Even with the 75% reimbursement, I don't feel comfortable with the owner's actions throughout this whole thing.
I'll probably be taking Luna to another daycare.
i think your gut is telling you the right thing here. Just take the 75% and run. I wouldn't leave any bad reviews or anything since she's going above and beyond the policy. It took me a long time to find the perfect daycare for salty, there so many hit and misses out there.
I agree with this. Plus I would make a comment about how dumb the DC owner's implication of it was partially Luna's fault going back for more. Jeez.
"Why would you ruin perfectly good peanuts by adding candy corn? That's like saying hey, I have these awesome nachos, guess I better add some dryer lint." - Nonny
Post by janiejones on Apr 12, 2014 12:53:12 GMT -5
Even with the waiver I would expect a dog daycare to follow through and take some responsibility when these things happen. It's the decent thing to do.
I'd just send back a firm line: "I expect full reimbursement of the vet bill within the next 7 days. How you handle matters with the owner of the dog that attacked mine is not something I can advise you over with any objectivity. Thank you very much for your trouble".
This is bugging me (not like... you are bugging me, but this interpretation is bugging me). So now I am going to rant for education purposes, not because I am actually directing it at you LOL
This is a shitty daycare. Amoosed and Luna should absolutely high tail it out of there. But the other dog did not attack Luna. Play got too rough, and an injury happened, as is to be expected when sending your dog to daycare, the dog park, or any other off leash dog socializing venue. Luna going back to the other dog does NOT in any way indicate friendliness (this is a HUGE mistake people make with puppies), it indicates a lack of maturity and shows that she does not have the ability to interpret body language correctly yet, which is TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY normal because she is like five months old. I guarantee you the other dog was communicating their overstimulation for a long while before it escalate to the injury, and that's something that Luna would have picked up on if she was older and something the daycare staff would have intervened with if they were even remotely competent. This is why puppies should be confined to the small dog (or preferably puppy only) room until they have proven that they can communicate appropriately and respond to communication appropriately.
If anything, the other dog is just as much a victim in this situation because it was set up to fail, their play was supervised poorly, and now he can no longer attend daycare for something that should have and could have been prevented.
And unfortunately, the daycare really has zero obligation to pay the vet bill. This is why you sign the waiver and why there are so many truly dangerous daycares around. It sucks. Daycares mostly suck. Dog parks mostly suck. It's just sort of the way it is, and Amoosed and Luna are stuck learning that the hard way right now.
Kathy Sdao has a great article on finding appropriate daycares. Many will not meet all of her standards (especially using treats on the floor, and removing collars), but it's a good starting point : seattletimes.com/html/tailsofseattle/2018722675_trainer_qa_how_to_find_a_good_dog_day_care.html . Also, in the future, try to stick to daycares that at least have a CPDT-KA on site, but preferably as the primary staff on floor and try to schedule her for their most low-key time slots until she has matured and they get to know her better (sunday mornings are often great if your daycare has weekend hours).
I hope miss Luna is recovering okay, and you guys can all move on from this and go on to find a good daycare where she can have lots of good experiences. It really does blow when stuff like this happens.
I am not sure a prospective waiver like that would be enforceable, but I would be more inclined to take the 75% knowing you signed it. I do, however, think the highlight of this is the part where the daycare thinks that because your dog didn't report the injury, she waived the daycare's liability. It's a puppy.
I am not sure a prospective waiver like that would be enforceable, but I would be more inclined to take the 75% knowing you signed it. I do, however, think the highlight of this is the part where the daycare thinks that because your dog didn't report the injury, she waived the daycare's liability. It's a puppy.
Right? So sorry she didn't teach the dog English. What a nutbar.
I am not sure a prospective waiver like that would be enforceable, but I would be more inclined to take the 75% knowing you signed it. I do, however, think the highlight of this is the part where the daycare thinks that because your dog didn't report the injury, she waived the daycare's liability. It's a puppy.
Interesting. Clearly I know about 0 about the intricacies of law. So whenever people sign waivers that are about prospective damage, injury or death, they're not always enforceable? (Assuming the person signed it under their own will).
I am not sure a prospective waiver like that would be enforceable, but I would be more inclined to take the 75% knowing you signed it. I do, however, think the highlight of this is the part where the daycare thinks that because your dog didn't report the injury, she waived the daycare's liability. It's a puppy.
Interesting. Clearly I know about 0 about the intricacies of law. So whenever people sign waivers that are about prospective damage, injury or death, they're not always enforceable? (Assuming the person signed it under their own will).
It's very fact dependent. At least in my nutty state where judges disregard contracts for public policy.