Dennis,

You wanted that list to go away before it even started. Don't go there. I have proof. Letters from you and another.

I didn't have a computer from the months of January thru March. The motherboard of it went.
This was taken up with them & STILL TO THIS DAY NOTHING!!!!!! Not even a call from 'your' friend Kevin Riley or a letter from him. HMMMMM Believe me I'm very happy without it. BUT now was it personally because somebody went after you, him and another & you all were removed??? HMMMM

As far as the name BCA goes, it's not trademark & as the logo it was NEVER on there! I have seen the logo on many sites including yours. Should that the logo & name come off all the sites that it's on????

DEBBIE



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Debbie,

Shouldn't you take this up with the BCA National Executive Officers. They were the ones who ruled on your situation and pulled your chair as BCA Education Chairperson. Not Kevin. Kevin had a very valid complaint as did many when they saw the direction the BCA Education list was going. Your list was being used for witch hunts and you were in fact participating. This to me is not about education and not what I would want the BCA name and logo associated with. Just my two cents.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com

NOPE!

You may not "buy" it Liz but no where do you see ANY board member saying why they suspended the Lynn's...not even to them.
You see Elaine blustering and diverting the content of the questions, you see Dennis and Zack attempting to bring it all to a personal level but no where do you see a board member pony up an answer to a VERY simple question,
"Why were the Lynn's suspended?"

Executive decision so no one gets to know? SCARY. Yet Elaine says in a previous rant that the confidentiality has been broken by the Lynn's so where is the answer? Nothing stopping them now other than fear that what they put in writing can be used against them in a court of law.

Why were the Lynn's suspended? How hard is that to answer? Yet the Division IV board won't.........

Here's another one, who was the board member who transported a pup, while this was going on, for the people who filed the complaint? Just another conflict of interest that this board is known for.

One more for you since your not buying what has already been posted, why were the Lynn's told that it was a unanimous decision when all board members did NOT vote on it?
If this goes to court then that comes out too.

I'm sure by now one or more of the malcontents posting here today have called you to give you their response and some excuse as to why they won't post it here...hope that manipulation felt good but I would personally be angry that they thought so little of my intelligence that they would do it!
If it walks like a duck
Smells like a duck
And stinks like duck poo, their ducking to save their butts because it's a duck.

Everyone can bluster and some can try to pin all of this on malcontents but it won't change the facts. Seems there was more going on than they would like the voting public to know about.
The board overstepped their boundaries under the guise of just doing their job but in this case they have put the BCA in a position to be taken into what could turn out to be a very expensive court case.

Dennis O'Connor stated that selling a puppy with a heart murmur was not good for the breed yet everyone knows that anyone who breeds will produce pups that are not always healthy. So if someone wanted to purchase one, at a reduced rate mind you, and was willing to take one that had a medical problem then whose business is it of anyone to step into the middle of it?
And as anyone knows often times a murmur shows up at a young age and by the time the pup is 6 months, the murmur is no longer there. IF someone chooses to take that chance, then that is their business.

The case was in the hands of the court when some of the board members made a ruling. AKC would even say shame on them.

Jo

It has just what DIV 4 had to go by and I do feel for the board to have to read all of it . But this will be the last comment as it is between you and the other party.They Div 4 went buy the the rules and did there job as hard as it was

why were they suspended, teh puppy murmor dog or not? and why they were not told why they were suspended??

webmaster.
2008 Bulldog Calendars now ready!
Bulldog gifts, click below
http://www.cafepress.com/bulldogsworld

they go hand in hand, do they not?

The "National" Bylaws state:
ARTICLE III
Resignations and Discipline
SECTION 2. Disciplinary action shall be administered in accordance with instructions contained in the DIVISIONAL BY-LAWS, ARTICLE VI, Discipline.

Elaine

You were told no such thing. You were told there was a facilitator, that he was appointed by the Division President to facilitate the complaint process in order to comply with the time restraints set forth by the C/BLs. You were called because you commented inappropriately, without researching the facts, that heads should roll in Division IV, which was an unfair offhanded comment after hearing only a biased diatribe. As a divisional board member yourself you should realize the implications of false statements and innuendos and the impact they can have. People need to be held accountable for what they say and write on the internet.

Hopefully I will have the opportunity to visit with you in person at Nationals. We need to talk, Sistah.



Elaine

Since when does having your own personal copy of the complaint filed mean that you "do have all the facts"?

n/m

Liz,

As I've put out there in pretty much every post I've had on the subject, we don't know the reason either. Three months after the suspension vote, that's a problem for me. We tried "official channels" to find an answer, and failed. Two weeks ago, I exercised my right to ask a question, and still have no answer, although for that I've now been accused of being some mindless puppet of someone I've never met, seeking answers to my issue to somehow forward her agenda.

