# Wacky cat buyer. Freaked out SMALL cattery owner. HELP!



## Sereena (Mar 5, 2005)

I hope someone from this forum can give me some info ASAP. I run a small cattery and I recently sold a kitten to some people who came in from out of state (they put the kitten on reserve). Anyway, they came and took the kitten (under some additionally odd circumstances) and several days later they called wanting me address to send me payment. I called back and provided my address. Now, today, about a week later I hear from them again and they tell me that they took the kitten to the vet and it had the following problems: Ear mites, fleas, a resp infection, and worms and the vet told them it was only four weeks old. They also stated that the kitten refused to eat anything for the first couple or several days that they had it. Moreover, the vet reportedly told them that the kitten had never been vaccinated. They claimed that the vet gave the kitten a blood test, which confirmed that the kitten had never been vaccinated. Now I am really very confused. That kitten was seven weeks old -- I'm 100% positive. That kitten had been weaned for a week here and it had been eating Iams kitten chow like a little piglet -- no problems. That kitten received it's first basic 4-way vaccine. That kitten had been dewormed. What the heck is going on? I can buy the idea of ear mites and fleas as it's always possible that I messed up and missed that because a lot was going on when I sold that kitten and I had brought in some rescue puppies the week prior -- so although I did not see fleas or knowingly sell a kitten with fleas (of ear mites for that matter), it is possible (very possible as another litter mate apparently had fleas and ear mites). A resp infection could have been the result, possibly a combo result from the recent new vaccine that had been given and the move into a stressful home environment -- it now seems that these buyers are a little wacky. However, four weeks old, NO and a bloodtest which proves that no vaccine was given -- impossible, right? I don't get it. The full sister to this kitten went to another home and she too unfortunately had ear mites and fleas, but other than that the vet said she was healthy and there were no reports from those people of the kitten being only four weeks old or no vaccine having been given. I am definitely going to tighten my methods here to deal with any and all fleas and ear mites. I will NEVER take in any rescue puppies ever again!!!!! I really have never had these kinds of problem or had anyone complain before. Anyhow, Does anyone on this forum have any information about the potential situation here? Has anyone ever heard of a similar story? I'm really pretty freaked out because I have always done the best that I could to keep my cats healthy and my clients satisfied and this episode is something right out ot the Twilight Zone to me.


----------



## Melissaandcats (Aug 18, 2004)

7 weeks is too young to be given away, isn't it???????
The rest i am not sure. I'd suggest bringing the kittens into a vet, getting all their paperwork of what has been done for shots, having been checked for mites, etc.. and giving that to the adoption owners. Did you give papers to the owners previously to this happening?
But i do believe, and i am sure someone else will post that kittens are not ready to leave the mother before 12 weeks..
I also suggest getting the rest of the animals you have to a vet, because if two had ear mites, fleas and worms, i am sure the rest will too. 
Good Luck!


----------



## Celeste_Eden (Jan 18, 2005)

i agree, in the future, i'd wait until the kittens are at least 12 weeks old and have been eating cat food for at least 3-4 weeks. i know that birds that are sold too soon after being weaned can revert to a baby like state, being forced into a new, scary environment, they will beg to be hand fed formula because it's familiar and comforting and reminds them of "mom"

also, i would keep a record of every kitten you sell, documenting all the shots they've had, their birthday, and have been given a clean bill of health from the vet before being sold. give a copy to the people who buy the kitten, and keep a copy for your own records.


----------



## OsnobunnieO (Jun 28, 2004)

I agree that kittens should wait until 12 weeks to leave the mother as well, but that isn't the issue here (but good to keep in mind!)

Don't beat yourself up. If it hasn't happened before, chances are these people are just trying to be a pain.

You said they had fleas and earmites. At this point, they had been gone from your home over a week (so around two weeks?) This is plenty of time for them to pick up fleas (heck, a DAY is enough) and earmites are a very common problem in young cats and dogs. Its also easy to treat as well. This also could have come from the new home... especially if it were around other pets.

The respiratory infection, again, could have come from home... could have been stress related... anywhere. Not to mention this is what the vet told them... not what the vet told you. For all you know they could be making it all up. Not to say it isn't possible... but you know.

