeriouslySearching,
You made me laugh because I couldn't understand why the adoption lady being lesbian had anything to do with this BUT I remembered Ellen is gay. What if the adoption gal is trying to be the tough chic and teach Ellen a lesson for some unknown reason? She definitely is one nasty angry person. I'd never adopt an animal from someone like her, she's too angry. Hope she looses lots of business.

Her business just tanked, imo!!! What an idiot! :bang: You don't make a beloved talk show hostess cry on national tv and walk away unscathed!! (Ask Oprah!)

 

[Glow]

There is always the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law". In this case Ellen upheld the "sprit" of the law. She took the dog paid a lot of money etc...

Only it didn't fit with her current circumstances so she responsibly chose to exercise the "spirit" of the "law" and be responsible for the dog by carefully choosing someone to take her place.

The woman who owns the rescue group has decided to exercise her "rights" and her basis for doing that rests on the "letter" of the law.

It is always better for everyone in real life, when one can grasp the spirit of the law rather then the easier "letter" of the law.

 

[philamena]

Her business just tanked, imo!!! What an idiot! :bang: You don't make a beloved talk show hostess cry on national tv and walk away unscathed!! (Ask Oprah!)

You got that right. I love Ellen and seeing her that upset almost made me cry.

 

[philamena]

There is always the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law". In this case Ellen upheld the "sprit" of the law. She took the dog paid a lot of money etc...
........

:clap: Good post.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

There is always the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law". In this case Ellen upheld the "sprit" of the law. She took the dog paid a lot of money etc...

Only it didn't fit with her current circumstances so she responsibly chose to exercise the "spirit" of the "law" and be responsible for the dog by carefully choosing someone to take her place.

The woman who owns the rescue group has decided to exercise her "rights" and her basis for doing that rests on the "letter" of the law.

It is always better for everyone in real life, when one can grasp the spirit of the law rather then the easier "letter" of the law.

You make a very good point and are so right!!

However, I still think Ellen has a good leg to stand on as far as the "letter" of the law is concerned. If the contract stated that the chip would be put into her name, this would constitute breach of contract on their part prior to the dog's departure for a new home. If there was anything stated about the owner being responsible for neutering and medical care...it would make Ellen the legal owner being she paid for such costs. I can't wait to hear what the "letter" of the law plays out to be in this scenario.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Awwww...the little girl was just on Inside Edition (so was the mom, the hairstylist). She is so sweet and so kind. I didn't realize that Iggy had already bonded with their other dog, too. The owner of the rescue HAS to be one heartless &itch!! GRRRR!

 

[reb]

tangled with Ellen?? She's gonna be sorry she tangled with us, and everyone else!! LOL!

So.. does anyone know, IS there a lawsuit between the family and the b*tch? (sorry-- but sometimes that word is warranted)... I think more than anything this would be beneficial to clarify how these groups whould work.. and warn people of the dangers,, and lack of their rights in such a situation...

SS.. you have a point,, E might actually have a chance of winning... however if it's true the poor dog has been adopted to someone else... now it really gets tricky.

Maybe no matter what the outcome of the lawsuit.. the parents should tell the girls... no matter if we are right or wrong in this... guess what,, heartbreak is a part of life and we don't always get what we want. Lesson learned. But there are many other sweet lovable pooches out there who need a good home... so let's go to the pound (or a LEGITIMATE rescue group with a good reputation!) and adopt another needy pup... and put our own issues aside.
I bet there are hundreds of resuce people right now,, just dying to give them a wonderful new dog.. because they are sympathetic and see they are a loving family.. and also the added benefit of the good publicity for their group..

 

[SadieMae]

Salem, sorry about your experience with the rescue. No way in HELL should BOTH dogs have been adopted to your son!!! If the dogs HAD to be adopted together, they should have KNOWN not a good idea with a infant and a small home for dogs of that size.

I can understand concern for dogs placed, but if adopters passed the initial home visit and their application was fine...then they must be capable of OWNING the dog! There is no need to harrass them. A followup call a month or two later to see how things are working out is sufficient. Some of our adopters stay in contact with our group through our forum board, some we never hear from. Quite a few come back to us to add a 2nd Dane or to adopt again when their dog died. One adopter has 9, and they are all loved and well taken care of.

If this beyotch wanted publicity for adopting one her dogs to Ellen...she sure is getting it! I think this family should sue! I didn't know they already had a dog...so there ya go, they DO know how to care for a dog. I do have one thing against Ellen though. If she knows her cats do NOT get along with dogs, why is she adopting them?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

You know...what you said struck a chord with me, Reb. No matter what happens...the girls should understand the legal system if it is unfair to them. However, I don't feel they are feeling spoiled or indulged being they are the children of a hairstylist that does Ellen's hair. Their mom struggled and is struggling to make ends meet. They aren't the rich...they are the service. They are the loving people who wanted a gift of life from Ellen and who adopted this dog with their hearts. They are in no way the machine that Ellen is a part of.

 

[Leila]

I've followed this in the news and have read through this thread. Everyone has brought up a lot of good points and good stories of personal experiences. I too have rescues, but cats not dogs.

I can see both points of view in this situation. I think it's a good policy that a dog is to be returned to the rescue if it doesn't work out. But, every situation is different and sometimes the rules need to be bent a little. In this particular situation, a good second home was found.