Interestingly, some of the same people you observe "insisting pretty adamantly that this is not all that is going on" are on record as stating "Everyone knows that they were suspended for selling a puppy with a heart murmur." This, and other gossip in the same vein that has come my way from Texas, was the only indication I had of the reason for our suspension. Two weeks ago, I publicly asked the board members to contact me if this information was incorrect. They did not.

Two weeks ago, I spoke to Lucille Inmon, who was there (and a current long standing respected Div IV board member). I suggest that you, and anyone else concerned about the actions of this current board (and future of this club under their rule) to give her a call - I'm sure she'll tell you what she told me...and shed a LOT of light on this injustice to include the FACT that the decision was NOT unanimous (as Carolyn Adams would like all to believe). The corruption of it all goes far beyond that I'm afraid. You have good reason to be scared Liz!

So, the only information I have is that we were suspended for selling/placing - choose your word as to whether you call it a greatly reduced purchase price or a placement fee (as rescue does) - a puppy with a disclosed heart murmur.

A matter of record, and provided in evidence to the board, is the contract signed by the complainants which states "The purchaser understands that this dog has a suspected Puppy Heart Murmur. The purchaser understands how to best care for this dog so that it has the most potential to live a full life. It’s understood that this dog should be in a quiet excitement free environment, not be pushed to over exert itself with too much exercise, and kept in shape through a proper diet. Failure to do this can put this dog’s life at risk with its current diagnosed condition at the time of sale." The words "heart murmur" were mentioned at least two other places in this contract.

A third party also provided the board with e-mails in which she asked the complainant (just after she got the dog) why she had chosen the puppy with a heart murmur rather than the healthy male we had originally agreed to sell them.

In addition, although the evidence was not in writing, I testified to the board that when the complainant asked to take the puppy with the murmur, we were not willing to agree to that without a great deal of discussion. The day she asked for the dog, I provided her with the diagnosing vet's phone number and asked her to call our vet for more information and consult with her own prior to making such a decision. So, there was no question of us misleading, lying, or not providing her with the information available to us at the time.

As the complainants are adults with nearly ten years in the breed, I would think our agreement, as there was no subterfuge whatsoever, would be looked at as an arrangement between consenting, informed adults. I would also think that the fact that we have invested over $25K in legal fees to defend ourselves and now in pursuing a suit against them for slander, libel, and defamation of character is pretty clear evidence that we feel their allegations and statements have been highly misleading and defamatory. We don't have the kind of money to pursue a suit like that frivolously, but we will go to the wire for something we believe to be right. Love us or hate us, the one thing we are not is people who will stand by and be wronged like this.

If all I have found out is true, you have a right to be scared, as should all who read this. Without a doubt this precedent-setting case will effect ALL in the BCA in time. Ironically, the ones that were the "architects of the complaint" - in the Board's words - have escaped scrutiny for their words and actions - it has never occurred to anyone to ask why or how their words and actions have made them the focus of legal allegations of slander, libel, and defamation. Has anyone thought to take a step back and ask themselves…did they do this for the “good” of the BCA or maybe themselves??

As this current board refuses to provide us the reason(s) why they did what they did, and the proof they had to support it...EVERYONE IN THE BCA SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND BE CONCERNED! Any logical thinking person must ask why? What do they have to hide if they were “only” doing their job and doing it correctly?

To us, and a growing number of other Bulldoggers, the board’s silence speaks volumes. This is NOT what the constitution of this club entitled them to do. If you are a Div IV member who has yet to vote in this next election…think carefully before you do. PLEASE! Where there is smoke, there is fire with the current Div IV leadership (a LOT of fire).

Respectfully,
Sharon

Don't you follow the National Bylaws, that is my understanding from another division officer.

Notification of the Board's decision and the penalty was sent to the Lynns as required by the Divisional By-Laws Article VI, Section 3.


Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://www.rubarbsoap.com/
Bulldog Club of Greater Seattle
PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

1 person was leading this whole thing against the Lynn's. I was not told htey were facilitating or anything like htat.



Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://www.rubarbsoap.com/
Bulldog Club of Greater Seattle
PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

Jo, I don't have a clue who you are but you obviously haven't kept up with things, nor do you have the full story.

Our dear Frank Cobb passed away several years ago. We miss him greatly every single day. It was an honor and pleasure to have worked along side of him for years. He was always a calm voice of reason and a very clear thinker. He wouldn't care for his name being brought into a matter such as this either. Frank is in heaven.

Brenda Newcomb moved to another division and transfered her membership. We will miss her too. However, she has served continually as a Councilor up to her transfer a few weeks ago and will represent Division IV at the Council meeting this fall as she was elected to do. Brenda is in California.

Jim Armstrong lost his bid for re-election last term by a very narrow margin. He has continued to keep himself involved and educated and is running for election again this time. Jim is in Norman, OK.

