Hi all!
In April last year, my husband and I bought a 5th generation purebred siberian husky from an AKC licensed breeder in Lindale, Texas. We paid $750 for him. His name is Sully. We love him to DEATH.
But as he's gotten older, we've noticed that Sully does not look at all like a Siberian husky. In fact, other siberian husky owners comment on it all the time. He looks mixed with malamute and something else because he's also much smaller than he should be. Don't get me wrong we love Sully. His size is kind of perfect, because at 50 lbs he drags me already!

But we signed a contract for a PUREBRED siberian husky and paid almost a thousand dollars for one. So we were wondering if we could get that money back, and how. We will be doing a DNA test to have proof.

I looked up the breeder and they are no longer listed on AKC's site, so I dont think they have their licensing any longer which makes me wonder if another dog of theirs was proven not to be purebred as well.

The questions:
If he's not purebred, is the contract void?
If so, what action do we take to get our money back?

Thank you all for your time!
I've attached some pictures of Sully for both cuteness and for reference!

Sully's Mama

Do you have a pic of him standing?

To me, he looks like a Siberian Husky, a beautiful one at that. 50 pounds for a male puts him within standards since the top weight for a male should be 59lbs. So he's not even *that* small. If he was mixed with Malamute, although he could still be small, chances are he'd be larger, and I personally don't even see any Malamute to be honest.

A lot of people have out of standard Huskies, generally falling on the larger side with not only tallness, but weight from 70lbs and up. A lot of people also *see* Malamute when they see a fluffier dog than their own, but Huskies have several variations of coats. Mine are fluffy/plush\showcoat, there is also a wooly, and then the standard coat being shorter and less "bulky". From what I can tell, your pup is a bit on the fluffy/plush\showcoat side. ..and truly beautiful!

I think laws vary by state as to misrepresentation. I don't know if, for example, they were found to be guilty of misrepresenting a breed they sold, and you wanted your money back, if they would also be entitled to the dog back. But I also think the judge could punish them by finding in your favor and awarding you damages, but I believe you'd have to have purchased the dog with the intent of breeding, showing, etc. where it's bloodline holds an actual value in the way of you being damaged by not being able to breed/show/etc . And in that case, the breeder would have sold your pup to you with full registration, as opposed to limited registration which is how most "pet" dogs are sold, from breeders.  Did you receive limited registration from the breeder when you purchased him? If so, you should be able to order his pedigree from the AKC. Keep in mind though, that being papered doesn't necessarily mean you are getting a dog free from any other breeds, but having its pedigree allows you to atleast trace his lineage back for generations. Again though, if another dog was to have bred with a breeders dog, without the breeder knowing, his papers wouldn't show that. Only a DNA test would, and I've heard opposing views on how accurate those can be.

I tend to disagree with Jimmy, the width of the ear set looks odd to me for a siberian. Take a look at this link where they explain the differences between a Sibe and a Mal. While Jimmy's pups are fluffy, the fur again, looks more Mal than Sibe. Of course it may simply be the way the picture was taken. Anyone may feel to disagree with me, I've seen Mals but never had one so this is strictly my opinion.

I'm also in Texas - though on the other side of the state - I think you find it very difficult to get any satisfaction from the breeder, even after taking them to court. The fact that you have a contract and it's been a year since you took possession, most courts would stand with the contract unless you can prove that not only is the dog not as represented but that you have been disadvantaged by the transaction.

All that said ... I'm guessing the first name of the person you bought him from is Judy. After looking around at her kennel, several of her dogs look a lot more like Mals than Sibes. (( Intentionally did not mention the "kennel" name since we've had a few disgruntled owners complain - well, maybe it was just one but that was too many ))

At this point, since you seem to care for the dog and in the pictures he looks well cared for and happy, I'd bite the bullet, say that this "kennel" who is little more than a puppy mill with a name took you and let it go. Life's too short to try to wreak any vengeance because I personally think there's little to no chance of getting any satisfaction.

Whatever he is, BTW, he's a good looking, happy dog ....

I have found that a lot of 'pure' huskies have Samoyed in them. If not pure the mix is probably more apt to be with a Sammy rather than a Mal which would give the plush coat and happy look without offsetting his size as much as a Mal would.

Only certain DNA tests will stand behind their evidence in court if you take them to small claims. The issue you may run into there depends on the wording of the contract. You run the risk of the breeder taking the dog back if wording isn't specific. If you do manage to win you may get your money back and perhaps some damages if you can prove any, but they may take the dog back from you. You will need to actually talk to a lawyer before going into it. While you can take someone to small claims on your own. The risk in this instance is high if it means gaining some money but losing your dog.

