Co-ownership of a dog

I said yes. I will co-own if I like the co-owner and the agreements that come with co-owning.
I currently co-own Ivan. And will continue to do so until I get him neutered. She currently doesn't have a say in what I do with him other than breeding. And we both are good with that. I will also be co-owning the next one from the same breeder. I like the co-own agreement we have with Ivan. I have on the other hand passed on other co-owned dogs. I didn't like the co-owned agreements that came with the dog.
The only thing in Ivans co-own contract that many people I've talked to didn't agree to was the fact that his breeder had the final say in who got bred to him. BUT keep in mind when I signed that contract almost 8 years ago, I had no idea what I was doing really. I had pet dalmatians up to that point.

As a breeder, that sounds reasonable to me. The breeder should (I would hope) know their lines and how best to breed them a whole lot better than someone relatively new to the breed.

you really are one of those people aren't you? :rofl1:

a co-ownership agreement IS a legal agreement. It MAY and most likely does contain a lot of other stipulations that all pertain to maintaining co-ownership of the dog in question.

Because a buyers contract might contain a clause similar or identical to what you might find in a co-owners contract doesn't make that portion null and void. It makes it part of your agreement, if that is a seller's contract or a co-ownership contract, whatever is contained IS a part of that contract.

and Adrianne asked this "I am currently discussing an option of co-owning and while we haven't discussed what that would mean exactly in this case, except a breed back, I am curious how people feel about this. I have friends who co-own and friends who've walked away when offered only a co-ownership.

Do you like Co-owns? Why? Why not?"

and also stating clearly they haven't talked about other stipulations of the agreement other than a breed back as being part of that co-ownership agreement. I guess you're also one that likes to cherry pick as well and then re-define and exclude whatever is pertinent or not to your position.

I will only co-own with a highly trusted friend, and with a detailed contract. I like to do it, because I will become a hoarder if I continue keeping a puppy out of every litter I breed LOL.

Yes - but my co-owns have always been with other people who went in to purchase the dog with me, not a breeder. I will say I will probably never co-own with an SO again - it made my last breakup ugly. It would've been uglier anyway, but instead of just making a clean break, we had to deal with the dogs' papers. I co-own swagger with my friend Andy, we bought him together, and he switched houses a lot as a pup. When we moved to Cali, the boys stayed with Andy. Mostly our co-owns just said that I got to take off with the boys & show them when I felt like it, but it was on my dime.

Things I would want ironed out: what happens if the dog is not finishable in the desired ring? Who decides about breeding the dog? What are the requirements - age, health tests, titles. If one co owner disagrees about the breed ability of the dog then what? Who gets to pick the stud / dam for the breeding? Does only the breeder get the say or does the other co owner get input? What happens if new information comes to light ( ex I know: health problem pops up back in the line).

Someone who hates it when people misuse certain words or terminology long enough that they think they get to change the meaning of them? Yes. Using "co-own" to mean "agreement" grates on my nerves almost as much as using "literally" to mean "figuratively."

A type of agreement that I would consider to be an actual, legally-binding "co-ownership agreement" are those that stipulate conditions that must be met prior to one party or group signing full registered ownership over to another party.

That is not what most people refer to when they're discussing whether a "co-own" is good or not, including your own examples.

That said, I've seen a whole...darn...lot...of dog agreements. Most of which contained so many legal loopholes and unenforceable content that they were beyond laughable. I can count on one hand the number of those I've seen that were actually worded in such a way as to make one lick of difference legally as to whether or not the persons involved were actively maintaining a co-ownership of the dog. If you really want to get technical, most dog agreements are barely legally binding in the first place. Sometimes, a single word out of place will make a difference as to whether a contract (and by extension, whether that single word only voided one portion or the entirety of it) is legally enforceable or not.

If it isn't legally binding, I don't much care what someone calls it, it's pretty worthless to me. Maybe we should split the thread off into a second part... "What can you/can you not legally get away with asking for in a dog agreement?" :rofl1:

That is exactly why I didn't have a problem with it. I knew and know she is not going to do something with Ivan with out explaining it to me. That way I learn as well. Just like when I get my girl she will have breeding rights to her as well and will probably whelp the first litter with me hopefully being there. That way I can continue to learn.

Sounds good. Honestly wish my own breed had more breeder-mentors like this.

Ivans breeders are great and have great looking dogs. Which is part of the reason I haven't gotten my liver girl yet. I keep comparing the dogs to what I already have and to Ivans breeder. Needless to say I have found a look and a breeder I like. And I will be going back to what I'm comfortable with and know. She has been very patient and very willing to answer any and all questions I have. Even if they seem stupid.


So I think that in a nutshell is what encompasses a good co-ownership agreement. Make sure you understand everything in the contract (because to me they are entwined, you can't have one with out the other), make sure each party is comfortable with everything, and make sure the other party is someone you are happy to have as a part of your life for the next X amount of years. Because even the most hands off co-owner/breeder is going to be a part of your life in some shape or form.

I haven't clearly read the debate so I should clarify it is asking, in the most general senses, do you like/mind sharing a dog and rights to that dog, whether that includes breeding or finances and if that is part of the why.

I do like the point about not paying if the other owner/breeder owns the litter profits.

I'm not against breeding and having that be a part of the agreement but I'm trying to just be prepared and aware of other issues. I am sure it's all extremely by-case though.

I really appreciate all of the input.

Lark is not co-owned, however I did sign a contract stating her breeder gets a puppy back from her first litter. But my name is the only one on her papers, Hawkeye's too. Either way I wouldn't have been opposed to a co-own, if she had requested it.

It certainly did in mine. Kaia was actually off limits for the property division because she is co-owned on paper between me and her breeder, and somehow because of that didn't fall under common property. Maybe it's interpreted differently in different jurisdictions or something. The attorney explained to me that it's as if her breeder and I were both on my car's registration as owners. If that was the case the court couldn't just take the car and give it to my ex, because it wouldn't be completely mine.

I don't mind sharing actual legal rights to a dog, depending on what they are. Breeding rights especially would have to be worded and spelled out very specifically and I would only consider it if I had a loophole or written "out" in the agreement on the chance that, just for example, a particular health test came back with poor results. Then I would spell out in the contract exactly WHAT were considered "poor results" that would render the dog not suitable for breeding. Amongst other things...

well that has been evident from the outset. YOU consider a co-ownership to be one thing, and the rest of the dog owning world consider it something else.
can you please point me to this very narrow definition of co-ownership that you use?

I've already told you what co-ownership is according to UKC and AKC, and what co-ownership entitles you to, also according to UKC and AKC. What other definition are you looking for?

This

I like and I trust Merlin's breeder. He is co-owned and she basically owns his testicles and it gives an extra UMPH to the agreement in case I can't care for him so that she gets him. No matter what. Which is very important to me.

I know she wouldn't interfere unless necessary and I trust her judgement and LIKE her.
I mean, I trusted her enough to get a dog from her after all lol

For personal dogs, no.

For UP dogs, yes.

Yep. Hopefully in the very near future actually

To echo what others have said... as long as there's a good contract in place and it's fair to all parties, I see no problem with co-ownerships. Heck, I was allowed to write Poison's contract myself!