Van Blevins chose not to run last time. He was coming off of an assignment as a national officer. He was tired. Like most people, he deserved a rest from being constantly on the hot seat with every move made being criticized by someone with half baked information. Van is running for a position on this ballot. Van is in Henrietta, TX.

Ditto the above for Bob Newcomb, except he chose not to run this time. He still serves on the Nation Executive Committee as an officer of the club in the position of AKC Delegate. Bob continues to work hard for BCA and is more often than not consulted on ALL issues before the division board. He has a wealth of knowledge regarding the workings of the entire organization. It would be foolish not to tap those resources. Bob is in Elk City, OK.

NOW... Jo, Randy, Sybil and the rest who choose to intentionally spew venoms misinformation for various and sordid reasons, I doubt that the truth and real facts would suit your purpose. However... against my better judgment... the Lynn matter is NOBODY's business except the Lynn's, the people who made the complaint and the board. For that reason and to protect both parties, the Division IV board decided to keep the proceedings confidential. Mrs. Lynn chose to air her dirty laundry in public, albeit short of a few pertinent facts. IMO, with that act she released the board from their obligation of confidentiality.

LET ME CLARIFY at this point, NEVER were any contractual issues considered by the Division IV board. NEVER. Contracts are a matter for the court system. The board dealt with issues ONLY pertaining to the breed and BCA. On the BCA website is a copy of the Constitution and Bylaws. READ IT. Do not take it out of context. Do not co-mingle national and divisional text. In those documents you will find specific time frames, etc. to be adhered to in the event of a complaint. Keep in mind that Division IV had the unfortunate privilege of being the first to have to deal with the new process that was approved by the Council in 2004. There are no written procedures or guidelines other than what you see in the aforementioned documents. As Bob Newcomb put it, the board had no choice but to deal with it head on. The board would be scrutinized and would be the trailblazer for such proceedings in the future. It was a no win situation, damned if you do and damned if you don't. The board did the job they were elected to do. It was distasteful. It was tedious. It was heart-wrenching, nauseating, and very stressful. Hours upon hours upon hours were spent, not to mention non-reimbursable monies, by each board member. They are thanked for their conscientious efforts by being defamed criticized and scrutinized all over the internet.

In closing I would like to ask each and everyone who has chosen to believe the smut to just sit back and digest what they have heard. If it sounds outlandish, it probably isn't true. Partial facts and innuendos make a much better read, just ask the National Inquirer and the other sensationalistic rag sheets.

I am not sorry for my rant. If you want to know the truth, go directly to a board member and ask them. If you prefer a juicy story, just ask Sybil and crew.

Elaine Andrew
Proudly a member of the Division IV Board

Thank You But I still feel it should not be on the net. And I do have the facts I have a copy of what Div 4 went buy So I do know both sides But never put any of it on the net .And Div 4 did what they were voted in to do the job at hand and while some did not like it they did there duty Hats off to them I know it was a hard task for them .

n/m

Elaine

You are correct about executive sessions to a point. No rules have been broken.

Notification of the Board's decision and the penalty was sent to the Lynns as required by the Divisional By-Laws Article VI, Section 3.

As for the comment "I have been told by 2 board members that 1 person was leading this, so it sounds like it was personal" you couldn't be any more wrong. "Sounds like" is an unfair assumption. Yes, one person was leading the whatever you want to call it. He was called a facilitator, much better than having all of the board members contact all of the witness and check all of the resources. He delegated assignments and coordinated the investigation so to speak. He was NOT a ringleader with a personal vendetta but merely a coordinator, leader, organizer, facilitator, call it whatever you want but he did a damn fine job with an ugly assignment. No more "sounds like" okay?


Elaine

"Jo"

If you will take the time to read Article VI, Section 2 of the Divisional By-Laws of the Bulldog Club of America, you will see that it states in part:

"The Division Secretary shall promptly send a copy of the charges to each member of the involved Division Board or present them at the next quarterly meeting. The Division Board shall first consider whether the actions alleged in the charges, if proven, might constitute conduct prejudicial to the best interest of The Bulldog Club of America or the Bulldog breed. If the Division Board considers that the charges do not allege conduct which would be prejudicial to the best interest of the Club or the Bulldog breed. It may refuse to entertain jurisdiction. If the Division Board entertains jurisdiction of the charges, it shall fix a date of hearing by the Division Board not less than 3 weeks nor more than 12 weeks thereafter."

The Div IV Board, of which I am a member, adhered to the timeline required by the By-Laws.

