Print the value of index0
  • Report:  #1160899

Complaint Review: Goldstar German Shepherds

Goldstar German Shepherds Goldstar Service Dog Center Service Dog Ripoff ,Scaming Veterans and Disabled, Pahrump Nevada

  • Reported By:
    Joshua — Las Vegas Nevada
  • Submitted:
    Thu, July 10, 2014
  • Updated:
    Thu, July 10, 2014

        I paid Goldstar for a fully trained service dog. The tasks that the SD was supposed to be trained in include object retrieval, crowd negotiation and basic and advanced obedience. I advised Goldstar that the primary objective of the SD was to mitigate diagnosed PTSD and other physical disabilities. I also advised Goldstar that there was a second dog in the home and that it was important the two animals got along. Further, I asked Goldstar, prior to the agreement to have them train a SD, what would happen should the dog not be a good fit. Goldstar advised that should the dog not be a good fit then “Goldstar shall provide a new dog or work out other arrangements” with me.

        I received the SD around March 28th, 2014. On April 10th, 2014 I contact Eric Saundrs at Goldstar, via email, and advised of multiple issues going on with the SD. These issues included that the SD was aggressive towards the household dog and other dogs while out in public. Goldstar failed to contact me at that time. I was able to contact Goldstar the next day regarding this behavior and returned the SD to Goldstar for additional training. The cost incurred with this additional training was $150. The SD was returned to me at a dog park where I was to show the "progress" that had been made. During the exchange the SD, while under the control of the Eric Saunders, lunged at multiple dogs. He was only able to control the SD by yanking back on the leash and using negative corrections through the use of a choke collar. Goldstar then proceeded to advise me that the SD was acting that way due to “handler error”. The trainer further advised the plaintiff to start using a pinch collar to “control” the SD.

 I took possession of the SD that day and returned to working with him. It was agreed that I would contact Goldstar in a few days in order to advise of the progress. I contacted Goldstar on April 23rd, 2014 to advise them that the dog was not working out, explained what was going on, and that I was unable to bring the dog in to public. Goldstar, at that time, advised me that he (Eric Saunders) would come and get the dog. I explained that I had to return to work and would be at work all day and we both agreed to speak the next day. On April 24th, 2014 I attempted to make contact with Goldstar, and left a voicemail. Several hours later, calling from a different number, I was able to speak with the Eric Saunders. Eric became agitated and advised me that “the dog is yours, there is nothing I have to do with it any longer”. I, in good faith, attempted to resolve the issues at hand with no progress made. Eric Saunders did state that he would be willing to come to me, for additional money, in order to train the dog.

 Since initially starting to deal with this issue Goldstar has refused service of payment demand letters and a court order was signed and to be served to Goldstar. Upon receiving the court order I have had a process server attempt to serve Eric Saunders, who was noted and represented himself as the owner, attempt to provide service. Several attempts were made and it was noted that on each attempt there were notices placed from animal control and the power company. There has also been reports to the BBB that have gone unanswered.

The business which went by the name of Goldstar German Shepherds has since changed the company name to Goldstar Service Dog Center and it is now being stated that the owner is a female named "Rebecca". There has also been a major change on the website including the name of the company, removal of the address and removal of several photos of Eric with the dogs.

I think it is also important to note that the down payment was allowed to be made by credit card, however the final balance had to "be paid in a money order or certified check". It is now I can see why that may have been the case.

 

Respond to this Report!