Lane Shepherds is a crook - Page 3

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Red Sable

by Red Sable on 31 July 2011 - 22:07


by Dhaines on 01 August 2011 - 00:08

Try not to feel bad, you went into it with good intentions. A crook will take advantage of that. I'm so sorry for you, but I hate to say, it makes me feel like getting a mutt for $850 from a police officer seems like a bargain compared to what you went through. I wish you the best and keep warning people away from that piece of dog crap!

by Ibrahim on 01 August 2011 - 00:08

Thanks Red Sable

by Paul15 on 01 August 2011 - 01:08

Any breed standard on the website?? I am pretty sure GSDs over 100 pounds and bred to be that way may not be considered GSDs by the standard. If they are over 65cm at the withers for a male or 60cm for a female, they are not within the FCI standard.

Stumpywop

by Stumpywop on 01 August 2011 - 13:08

Thanx for the heads up on this breeder. A friend of mine who lives in Utah i alooking for a breeder of large, straight/square backed GSDs, just like my oldest GSD, Zane. She's prepared to travel to other countries for what she wants and she had started by looking in teh UK first, thinking it would be easier to locate what she wanted.

She hasn't managed this so she's looking around the US and I know that Lanes Shepherds was one of the breeders she mentioned. Firstly, yes it's nice to have a very big GSD at your side but if tehy are so oversized (as my boy is) then surely they cannot be shown if they are over the breed standard? Also, I will show her this thread for sure (or rather, e-mail her the link) so she's aware of what she may be getting into.

having said that, she is the sort of person who would want to visit the kennels first, who would want to see the pups, who would pay by post dated cheque, credit card or some other method meaning she'd be covered under such circumstances etc. She's been caught out and fraudulently ripped off before. She won't allow it to happen to her twice.

To the OP - you are not stupid. it's so easy for any of us to believe peopel we have reason to beleive are telling us the truth. Don't beat yourself up about it. The scum who STOLE your money should be doing that!

by Duderino on 01 August 2011 - 13:08

It is no longer legal to pay for purchases or debts with post dated checks.

Red Sable

by Red Sable on 01 August 2011 - 13:08

Really Dude, is that a States thing?  I know people that do it all the time. (Canada)

by Donald Deluxe on 01 August 2011 - 15:08

"It is no longer legal to pay for purchases or debts with post dated checks."

Not true.  Still perfectly legal unless the underlying intent in post-dating the check was to defraud rather than to await funds to deposit that would make the check good. 

by Duderino on 01 August 2011 - 17:08

I stand corrected.  My mistake, I remember a conversation I had with my brother who at the time was a 32 year veteran of a local police department who also happened to specialize in financial crimes.  The problem lies with how you will prove that a person "intended" to defraud you on day 1 after the date on the check.  Don't even try and cash it before the date because the courts will not pursue the "bad check" laws when a check bounces because of "premature" depositing.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/postdated-checks.html 

It's just a bad practice for both parties involved.

Slamdunc

by Slamdunc on 01 August 2011 - 17:08

Funny how laneshepherds was on this site yesterday and never commented on this thread?   I guess he couldn't be bothered to defend himself?????





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top