Dan Bandy

due to a contract issue.

dont know if this will ever be made public. but i agree with E it sets a precidence

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://www.rubarbsoap.com/
Bulldog Club of Greater Seattle
PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

come on. were they suspended simply for placing or selling a heart murmor puppy that was fully disclosed and in contract to a willing person??? is that all there is to it?? is that it?

webmaster.
2008 Bulldog Calendars now ready!
Bulldog gifts, click below
http://www.cafepress.com/bulldogsworld

Executive session and NOTHING in executive session is to be discussed outside of the walls of that meeting.

So unless rules are going to be broken, we may never know.

The Lynn's should have had the results of the meeting and it's vote to them in writing. It should also have an explanation.

I have been told by 2 board members that 1 person was leading this, so it sounds like it was personal

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://www.rubarbsoap.com/
Bulldog Club of Greater Seattle
PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

I didn't bring any of this up. I had no clue what was going on until recently, just like most people here.
Since it was brought to all of our attentions, I figured I would ask some questions that are surley on anyone's mind that is following this soap opera.
No, I have not taken sides. I was unaware that there were any sides at all considering that I always thought that many on the current board and many on the slate that is running against them are in fact friends with each other.
And the same old group that is complaining the loudest are just about everyone's enemies at this point.. No one can do anything right in their minds as it is (particularly me so it seems).. no surprise there.
The question I raised was an easy one.. and an obvious one.
I just do not buy without question that the board would suspend someone for merely producing a heart murmur puppy then placing it in a loving pet home. And that the underlying reason was that some people just plain and simple do not like you.
That is what we are being told....right?
If this is the pure truth, then yes, you have every right to be unhappy with the verdict. We all do. Scary stuff.
I can read that some people are suggesting pretty adamantly that this is not all that is going on.
I don't know what that means, but some people feel pretty strongly that they did what they felt was right for the breed.
Pretty strong sentiments.
If you want the board to be judged for what they did to you, maybe if you are asking for people to form opinions, we should hear the other side.
I heard something said about actions detrimental to the breed or something like that.
Can someone define that in the context of this situation?
If this is to be a precedent-setting case, I think we all have the right to fully understand just what happend and not be told that some personal vendettas are the sole reason why a BCA membership was stripped.
If this is the case, we all should be scared.. as I pointed out before.
Can you see my point?
I don't want BCA to be big brother.. however.. someone has to protect the dogs and the breed.. no?
e

You don't put a puppy to sleep because it isn't 100 percent healthy. A vet will advise on any situation where euthanasia would be a neccessary but unfortunate option. To suggest otherwise is completely disgusting and shows your true character. I do not see any depth to your postings but rather an attempt to further spew venom at the standing board. Please either make yourself known or go away.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
wwwm.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com


Re: Selling of unhealthy puppies for any reason???
by Jo (Login newmans)
Bulldogsworld Show Forum
Couch it any way you want. They sold a puppy with a minor murmur and the buyers bought it knowing it. No 2 ways around it and no way to justify what has happened to the reputation of the Lynn's.

They sold a puppy to someone who knowingly bought it with a signed contract. How much simpler can that be?
Bad for the breed? only if the Division IV board intends for everyone to keep or put to sleep everything that isn't 100% healthy.

Imagine the implications for rescue!

Jo


MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

if, again IF the following is true, ( I SAID IF) they signed and agreed to a contract, with disclosure and medicl records given to the new owner, then how can there be a issue, based solely on that, now I WANT TO STRESS, if that is all there is to it!!! if that is the only factor here, and i respect each of you and yoru opinions, im looking to know if its correct and if so, then the person was aaware and agreed...NO??? am i wrong here or not??

i mean i get emails weekly from people who email me complaining about the puppy pyramid they signed them self into, they have to breed a bitch 2 time or more, give half or the whole litter back on the first one, even if there is 9 pups, and this is with bca members and respected breeders, not some puppymiller as we call them.. my reply to them is always, if you agreed and signed the contract, its yoru baby! no one forced you to sign, what you agreed to is in writting, you signed it, so its your deal... i dont want to hear complints about it after the fact.. my point in teh 2 re simply this, while there both different, in reality the issue ( if i understood it correctly, please correct me if i did not) is teh use of a contract and disclosure of what is what in it. nothing hidden.?

webmaster.
2008 Bulldog Calendars now ready!
Bulldog gifts, click below
http://www.cafepress.com/bulldogsworld

Hmmm…just where might your “hunch” be coming from Liz? One has to “wonder” what side of a story might have bent your ear the most here!

Everyone here needs to take a step back, take a deep breath, then take a look at this for what it REALLY is! This now goes BEYOND the “club,” and is a real life issue that can now possibly effect the entire club!

Regardless of what side of this issue you stand on, the root of ALL evil with this, and where it ALL started is in Hastings, Michigan.

It’s THERE (not Div IV) where clearly “personal” issues and personal agenda are being taking before “the best interest of the Bulldog Club of America.” It’s THERE and not here that one should question potential violations of the BCA code of ethics!!

