HELP with AKC - Page 15

From DH's commentary on the emails she provided...
Yes, Nando was sent to Kim - von Hayden German Shepherds. But on a stud lease. And lease only. I made it very clear that this dog was not for sale.

It's pretty obvious there were care issues /ownership vs leasing and resulting breeding issues between Daniela and Kim which relate to the dogs Daniela sent to Kim for breeding/and or lease., These issues in all liklihood were indicitave and justifiable as the reasons why Kim indeed believes that she is entitled to and was granted by Daniela partial/and or full ownership of this dog, but that is not the main issue at this point in time.
 
The fact that Daniela is claiming here in writing to own this dog and that she also states within the text of the commentary she provides above, that the dog was provided to Kim on a lease, clearly also dictates that DH as SELF- LISTED yet recorded owner of Nando at the time of these breedings, accordingly "is responsible to sign over ownership on Nando for all Nando breedings which have produced litters with females during the period of said agreed-upon lease." 

Readers might also note on the copied emails Daniela provides above that there is a time gap from February 23rd 2006 to June 10th, 2006 where Kim asks not once but twice that Daniela provide copies of Nando's registration paperwork. She again asks if paperwork will be in order for the Nando breeding to Esie.  Since Daniela claims she is in the position of leasing the dog to Kim, then the lease paperwork should have rightfully been done by DH from the get go when Kim took posession of the dog(s) on the said lease...irreguardless of what has transpired between them since that point in time.  
Kim makes it clear that she is very nervous and unsure how to proceed without this proper document for said lease being in place...and in effect later she is being held for ransome by Daniela.

My intent of my posts in this thread was to expose Daniela for what she is, a person who routinely dupes people out of their money, leaving buyers who routinely do not get their rightfully promised paperwork, or the dog she has promised them that they were purchasing,  or who untimately end up holding the bag with unregisterable litters for any number of variable reasons which are unjustified and/or unsubstantiated by Daniela.. 

I speak from my own experience of this. 
  I venture to put out there that Kim would as well.

The facts are here...
you readers may choose to believe them or not...
but don't say that you haven't been warned that
purchasing a dog from Daniela Huppe constitutes a big red warning of BUYER BEWARE> 

Carolyn and Mark...I truly hope you can get things worked out with Kim for papers on Voxi.  Look closely at the information I included above, about the lease which Daniela claims was in place when Nando was sent to Kim.  The facts preventing you from your female's registration are all contained above, and you only need to proceed in the direction of the source of your problem, which is not Kim, but is Daniela.
If DH was indeed leasing Nando to Kim as she states above, she owes Kim (effectively you)  the signature on ALL the litters which she is preventing Kim from registering at this time.

I wanted to leave an update about the registration papers for all the Nando pups that Kim has been diligently working on obtaining for her clients for so long...

It is now official that she received AKC papers in March for all her puppies, at long last.  
I trust that you have received them from Kim.

 I'm happy that you and all the others were able to obtain your rightful paperwork on the pups you purchased. 
 

Congratulations to you all, I am thrilled for you!!  ... 

Kim,  I never doubted that you would  succeed in providing your AKC paperwork for your puppy clients and you did so with flying colors!
Job WELL DONE for hanging in there as you did!

Jean

Czech DDR Lover