I would do my research and do a DNA test but be aware as Jimmy said, some dogs are just out of standard in some ways and may still be pure. I did the Embark test on my big male. I would have bet money on GSD in there and he came back pure despite having large ears and topping the scales at 75 pounds. See what comes out of the DNA to satisfy curiosity but as for taking legal action I tend to agree with Al. The likelihood of winning is slim and the liability of it could be greater than you want. I do always agree that exposing bad breeders is a good thing though and with proof in hand you may be able to warn off any other potential buyers to do their homework and be a real proponent of finding reputable breeders.

The only addition I can add, your pup looks to be husky x malamute, maybe sammy. Ear placement and snout looks like typical husky x mal. I would spend the money on a dna test and then expose the breeder, tho I do know that if the breeder had mals on property, a female can have a litter with 2 or more sires, so the breeder may think only the husky got to her, but the mal got to her also. I think it is a learning experience and chalk up the cost of getting him to that, and then spend the cash on the dna test and expose them is a better idea, like the others said you could win, but you may have to give up your pup, best to expose the breeder vs loosing your loved pup.

I must start by saying that I think your dog is very beautiful! Actually, Sully looks a lot like one of our dogs (Lyra), and there is no question that she is a purebred. Both her parents were high quality show dogs but Lyra has several "flaws" that would keep her from being a champion herself.

There is still enough genetic variation in the Siberian gene pool that there is no guarantee that the pups from the mating of two purebreds, even two "show quality purebreds", will result in all the pups being perfectly within "standard". Understand that the "standards" were created to both describe the original examples of the breed, but also to enhance traits that the original breeders found desirable. It does not follow that all the traits identified in the standard represent the centerline of the distribution of genes in the Siberian gene pool.

If you read everything you can find on the history of the Siberian I think you will find that there is reason to believe that the dogs bred by the Chukchi people hundreds of years ago looked somewhat different than what we now consider the "breed standard". Unfortunately there are no photos from the first contacts Europeans had with the Chukchi people, just written descriptions, which If I remember include the word "shaggy". The "foxy" look may have come about more recently in their history as the result of interbreeding with other northern breeds after the Chukchi people suffered some very hard times and lost not only a lot of their numbers but also a lot of their dogs.

Cyberpup wrote:

Unfortunately there are no photos from the first contacts Europeans had with the Chukchi people, just written descriptions, which If I remember include the word "shaggy".

Someone in a FB husky group actually posted some history pictures...including a very old, black and white photo of several Chukchis with their dogs. I was very surprised to see just how shaggy they were. Made my wooly look like a sleek, short-hair

In the very first photo, in profile, your pup looks like a close cousin to another member's dog - Mishka from Louisiana. Also, a purebred.

I love Cyberpups post, I remember reading a very interesting article on "Old line " Siberian Huskies a few years ago , I am trying to find it again but so far I'm unsuccessful, but I read it after getting Kohdi and thinking to myself that the "look" was very much similar to how Kohdi looks but I don't remember there being pictures to compare to. It was a Russian based article and I am determined to find it, lol. Anyways, there was also a discussion in here on the subject, it refers a lot to the Sepala but does give a lot of insight to the different looks of the Siberian ...Breed Types: Different lines of the Siberian Husky from August 2011. It's an interesting read as well.

Kohdi and Mishka are mostly a mix of Troika and Karnovanda Siberians, it was through a search for Troika that I came across the article I mentioned as Troika is/was (?) breeding for that "old line" Siberian, they were a breeder mentioned in the article, and it's where I think they get that fluff they have going on, from. There was more to it than just fluff though, it talked of a shorter back and something about the chest, etc. Basically a sturdier looking husky without being a "freight" type, and why I kept thinking of Kohdi when I read it, a lot of the description just seemed to fit him (in my mind) . Anyways, it always bothers me to hear stories/comments on what someone else thinks our huskies should look, and when they don't conform, must be a mix, not pure, what have you? Reputable breeders will mostly keep the pups from a litter that tick most of breed conformation check boxes, so they can use them to better the breed, the rest are mostly sold as pets and the majority of us get our huskies as pets, so they will have things that don't conform to the standards. I'm uneducated on the conformation points of a Siberian, but I know I can name off some of Kohdi and Mishka's "flaws", does not mean they've been mixed with Malamutes because their fluffy, they just are! Or a Samoyed because they always look happy, I like to believe they ARE happy, lol, so I accept my dogs for what they are, don't need a DNA test to confirm they are pure, and just am elated I get the privelage of having two truly awesome dogs

This isn't THE article I mentioned above, but it does talk about the old line, and the different characteristics of old line, show line, and racing lines.