By mere fact that “they” took this to civil litigation (just weeks after filing a complaint to Div IV) and before the BCA could have a chance to rule on it, they willingly and deliberately threw the entire BCA under the bus, involving this club were it needs not be…and for ONLY their own personal agenda/vendetta. Think about this…PLEASE!

It does not take a brain surgeon to realize that their actions will most likely draw the BCA into expensive litigation. Their actions (and now this board’s decision) really do not leave civil law and true “due process” much choice in the matter.

Will “they” back those that backed them if push comes to shove….as it is on a collision course to do?? As it was a personal agenda and vendetta from the start…one has to wonder? If you want to believe that “they” rooted out evil in the BCA (where no one has before), saving the BCA from “conduct prejudicial to the best interest of The Bulldog Club of America or the Bulldog,” because “they” CARE for the BCA like none before…think again!

After losing decisively in Michigan civil court, these same Div II members (known as “they” above) have been served to a Colorado court to answer to charges of Slander, Liable, and Defamation of Character. These are serious charges (for those unaware), and not ones brought about without a LOT of proof. No reputable law firm attempts to argue a case such as this unless they KNOW they can win!!

Again take a step back, and deep breath, and THINK here!

Debbie,

I am not sure I understand the point given the context of your email. Are you comparing the likeness of Rescue and this particular situation? If so please explain. Or are you stating Rescue would have been an alternative to selling an unhealthy puppy with a known heart murmur? Can you please be more concise?

My post was why would anyone(meaning a breeder and not rescue for the record sell a known unhealthy puppy? Hope this helps to clear up the confusion.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com



Dennis,

RESCUE ... Not only is rescue placing dogs but they are collecting monies now so they can place & save more.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ok, the Lynns and the current issue aside... Why would anyone sell a known unhealthy puppy??? Is this the way we should conduct ourselves as reputable breeders?

Who is looking out for the Bulldogs here... shouldn't that be our number one priortiy? Our dogs do not have voices of their own. We are in charge of their well being and we should be ethical in all regards.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com


MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Dennis,

RESCUE ... Not only is rescue placing dogs but they are collecting monies now so they can place & save more.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ok, the Lynns and the current issue aside... Why would anyone sell a known unhealthy puppy??? Is this the way we should conduct ourselves as reputable breeders?

Who is looking out for the Bulldogs here... shouldn't that be our number one priortiy? Our dogs do not have voices of their own. We are in charge of their well being and we should be ethical in all regards.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Elaine,
Per your question about the wording of the letter, no, it did not say "misconduct prejudicial to the breed"? Nor, certainly, were we told what our misconduct was nor how it was prejudicial to the breed - had it done so, we would not be having this conversation.

As far as my not e-mailing you personally, no, I did not, just as I did not attempt to contact anyone privately during the course of the investigation. I feel that there are proper channels through which these things should flow, and I "flowed" them that way. Based on my own Division experience, I made the assumption that this information request would be shared with all. Whether it was or not, I received no response that addressed my question.

As a result, we have a very real gripe with how this has been handled. The ambiguity and lack of response to our question has made possible the kind of wild speculation that has started up down below - many seem to think they know why we were suspended - except us. Many want to turn attention away from the very real concern we have with the process because either they think we are launching some personal attack against their friends, they have some personal stake in it, or they just find it more interesting to get into other peoples lives and pass judgement for their own entertainment.

Regardless, I'm not going to participate in that circus, just as I have not participated in the gossip circus that has been flowing about this for the past nine months. I do, however, ask that you and your fellow board members rectify the omission in our suspension letter and send us one that does explain the what and why of our actions and how you feel they were prejudicial to the breed. As mentioned in the post above, suspending us really serves no useful purpose unless we know what our misconduct was and how we adversely impacted the breed or the BCA. As we told you in response to your questions, at every step of the process we did what we felt to be right at that time - so without knowing what the board felt was wrong, we can't exactly change anything, can we?

Respectfully,
Sharon

Sharon,

I am so sorry that you have been brought into a matter that has nothing to do with your situation. You and your situation are simply being used as pawns evidenced by your comment "It would appear that some of you have also attempted to make this "all about you" by tying in your own personal conflicts with an individual who has become "the evil one" in this Division ..." Reverse the parties in that comment and you will be more on target. I further apologize if you have been "talked down to and about" by any member of the board. This is the first I have heard of any such thing.

Did you email me or call me and ask me questions about the decision? No. Did you receive a certified mail letter from the Division Secretary advising you of your suspension? Yes. Did that letter not state the reason as "misconduct prejudicial to the breed"? I didn't read the letter but I believe it was so stated.

