Microchips... Beware. Not heard of this one before!

[Mightymax]

I was reliably told of this situation. There is someone who does dog fostering. A large breed male dog was taken to the vets to be PTS, which they refused to do as it was only 18 Months old and perfectly healthy. The reason for the PTS request was the owners were not coping with the dog, as the husband had had a major stroke.

The dog had been left outside in a tiny yard with no socialisation, but given food and water. The only real contact it had with humans was chasing and barking at people as they went past the yard.

The dog had quite a few quirks as a result, and because it was a long-coated breed it was badly matted.

The Vets contacted the foster person, who started working with the dog with good results. Soon the dog was legally signed over to the foster person. All good so far.

A close friend of the foster person showed an interest in re-homing the dog. The foster person worked with said friend and the dog, making it clear verbally in front of witnesses, that there were conditions attached to the friend re-homing the dog, as in her and the vet's opinion, because the dog was quirky, it should be neutered, and while it was 'out' under anesthetic it should also be groomed/coat clipped.

This hadn't been done previously so as not to traumatize the dog further.

The friend in front of witnesses, agreed to these conditions, so they were allowed to take the dog home on trial. They had also taken the dog's vaccination card which contained the microchip details, as it was due to be vaccinated which the friend agreed to do. If the re-home worked out well, and the dog had been neutered/groomed as discussed, then the foster person would sign it over to the friend.

The friend took the dog home, decided to get the dog groomed herself, refused to get it neutered, and by blagging the microchip company, changed the dog's name, and got the microchip put into their name although they were not the legal owner of the dog, and has decided that the dog is now theirs!

Solicitors are currently involved.

So it would seem, as a word of warning, that if a dog has not been reported as stolen/missing to a microchip company, and therefore an alert put on that particular microchip number, it is possible, for anyone to change a microchip into another person's name, and claim ownership. This dog was not registered with the Kennel Club or any other breed clubs.

It would appear that this is a loophole that dog owners need to be aware of, hence this post.

I am neither the foster person or the (now ex!) friend. Just a concerned bystander.

 

[Gloi]

All of which would have been avoided if the vet had put the dog to sleep as requested.

 

[bonny]

I can’t see it really matters as long as the dog has an ok home now and I’m trusting it’s not aggressive. If it is the vet should of pts in the first place.

 

[Mightymax]

I agree on some fronts, the issue for me was that it was possible for the name on a microchip to be changed so easily.

 

[bonny]

I think micro chips are a good idea in practice but over a dogs lifetime not so useful unless they stay with the same owner who updates their details when needed.

 

[tda]

Suspect/useless rehoming centre, why would they let the dog go until all those issues had been addressed

 

[The Xmas Furry]

Vet and foster person both at fault in not notifying chip company of dog's circumstances. (Trial foster to alleviate a potential pts)

 

[CorvusCorax]

Also verbal agreement means nothing and no paperwork/documents (and this is why paperwork/documents are important) should be handed over before the end of a trial.

 

[lizziebell]

I agree on some fronts, the issue for me was that it was possible for the name on a microchip to be changed so easily.

Most microchip companies have a delay to making changes (eg, 28 days before changes made to allow issues of ownership to come to light), and will also contact the previous microchip holders to check. Suspect there’s more to this story.

 

[Clodagh]

This must be another rescue that will hopefully cease to be if the current petition triggered by save a paw comes into being.
Really people just need to grow up and take responsibility for passing whimsies like getting a dog, then rehoming it to the first Tom Dick or Harry that says ‘nice dog, mate’.

 

[blackcob]

Microchips not being proof of ownership the fosterer may have a decent case for getting the dog back via legal action - but having passed a matted, un-neutered and un-vaccinated dog to a third party without any paperwork in the name of foster/rescue, that might not be the optimal outcome.

 

[cbmcts]

Most microchip companies have a delay to making changes (eg, 28 days before changes made to allow issues of ownership to come to light), and will also contact the previous microchip holders to check. Suspect there’s more to this story.

The microchip companies allow recues to change the chip to their name without charge once they have proof that the dog has been signed over. I don't think they contact the previous owner but prepared to be corrected on that.

I'm guessing that in this case, the microchip company contacted the previous owner who the dog was still registered to and they agreed the transfer because the original rescuer hadn't transferred the dog prior.

 

[TheresaW]

When we took on Ellie, after her previous owner passed away, we sent off the paperwork to change her chip to us. We gave all her previous details, and obviously they were on her records anyway, and said the owner had passed away. They contacted the previous owner, and we had to wait, I think it was 6 weeks, for a response, before she was signed over to us.

 

[stormox]

As long as they dog has a good home now......there's plenty more dogs in rehoming kennels needing help

 

[rara007]

Microchips are not proof of ownership so it’s a simple case of theft, (like loan horses going ‘missing’).

 

[rabatsa]

Not just dogs. At least one horse passport agency will send a sticker to have change of owner for a horse with just an email to them. If the passport is with somewhere like a livery yard it is too easy for them to this.

 

[HopOnTrot]

Microchips are not proof of ownership so it’s a simple case of theft, (like loan horses going ‘missing’).

Why do they scan them in stray dogs then? What do they denote if not ownership?

 

[rara007]

The person that’s on the microchip (should) be the registered keeper.

 

[Goldenstar]

A microchip is not proof of ownership.
But is a factor that would be taken into account if a dispute ended up court.
Let’s say some nefarious person got Dram and managed to change the chip details , I would have loads of evidence that’s he’s my dog.

 

[Landcruiser]

Why do they scan them in stray dogs then? What do they denote if not ownership?

Last registered keeper.

 

[Landcruiser]

Vet and foster person both at fault in not notifying chip company of dog's circumstances. (Trial foster to alleviate a potential pts)

Vets don't notify chip companies about issues like that. Vets try to stay right out of ownership issues, as it can be a legal minefield and is nothing to do with them beyond implanting/registering initially and checking. .

 

[Sleighfarer]

Do vets normally hand dogs over to individuals who do fostering? Why not give the dog to a known charity or breed rescue, which would assess it and provide appropriate treatment?

 

[Jenko109]

We purchased a lurcher on Gumtree or similar some 13 years ago.

We took her into the vet for vaccinations. The first thing they did was ring the old owner and make sure the dog wasn't stolen.

I suppose the breed may have played a factor in why they did that.

 

[rara007]

Rescues are 99% full to capacity. Almost certainly at that point the old owner had signed the dog over to the vet, so it was their personal responsibility and liability. Some vet’s clinics have space to board healthy animals, others don’t, and a 4 week wait for a rescue spot just isn’t feasible in many situations. I know locally our only realistic options are national breed rescues, dodgy rescues that are not registered charities or personal contacts.