FERRET-SEARCH Archives

Searchable FML archives

FERRET-SEARCH@LISTSERV.FERRETMAILINGLIST.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Woods, Kathryn STG2 (USS McFAUL)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 6 Oct 2002 18:06:46 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
Hi!
 
I usually lurk, but I thought this was an interesting message and it got
me thinking.
 
Betty wrote:
>This shelter had her sign a contract which gave a 24 hour
>reconsideration period in which she could get her two ferrets back, no
>questions asked.  At the 18 hour mark, this woman claims to have called
>because she had a change of heart and requested that her two ferrets be
>returned to her.  She also claims that the shelter responded with a quick
>no, and told her that if she wanted them back, she would have to pay the
>full adoption fee for them.
 
First off: unless the contract makes exception for, say, vet-certified
cases of abuse, the shelter is in violation of its contract if this lady
did indeed call within the "cooling off period" asking for the ferts
back.  That's a pretty cut-and-dry situation, in my mind, since a
contract is involved.  Of course, it depends on the actual wording of
the contract, which I don't know.
 
Later on, Betty wrote:
>What I mean to say is that just because this shelter kept the ferrets,
>does not necessarily mean that the shelter kept the ferrets because they
>were being abused.  Abuse is a strong word that needs to be clarified
>and used with caution.
 
Indeed.  I haven't seen the website and I don't know about this situation
in detail, but I would have this to say: if (IF!) the shelter is
justifying the breaking of its contract by claiming abuse on the part of
the owner, then why did it offer to let her have them back for the full
adoption fee?  "No, you can't have 'em because they were abused and we
care about ferrets...unless you give us a bucket o' cash." Again, I'm not
saying that the shelter said, did, or feels this.  I don't even know
about the situation.  It's all hypothetical.
 
Personally, I think that contracts are great ideas and so are cooling-off
periods.  I don't know if 24 hours is too short or 72 hours is too long,
but the important thing is to have /something/ in there, and to make sure
that everyone involved knows the time period.  And the contract should be
clear on the point of exceptions that the shelter might want to make,
such as in the case of abuse or neglect.  You've got to leave yourself a
legal leg to stand on, to use an old and hoary cliche.
 
Now, lastly, how does one prove that one called within the cooling-off
period?  Some answering machines and voicemail services will timestamp
the messages people leave, but if you're the /caller/, what's the best
way to prove that you called at such and such a time?  Any suggestions?
 
 -- Kat
[Posted in FML issue 3928]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2