News, Foster dog dispute hits Internet.

[SouthernBelle3]

The lady was not a licensed kennel. I wonder what the verbal agreement was to begin with. No way does it cost that much to keep a dog in your home. As someone who is currently fostering a dog, all I ask was for a little help with the expensive dog food that the dog required and vet fees. I paid for all the damages to my furniture and screens myself I love this dog I have , but in 4 weeks, I am giving it back to its' owner knowing I provided a good home. Too bad this lady can't see that just fostering a dog has great rewards, and I sure a reward in heaven

[Mercury Cougar]

Originally Posted by Hopes

But the article does state that she wants to keep the dog because the neighbor's dog is in love with it.

That tells me that this isn't really about the money at all.

I understand that, but it still doesn't tell us what the original handshake deal between them was.

[Mercury Cougar]

Originally Posted by CoastalMaine

First off: She isn't operating a kennel. She knew she was HELPING this man who'd lost his home through a fire.

First off, whether or not she is operating a kennel is not the issue. The issue is did they have a deal about money to be exchanged for her taking care of his dog?

Charity is large part of Christianity. At least that's how I was brought up through my Protestant church. Where I come from, it wouldn't be unusual at all for the minister or pastor of the church to have a quiet chat with the parties to try and mediate and resolve the issue.

So? If they had a pre-existing deal for her to be paid for this, she deserves to be paid. Religion has nothing to do with it, as it would be a legal contract.

The issue as I see it is this: You and I have no bone in the fight either way. Please stop attacking my viewpoint. Arguing is better suited to other forums on CD. Thank-you.

Moderator cut: rude I'm merely presenting what I see as missing facts, and facts I've gleaned from my own experiences with having to spend money to kennel dogs.

Moderator cut: rude I went to the article and read it to try to get the facts. Sadly, it is missing a lot of pertinent information, and thus my opinion of...we don't know all the facts, but it's possible the story is biased because of the emotional context of it.

And no, I won't stop posting my opinion. You don't have to agree with it, but you can't keep me from inserting what I think are valid points.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar

I understand that, but it still doesn't tell us what the original handshake deal between them was.

Her stating that she wants to keep the dog because she feels it shouldn't be separated from the neighbor's dog weakens her position concerning the financial claim. The judge will be more likely to believe the old man's accounting of any verbal agreement.

Keep in mind, when it comes to the financial claim, it's her word against his. When it comes to her stating that she wants to keep the dog, she said that to a reporter. As a result, the old man's case is stronger.

Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar

So? If they had a pre-existing deal for her to be paid for this, she deserves to be paid.

Since he's taking her to court, I'd say that's a clue that she over stepped whatever deal they made.

[CoastalMaine]

[quote=Mercury Cougar;11332138][/color][/b]First off, whether or not she is operating a kennel is not the issue. The issue is did they have a deal about money to be exchanged for her taking care of his dog?

[color=purple] I agree! You've made an assumption one way, I've made it another. So what?

So? If they had a pre-existing deal for her to be paid for this, she deserves to be paid. Religion has nothing to do with it, as it would be a legal contract. YOU are assuming there was a pre-existing deal for payment, I've not made that assumption. My assumption was, since the article mentions they attend services at the same church, there was likely some mention by the minister of this mans plight and this woman stepped up to the plate to HELP. That's generally the way things go in church and rightly so.

Before you make another assumption, I'd like to let you know, I haven't stepped foot in a church for anything but someone's funeral in 35+ years, so don't please don't make another assumption that I'm a religous fanatic into any reply you decide to send back.



Moderator cut: orphaned quote + rude

Moderator cut: orphaned quote I went to the article and read it to try to get the facts. Sadly, it is missing a lot of pertinent information, and thus my opinion of...we don't know all the facts, but it's possible the story is biased because of the emotional context of it.

[b][b]And no, I won't stop posting my opinion. You don't have to agree with it, but you can't keep me from inserting what I think are valid points. I didn't jump on any bandwagon. I simply came to the forum I frequent and posted my thoughts on a thread I read based on my intelligence level (I assure you it's extemely high) and my life experiences. If you don't agree with my views, that's fine. Moderator cut: rude And where you get the idea that these boards exist for discussion is beyond me. The board exists for people to get information about states and particular categories of things. It is not a discussion board. Read the TOS. Geesh.[/quote],

[Nomadicus]

In neck of the woods folks would help such an individual out with shelter for his pooch and not expect to be paid. We have a way of doing things just because it is the right thing to do. I think someone got attached to something that didn't belong to them and is trying to keep it any way they can justify it.

[MistyVT]

Is there such a thing as doing kind deeds for others just because we care? A good person would not expect compensation for caring for a pet for a person in need. An emergency situation! If money was an issue for this caregiver, they shouldn't have taken the animal in to begin with. It does not cost that much money to feed and care for a dog! If the dog had high vet bills...the owner should be responsible...but that's not the case. I find this terrible that people agree that this is acceptable. I don't think the church needs to get involved...but I do think that moral guidance is important. What would Jesus do? Anyone ask that question? There's your answer! Caring without expecting in return is always the right thing to do!

[CoastalMaine]

Nice points you two. I took in a worker last December who'd been evicted from his house. His SO and 3 kids went to another house because the dog coudn't go there. I took he and the dog in. For 4.5 months. I even bought the dog food. I also bought food for his family to have at the other house. I gave him money to buy his kids Christmas presents. I gave them a warm home and a Christmas celebreation and dinner. I never asked for ONE cent because someone needed help and I was in a position to give it. That's what puts the itarian in human imo. It's the RIGHT thing to do.

[SouthernBelleInUtah]

Things have gotten out of hand here, not sure this was the appropriate forum in the first place. Thread closed.