Now the main problems I see here are the age difference between what you told them and they vet told them, and the issue with vaccines. First, was the kitten smaller than the rest of the litter? Small litter in general? Its possible the vet is mistaken. If YOU know the age of your kittens and can document it, that's not really up for dispute. (this is also where proper paperwork for EVERYTHING you have done to your litters should be kept and sent with new families in the future).

As for the blood testing for vaccines... this is tricky. There's a test for titers in the blood that detects antibodies for certain diseases. This is a good way of telling if an animal needs to be vaccinated again or if they antibodies are still present (an example - many vets are now saying yearly vaccines aren't needed and can go 3 years between shots... some say puppy/kitten shots are enough for life). By testing the titers, you can tell how immune an animal is.

When kittens are born, they drink the colostrum in the mother's milk which provides them with a certain degree of immunity against diseases. This wears down over time, which is why you need rounds of vaccines when they are young - If there is too much of the mother's immunity in the system, it overrides the vaccines... so in a sense you can vaccinate and it'll be no good. Doing the vaccines over a span of weeks insures that there is still immunity (whether from the mother or the shot) until the kitten is old enough to be certain the vaccine did its job.

Now - in your case its very possible that the immunity from the mother overrode the vaccine, so the titer test came back without a big jump in numbers that would come from a vaccine. This doesn't mean the vaccine was never given, just that it didn't stay in the system.

I've never personally worked with titer tests (I work for a vet) but I've read about them a bit... I'm fairly certain what I told you was the way they work, at least the general idea. As far as them doing bloodwork and saying "this kitten was never vaccinated"... I doubt its possible.

Please don't blame the rescued puppies for your problems... it was so great of you to save them! Just be more careful and keep a close eye on problems like fleas and earmites.

Definately keep very accurate records so that if there are any disputes like this one, you'll have proof of what you've done. Now, are these people saying they don't want to pay you for the kitten? If that's the case, tell them you'll gladly take the kitten back and let them on their way. But there is NO reason for them to keep the kitten without paying you. This will probably be a good reason for you to accept payment before the kittens leave from now on, but still offer to take them back if something happens.

Anything else we can help you with?


----------



## Jeanie (Jun 18, 2003)

As a former breeder I would like to echo what has already been said. Get a health report for every kitten and NEVER accept anything other than cash for a kitten. These people do not want to pay, by the sounds of things. However, anyone buying a kitten deserves one in excellent condition with no fleas, no ear mites, and up to date vaccinations. There should also be a health certificate. That kitten should not be less than 12 weeks old. 

If you continue to breed kittens, please get a mentor. It sounds as if you have not had good advice. A good breeder will take a kitten back, regardless of its age. If these people refuse to return the kitten or pay for it, do you have proof or witnesses who can attest to the fact that it was yours? If so, you can go to the magistrate.


----------



## AKL (Feb 14, 2005)

Please try to see this from the buyer's point of view. If you yourself got a cat, and soon realized it wouldn't eat, and it had ear mites, fleas and a resp infection, and your vet told you that apart from all this it was much too young to be sold anyway- would you feel good about paying for this kitten?

Never ever sell a kitten before 12 weeks of age, and make sure the buyer gets a health certificate from the vet with all vaccinations included. Keep a copy of it yourself too, so you have proof from your own vet that the kitten was healthy and had all its vaccinations done when leaving your home.

Not to be rude, but... The minimum standards of a breeder should at least include what I mentioned above. Maybe if you try to see your breeding from a buyer's point of view, it might help you improve as a breeder.

edit: take a look at Sol's sticky post on good breeding at the top of this page, it may help you a lot!


----------



## Sereena (Mar 5, 2005)

OsnobunnieO said:


> I agree that kittens should wait until 12 weeks to leave the mother as well, but that isn't the issue here (but good to keep in mind!)
> 
> Don't beat yourself up. If it hasn't happened before, chances are these people are just trying to be a pain.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sereena (Mar 5, 2005)

NewRagdoll said:


> Took the kitten under odd circumstances? Without paying? Guess I'm confused, too.
> 
> First, I would ask for a copy of their vets report. Then, perhaps talk directly to the vet if part was unclear.
> 
> ...


----------

