2007-10-20 01:23:56 · 19 answers · asked by cbsncmom 2 in Pets ➔ Dogs
This was never about money.Ellen had her heart in the right place.She could have purchased any puppy anywhere in the world.She just happened to want to save a local pet at a local animal shelter ,save a puppy and give it a good loving home.Period!She is probably the one that told these mean hearted people that she gave the pup away,after it didn't fit into her home.She did not give this puppy to a stranger or a person who was an abuser.Who says she isn't just as good of a judge of people and families as the MOMS 4 MUTTS?Here's the BLING BLING how much did the next family pay for the same puppy??????What are they mad because they could have missed a Dollar??????What ,are these people gonna now police every person who adopts a mutt.Do home visits?Maybe go over with the adopties every detail of the "Contract"?Ellen is a smarter lady than that!Lets face it she is no fool !!Well ,I said all this to say ,I don't think Ellen should get her money back but I don't think she realised how crazy these MOMS 4 MUTTS are to even get involved with these DO GOODERS who certainly do not have the best intrest of the animal at heart."The CONTRACT" meant more to them than the wellfare of the puppy.No telling how much money she paid these people for this pup.Charges are often enough to purchase a new puppy.Sorry but I hope this shows everyone what the kind of problems you can run into dealing with these people.Not to mention the problems most of these pups have .That is why they are there to begin with.People learn from Ellen"s Mistake!!!!!!
2007-10-20 02:53:20 · answer #1 · answered by mcnatt c 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Mutts and Moms is being power hungry. If the goal of their organization is have great homes for dog: rather than remove the dog from the 2nd home they should have given that family the chance to adopt the dog. I'm sure the family or Ellen would not mind paying an adoption fee a 2nd time. This is a situation where a person became more concerned about being right than doing what is best for the dog.
2007-10-20 06:57:50 · answer #2 · answered by Dave 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
What people in this world do not understand is. You can not break any kind of agreement, that is the bottom line. You can not break laws either. Ellen spent $3,000.00 dollars for this puppy out of her own pocket. She did not ask the people she gave it to to give her the out of pocket money, so why should she expect money back from the adoption people. I don't know if that was what she was trying to get across to people when she said it on the show. I don't think she should of even mentioned how much money she spent. What has that to do with breaking an agreement anyway? Ellen did not read the agreement, or she would not of done what she did. And she is right saying, this is my fault, as she said on the show. I heard she walked off of her show for a couple of days, and says she does not want to talk about it anymore. I think she realized by what she said on public television she caused crazy people out there to email these people and threaten them with death or arson. Ellen owes these people an apology, but I bet she never does it, or I will be surprised. She is just going to stay a Ellen "Degenerate" for acting like a not mature person.
2007-10-20 07:24:02 · answer #3 · answered by MissySue 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I like Ellen. I'm so surprised at what she did.
No she should not get the money back. She signed the contract, she broke the contract. And what was with the tears? Was it so difficult for her to go out and find an identical dog for the family?
I honestly think the tears were an act to get her viewers behind her. She assumed with enough bad publicity the shelter would be "forced" to give back the dog. I understand why the shelter decided to give it away to another family. Ellen could have very easily gotten another dog. What was the big deal? I believe she felt like she was a star and she was going to get what she wanted. Period. Very passive-aggressive.
2007-10-20 01:44:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I don't think Ellen cares about the money, What the main issue for her was the fact that they came and took the pup right in front of the young girl. EDG did bring up the money on her show, but I think it was to support the fact that she did what she could to be a responsible dog owner, she spayed the pup and got her obedience training to help her blend into her home, along with routine puppy shots.
Ellen has enough money to easily replace the pup with another, but that is not the point here.
2007-10-20 01:41:28 · answer #5 · answered by Debra G 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Ellen GAVE the dog away. She has no claim to it, or the money.
Just because she is a celebrity does not mean she does not have to live by the rules the rest of us live by.
Crying on TV may get sympathy, but the Law is the law.
She signed a contract, didn't read it, and then cries because it applies to her.
If she cares so much for "Those kids", she can but them a different dog and shut up about it.
She got what she paid for from the rescue center. She got her money's worth. It is not her fault she gave it away. She must be responsible for her own decisions. Why should she blame someone else for Her mistakes. Why should anyone else have to pay for her mistakes.
Answer... No one else should have to pay for her mistakes.
2007-10-20 01:26:49 · answer #6 · answered by Answerman 4 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Ellen put Mutts& Moms out of business, and 6 dogs died at the pound this week, because Mutts& Moms wasn't there to save them. Nobody wanted Iggy, and he was scheduled to die the next day, when Mutts & Moms picked him up. This Friday, 6 dogs died, that Mutts & Moms would have saved, because no one was there to save them..Way to GO, Ellen.
2007-10-20 20:00:25 · answer #7 · answered by Chetco 7 · 9⤊ 2⤋
I don't think she should get her money back, however instead of just taking the puppy from the new owners, this rescue should have evaluated and interviewed the new family. It's sounds like they gave the puppy a good home. This rescue seems too radical!!
2007-10-20 03:16:23 · answer #8 · answered by nomorequestionsplz 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
She read the paper - she signed the paper. I have little sympathy for people who sign an agreement, ignore it and then get upset when it is enforced.
One more example of the "I am a star so this doesn't apply to me" mentality.
All of this demonstrates that she is probably not smart enough to have a pet in the first place
2007-10-20 01:27:44 · answer #9 · answered by Uncle John 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
absolutely not
she violated the terms of the agreement
we have got to protect animals (even ones
that need to be rescued) from freaky people
who want to adopt them and mutilate them or...
eat them or whatever!
i think it's good that not only is the organization
protecting it's animals in this way
but, also that they have not caved under the pressure
of the media and the fact that she is a celebrity.
2007-10-20 01:33:25 · answer #10 · answered by tamez 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