"I see posted this morning that Elaine and Dan e-mailed Susan Somers privately to talk about the process you followed..." OH NO YOU DID NOT!!! No such thing was ever posted above. I have NEVER spoken or emailed Susan Somers about this matter. NEVER EVER! I had a private email conversation with her about nomination and election procedures, which is a far cry from your personal matter. Furthermore, I stated "Mrs. Lynn chose to air her dirty laundry in public, albeit short of a few pertinent facts. IMO, with that act she released the board from their obligation of confidentiality." and there was no reference made to any inquiry. I did not say your post had inaccuracies in it but rather that it was short of a few pertinent facts. I stand behind my original statement. I don't think you really want EVERYTHING out in the open for all to see.

Sharon, this entire situation is not about your suspension. Do not ever for one moment think it is. Nobody on the board was ever mad at you or out to get you. Nobody knew the other party before the complaint was filed. They were just doing a really stinky job. Nobody enjoyed it. Nobody had an ax to grind. Please do not allow yourself to be manipulated.

The entire complaint process has holes in it. It is new. Currently there are other divisions with complaints on their agendas as well. The matter will be discussed at the Council meeting this fall.

Respectfully,

Elaine

Sharron
What size murmur did this puppy have?
Terri
MyToyBulldogs

MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Zack could hardly be considered a sheep he's way to good looking.... lol
Knowing Zack for a time like I have... he defiantly has a mind of his own...
Terri
MyToyBulldogs

MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Thats not even worth a response Jo.

Zack Lane

Great point Jo "to sell a puppy with knowledge of a heart murmur..." Oh my Jo, it's different to place a pup in this condition in a loving caring home, in my book, but not to sell one that you know had a heart murmur, ... yes and some heart murmurs escape detection by the vet at the first well check up or shows up later on in life. IMHO Monies or a replacement pup should be the priority if it is found to be a birth defect which had gone undetected.... that is in a reasonable amount of time or what ever your State allows. MG Not to knowingly sell a heart murmur for x amount of dollars with hopes that it will be out grown.

MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Geez Zack...look what happened to the Lynn's when some of those board members got mad at them! think I'm going to give out any personal info after THAT?

Give it a rest, your looking a bit lame and sorta like a follower.......

Jo

Couch it any way you want. They sold a puppy with a minor murmur and the buyers bought it knowing it. No 2 ways around it and no way to justify what has happened to the reputation of the Lynn's.

They sold a puppy to someone who knowingly bought it with a signed contract. How much simpler can that be?
Bad for the breed? only if the Division IV board intends for everyone to keep or put to sleep everything that isn't 100% healthy.

Imagine the implications for rescue!

Jo

It seems you have it out for this board. I find all of the boards members to be very responsible with there positions. Maybe you should run for a position on the board? I am assume you are a member of the BCA?!


Zack

Ok, the Lynns and the current issue aside... Why would anyone sell a known unhealthy puppy??? Is this the way we should conduct ourselves as reputable breeders?

Who is looking out for the Bulldogs here... shouldn't that be our number one priortiy? Our dogs do not have voices of their own. We are in charge of their well being and we should be ethical in all regards.

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com



Re: wait...........
by Jo (Login newmans)
Bulldogsworld Show Forum
That's ALL they did. They sold a bitch with a minor heart murmur to a person who bought it KNOWING it had the heart murmur and signed a contract to that FACT. They were also given all medical records and when this "buyer" got mad at them, and since she is friends with a couple of the board members from Division IV, she filed a complaint and the board suspended them based on what can only be "their" interpretation of what constitutes misconduct.
Not sure actually since they have not even told the Lynn's what they did wrong.

Everyone better plan on keeping all unhealthy puppies in Division IV as long as this board is in place.



Jo


MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

That's ALL they did. They sold a bitch with a minor heart murmur to a person who bought it KNOWING it had the heart murmur and signed a contract to that FACT. They were also given all medical records and when this "buyer" got mad at them, and since she is friends with a couple of the board members from Division IV, she filed a complaint and the board suspended them based on what can only be "their" interpretation of what constitutes misconduct.
Not sure actually since they have not even told the Lynn's what they did wrong.

Everyone better plan on keeping all unhealthy puppies in Division IV as long as this board is in place.



Jo

Sold or placed? From my readings on the internet I thought Sharon had stated the puppy was placed? Since when did placed and sold become synonomous? Sharon could you please clear that up?

Dennis
MyToy Bulldogs
www.mytoybulldogs.com
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com


MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

"Jo"

First of all, if I didn't sign my full and correct name my post would hold no credibility, right? In checking the membership lists of BCA and Division IV in particular I do not find any "Jo" nor "Jo Newman" listed. Making assumptions and accusations, such as those you have made, are dangerous at best, therefor I will simply ask if you are a member of BCA or just an angry trouble maker hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. Furthermore, you seem to have few validated facts, indicative that you are shooting anger from the hip.