Just from a logical point of view, the rescue group should have seriously considered the hairdresser and her daughters first before demanding the dog back. Had they done an evaluation of the family and found that it was a good home for the dog, what would have been the harm of giving the dog to this family? They could have had the hairdresser fill out the paperwork, sign a contract, and periodically checked with the family to make sure all was okay. The dog would have had a good home, all the adverse publicity would have been avoided, and there would have been no need for all this media attention which will probably destroy the rescue group's business.

Last night on Greta Van Susteran, the attorney for the rescue group was briefly interviewed by Greta. When Greta asked him "why not check out the hairdresser and her daughters and if all is okay, let them adopt the dog?" The attorney responded with, "It isn't going to happen, the dog has already been given to another home." That sort of killed the interview. You could tell from the questions Greta asked that she wasn't happy with the rescue group.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

HELLOOO! Rescue MEANS to place an animal where it is not being abused or neglected. Isn't that the idea?! They rescued the animal from abuse or neglect. DUH. I wonder if the other family paid their fee? I would say they are double dipping, if so. Let's see...pay several hundred to save an animal from horrors...give it to someone you know will love it and give it a great home...then...the shop comes to "regift" it because they lost out on the cash!! Hmmm...doesn't sound real heartfelt in motive to me.

 

[SadieMae]

HELLOOO! Rescue MEANS to place an animal where it is not being abused or neglected. Isn't that the idea?! They rescued the animal from abuse or neglect. DUH. I wonder if the other family paid their fee? I would say they are double dipping, if so. Let's see...pay several hundred to save an animal from horrors...give it to someone you know will love it and give it a great home...then...the shop comes to "regift" it because they lost out on the cash!! Hmmm...doesn't sound real heartfelt in motive to me.

That's what I was thinking too. Did they refund Ellen the money she put into the dog? From their website, they get their dogs from the city pound, probably for nothing since she is a "rescue". Most pound adoptions are rarely over $100 anyway. I got my harl Dane from my pound for a mere $25, and he was already neutered. Her "adoption" fee is outrageous IMO. The Danes I've adopted from rescues were $70, $150 and $175. They were neutered, heartworm negative and up to date on shots when I adopted them. She seems to try to make money on these dogs, definitely not a rescue's main objective! We struggle to pay vet bills, because the adoption fee barely covers what it costs to do the basics, neuter/spay/shots/microchip/heartworm meds for one dog, not even to mention the food to feed a 110-150 lb dog. It costs me $63 per dog for 6mos of heartworm prevention because of their size. We've had 3 dogs in terrible shape who's vet bills were almost $10,000 in one month AND that's with our substantial vet discount! We stay busy with fundraisers...which I'll have a thread on tomorrow to get y'alls votes so we can win $5,000 for the rescue.

 

[Mygirlsadie]

I can't believe they have not given this dog back. Do they even plan on it? What a bunch of crap! Would it of been a lie if Ellen told them when they called and asked how the dog was doing to of just said 'the dog is doing great'!! I mean that's not a lie...the dog was doing great. Too bad Ellen didnt know what was about to happen to poor little Iggy.

 

[SadieMae]

I can't believe they have not given this dog back. Do they even plan on it? What a bunch of crap! Would it of been a lie if Ellen told them when they called and asked how the dog was doing to of just said 'the dog is doing great'!! I mean that's not a lie...the dog was doing great. Too bad Ellen didnt know what was about to happen to poor little Iggy.

I doubt they'll give the dog back because it was adopted to another family already. :furious:

 

[Mygirlsadie]

:clap: YAY to the humane society for speaking out!


A spokesperson from the Pasadena Humane Society and SPCA spoke harshly about "Mutts and Moms" decision to seize a dog originally adopted by Ellen Degeneres after Degeneres found a new home for the dog. The SPCA has no jurisdiction over the private Mutts and Moms dog rescue, but stated, "I doubt very much that we would've taken that animal away."

 

[Mygirlsadie]

Oh so the new family has already been interviewed and 'watched' and just makes the perfect fit for Iggy huh? BOGUS!! This lady supposedly rescues dogs? I don't think so...

I doubt they'll give the dog back because it was adopted to another family already. :furious:

 

[Leila]

HELLOOO! Rescue MEANS to place an animal where it is not being abused or neglected. Isn't that the idea?! They rescued the animal from abuse or neglect. DUH. I wonder if the other family paid their fee? I would say they are double dipping, if so. Let's see...pay several hundred to save an animal from horrors...give it to someone you know will love it and give it a great home...then...the shop comes to "regift" it because they lost out on the cash!! Hmmm...doesn't sound real heartfelt in motive to me.

Excellent point! Ellen paid the rescue group a fee and then paid a vet to neuter the dog and a trainer to train the dog. So Ellen has paid out a lot of money to begin with. Then, when she gifted the dog to someone who would give it a good home, the rescue group lost out on a fee being paid. The rescue group took the dog back and evidently immediately placed the dog with another family. If this last family paid the rescue group a fee, then the rescue group is double-dipping.

Usually when you take an animal to the vet to be neutered, you have to sign papers as the owner of the animal to have the surgery done. If Ellen were to fight this legally, it comes down to which carries the most weight in determining ownership - the name on the micro-chip or the signature on papers as the owner authorizing a surgical procedure to be done. I've never paid someone to train a dog, but I would imagine the dog's owner would have to sign a contract with the trainer too, which is another proof of ownership.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Ellen has more than enough ammo against the...uhm...well...let me call her the notsoniceIdon'tlikeheratall person.