The real meaning of your post was very obvious and was well addressed, like it or not. Your fallacious and ridiculous allegations bring forth your real agenda.

Jim Armstrong was not slandered in any email that I read. His opposition was campaigned for, he was not campaigned against. Big difference.

Bob Newcomb can and has served as a division officer in tandem with his position as AKC Delegate. He could not hold two national offices (Pres. & Delegate) therefore he stepped down as delegate during his tenure as President. Get it straight.

You are wrong about "No one but the friends of the standing board are happy with the things that have been done for the past couple of years." I'm sure you would be disappointed to hear that many are very pleased with the forward movement and changes made by the current board. Hush though, we wouldn't want anything good to overshadow your agenda of hatred.

BTW, Bob Newcomb was at the August, 2007 meeting of the OKCBC, evidencing that he does, in fact, attend meetings. Once again, get it straight.

Lastly, I am fully aware of who I serve and I believe I did open myself to questions of the MEMBERSHIP. BTW, the complaint becomes the business of the membership ONLY when and if expulsion is recommended, then and only then, is all information disseminated to the entire membership.


Elaine

lets hear it all, were they suspended only because of selling a dog with a heart murmor, and if i understood that correctly, it was discolsed in teh contract, so they new it, or is there more, i mean what are teh facts, better yet, what is in a signed contract by both parties??? i cant understand what is what, so lets hear it! reading thru this all, i would like to know it to, i mean its such an open and public issue now, no one can be responsible for what they say since its been so openly posted places by all involved.. im giving a full free ticket for all involved to post without restrictions, its your words and you may post them.

webmaster.
2008 Bulldog Calendars now ready!
Bulldog gifts, click below
http://www.cafepress.com/bulldogsworld

so...... the sole and only reason the Lynns were suspended is because they bred a dog with a slight puppy heart murmur?
Is that right?
Is there more to this that we are not hearing?
What gives?
Really?
Since we have all been invited to this party...
Let's get it all out.. once and for all.
I have a hunch we haven't heard it all...
e

"This e-mail has been sent privately to the Division IV Board members:"

Then why share it with the world?
e

"Bob Newcomb cannot run for office since he is an AKC Delegate and is not allowed to hold office".

I was not aware of this rule?

"Jo"

This is not a wrongful termination case and is not subject to the requirements of employment law.

The By-Laws give the Board of Governors in each Division of the BCA the responsibility to determine if the actions of the defendant in any complaint "constitute conduct prejudicial to the best interest of The Bulldog Club of America or the Bulldog breed."

This Board made its determination as required by the By-Laws.

If you don't like the disciplinary procedure that was approved by the National Council and voted on by the membership, work to change it instead of chastising those of us who have done our duty as members of our Division's Board of Governors under the By-Laws as they exist now.

Dan Bandy

Hey Jo are you a member of the BCA or any Club for that matter...???

Would really love to know who you really are.... Your play on words brings to mind a person I know very well but the name doesn't match up... Who are you for real???? Love all your twist and turns... the manipulations of the audience is clever to say the least.

Terri

MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

You know what this really means? That IF you live in Division IV and a puppy in a litter you own has a health problem then you better plan on keeping it since the Division IV Board can entertain a charge against you for selling or placing it into a home that agrees to take it regardless of it's health problem.

That is what happened to the Lynn's.

The Board set a precedent and based it without BCA defining misconduct which leaves the door open to abuse.


Jo

Here come the friends that I spoke about in a previous email! LOL
Regardless of their ability to blame everything on one person, the evil one I think Sharon said, it won't hold water. But it must be nice to think only one person out there in bulldog land is the only one who finds their actions reprehensiable, they are simply wrong.

The bigger picture that every BCA member needs to consider is this:

Ok..here we go again.....and everyone really needs to put their thinking caps on for this one as this can impact you at anytime and leaves the door wide open for litigation against the BCA in my opinion.

Points have been discussed about the Lynn's and DIV IV response and action to a complaint filed by the Cooley's. I am not here to take sides but have asked questions about the process.

A point was made today on this forum as stated by a DIV IV representative Elaine Andrews. She stated that the actions taken were not about a contract dispute and that the board acted within a time frame, BCA Constitution, By-laws and Division By-laws. Read it folks word for word. It's on the BCA website on the front page link. I have read it and understand it. This is also wording taken from the AKC sample Constitution and By-laws on their website also word for word that is in our Discipline Policy. The AKC defines conduct prejudicial to the sport of dogs in relationship to an event clearly. The AKC also defines and has acted many times as noted in the secretary and board minutes what common areas that are punishable under this "conduct." I have yet to see where the AKC has acted on any issue related to this. Maybe someone else can come up with an example outside of DNA, registration and record keeping practices and actions taken against individuals who face legal issues with regards to the humane treatments of dogs.

This leads me to ask this very important question as the DIV IV Board has taken this action under the guise of the DIV By-laws as written:

What does, "alleged misconduct prejudicial to the best interests of The Bulldog Club of America or the Bulldog breed"

mean to you?"

No where in our current Constitution, By-laws, Division By-laws, membership packet, club membership documents does it spell out Misconduct or Serious Misconduct or give examples. This is a very vague and broad term bandied about that unless spelled out in it's entirety, discussed, voted on, distributed to the membership and published can anyone in the BCA be held accountable for "misconduct". Anyone who has ever worked a job in their life and been given an employee handbook that clearly "defines" misconduct or serious misconduct knows you can not hold someone accountable without the above word "misconduct" being defined to the membership or employee. Our own Code of Ethics does not define it. The Breeder Code of Ethics defines rules in order to participate in the program which is a voluntary program to participate in but there is still no definition for "Misconduct" for the BCA.

A definition of the word "Misconduct"

A misconduct is a legal term meaning a wrongful, improper, or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated or intentional purpose or by obstinate indifference to the consequences of one's acts.

Again, we have not defined what Misconduct is for our membership. Our discipline policy as written gives the Division Boards the power to measure the membership to "their" interpretation of the word "Misconduct". How will you know if you miss this mark? You won't folks. If someone is pissed off enough at you, pays the fee and sends their complaint thru to the Division Secretary you "could" be addressed in the same manner. Think about the implications!

Let's take for example a show breeder who stacks dogs crates with bulldogs in there garage, or a breeder who studs their male to puppy mill operations, or breeders who produce bulldogs with health ailments or breeders who sell bulldogs without a contract or breeders who have over 40 bitches and sell 15 litters a year or breeders who sell bulldogs on pyramid schemes and the list can go on and on. We know of and see these practices every single day. For some individuals this could be considered Misconduct or Serious Misconduct in their interpretation and you can send your $250 in with your complaint. Because it is not defined what "Misconduct" is for the membership we "COULD" be held accountable for their "INTERPRETATION."

What I find as an act of "alleged misconduct prejudicial to the best interests of the Bulldog Club of America or the Bulldog Breed" is that we have not defined this word to protect our club and it's membership and we are using this term to prosecute someone with something they are not aware of. A mistake has been made and it needs to be corrected. This has nothing to do with individuals in this matter but how globally we all can be affected by this terminolgy and by the PRESCEDENT set by the DIV IV Board.

If you find my questions off base, consider the example I have provided an example of an HR policy with regards to Misconduct and Serious Misconduct within the workplace. If an employee has not been informed, educated on the rules, documented thru the actions, they will win their unemployment case when discharged for Misconduct.

**************************************************************************************************************************

50.3 Misconduct and Serious Misconduct

This policy must be read in full and documented upon employee new hire and before proceeding to address misconduct or serious misconduct. Supervisors are required to discuss the matter with an officer of the Employee Relations and Management Services Section.
The term "misconduct" is a broad term that covers a variety of acts or omissions by an employee. The types of conduct, which constitute misconduct or serious misconduct, depend on the facts and circumstances in each case. Some examples are:

Misconduct

poor timekeeping (evidenced over a period of time)

absenteeism without reasonable cause

temporary absence from place of work without authority

failure to advise supervisor of completion of job or delays

uncooperative attitude

Serious Misconduct

Serious misconduct is conduct of a nature that justifies termination of employment without notice. It is misconduct that may include a combination of a number of documented incidents of misconduct, a single offence frequently repeated or a single serious incident (see below).

theft

fraud

assault

misappropriation of funds

serious harassment (including sexual harassment)

abusing or threatening another employee

malicious damage to University property

a wilful and serious breach of the University’s Code of Conduct, Statutes or Policies

wilful disobedience of a lawful and reasonable instruction given by a supervisor

repeated acts of misconduct for which the staff member has been counselled

Jo

"Jo"

The suggestion of your post was that this Board had the option to wait until after litigation was resolved to do our duty as outlined in the By-Laws.

As the section of the By-Laws I referred you to states, once a complaint is filed the Board must determine if a hearing is warranted. We did so at our next quarterly meeting as prescribed by the By-Laws, and then had a maximum of 12 weeks to hold the hearing. Nowhere in the By-Laws does it say "unless there is pending litigation" when referring to the timeline the Board must follow once a complaint is filed.

I understand you wanting to post something anonymously, but please make yourself familiar with what is required by the By-Laws before commenting.

Dan Bandy

That dennis post was me not Dennis.
Terri
Sorry
Terri
MyToyBulldogs

MyToyBulldogs
http://www.mytoybulldogs.com

Elaine. I think we all know who this is. Or who is pulling the strings on this one.

Its a new name every week. I hope this person doesnt actually have this many voices in there head.

Zack