#Do not comment on the original posts
Please read our [**sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules). Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice.
If there is an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment or your comment may be removed in general discussion.
**CHECK FLAIR** For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So Harriet volunteers there and suddenly the alterable parts of the file are altered.
đ¤how in the would could that happen. Hmm. Maybe if we all think real hard we will figure it out.
Transferring over someone's signature to a new document that they never saw and doesn't actually give them the same rights as the one they signed, is going to look REALLY badly in court. Why Harriet didn't just sign the new copy herself I cannot figure out.
I was thinking about this too, and the only thing I can come up with that makes sense is; when signing ownership over to a new person, the original owner also had to sign the document to prove that they are agreeing to said ownership change. So she just used the one from the original document.
And that's why so many documents require that you have a notary public verifying that everyone signing is present and have ID. Because you don't want anyone to have a plausible argument that they never saw, and didn't sign, any paperwork of importance. The paper documents are unimpeachable. Harriet will have to acknowledge she signed them in order to have any right to the cat at all, and those documents show OOP having ownership rights too.
But OOP can, and should, loudly dispute that the new paperwork has any legitimacy. Harriet has the burden of proof to show that OOP actually did complete the new paperwork, and she's starting from WAY behind. She doesn't have a paper copy of that transfer, with OOP's signature in pen. She doesn't have a good argument for why OOP would have signed over the cat or would be lying now. She can't prove she was providing food and medical care after the transfer. As soon as the judge starts actually asking, Harriet can get herself in serious fucking trouble for giving wrong answers.
The minute the new digital document came up OP could have called the shelter Karen-screaming whhhy diiiiid yoooou uuuuuse myyyy siiignaturre on a document iiiive neeeever seeeeen befooooore. (That was fun to type)
I donât care about speculating about their taxes and the IRS here.
But if a review was made about this agency allowing an employee to forge documents and remove ownership without consent, that would be horrible PR. If it was shared throughout the community, the public would lose respect and trust with them. They are playing with fire and should be burned.
In my community, an elderly woman had a medical emergency with her very expensive dog with her in her vehicle. The woman went to the hospital, then to a rehab facility to recover. In the meantime, the dog went to the overcrowded animal control and a local rescue swooped in to help with the dog, who was immediately placed with a volunteer who had several of the expensive dogs.
It took the elderly woman several months to recover enough to begin tracking down her dog, and she was told it was safe. In the meantime, the private rescue declared the dog abandoned and the volunteer adopted her dog. About nine months later the woman returned to her home and was told that her dog was no longer hers because she had abandoned it for too long. She managed to track down her dog (small town, distinctive breed) and the volunteer told her that she was too old to properly care for the dog.
She was heartbroken and began a campaign to regain her dog, culminating in finding a reporter to do an expose in the local paper. The dog was returned within the week, and that rescue organization lost rights to work with animal control.
Imagine how angry Animal Control, who are fully officers of the law, would be. How many cases would that call into question? Wouldnât the mayor love to have that shiny accomplishment on his record?
Potentially. It's unlikely that law enforcement would get involved but OOP could use the threat of negative social media coverage to try and convince the shelter management to denounce Harriet's documents. It's a bit of a long shot and a lot depends on how much noise OOP can make and how close Harriet is to the shelter management.
I mean, if there is genuine fraud happening, more likely that there are regulating bodies to report them too and have their licencing removed. It's very useful to the OP as a threat to get them to reverse there stance on the subject.
The forgery is local. The microchip most likely crossed state lines because the company is no doubt based elsewhere. That means the fraud is tried on two separate levels. If she is aggressive enough that shelter is double fucked.
I'm surprised no one brought up letting the rescue know what they did is fraud and illegal and see if they change their tune. You can't just change the information on a document someone has signed. If this goes to court, even small claims court, and a judge sees that, it could fall back on them with criminal charges. If Hannah pisses off the judge enough and the judge wants that to bite her in the butt....
Most (non-city) shelters I know of are ran as a non-profit with a board. The one of the employees running the day to day or a volunteer would be the person with access to documents.
What's weird is that she talked to one person who said the digital copy was binding. That's an accomplice. Anyone not in the know would mostly be confused and probably kick it up the chain to see if it can get sorted.
She should get more information from the shelter and get management involved. They probably don't want any part of anything shady.
She'd also get her side of the story out, because you know Harriet spun some BS to get whoever helped her to do that.
Yeah, surprised the top advice wasn't police report for fraud / forgery against both shelter and H, then inform shelter, possibly with a demand of their rectifying issue (and preventing it happen in the future) to oop's satisfaction or he takes his evidence to the relevant regulatory agencies.
Police report should have been top advice IMO, as it would go a long way to proving fraud, and should H submit her documents to the court as evidence, make charges of perjury that much easier.
Short answer, is it depends.
If OP requested documentation and it was mailed it would get an additional Federal charge, as it stands they probably have Fraud, Conspiracy to commit theft, and probably some other things.
It's easy to rack this shit up, them being a non-profit would probably get them into some hot water too since they are modifying their records.
This is what I'm thinking too. She needs to get a lawyer to draft a letter pressing for clarification about how it came to be - like, "Consider this informal discovery, with which you should absolutely cooperate because I will FUCKING END YOU if it comes to actual legal proceedings." But in legal speak.
That shelter, almost certainly a non profit, cannot possibly have deep enough pockets to tolerate a fraud-maker in their midst. They likely rely heavily on donations and grants, both of which rely on excellent PR. They'll figure it out fast, fix the paperwork, and ghost whomever did the dirty deed. It very well may be the roommate herself, but she easily could have a helper with admin access to documents.
... Setting all that aside, it may just be a bad Photoshop job the roommate did herself. The shelter might not be involved, even unwittingly. Step 1 is finding out what their records actually say.
Volunteering is also the equivalent of shift work whereas actually caring for a pet is an ongoing, thankless thing. I know Iâm not the only cat owner that has said âyouâre lucky I love youâ to my cats as I scrub some vomit out of the carpet, or scoop a particularly stinky pooâŚ. The day to day reality of pet ownership is not as glamorous as the short term commitment of volunteering
My ex friend's little brother worked as an assistant at a veterinary office, and he murdered her cats and hid them under her parents back deck. She didn't find out for five years until her sister told her out of guilt. He helped her look and everything and never said a word. The worst thing about the situation was that when she went to go find their bodies, she couldn't separate them from the piles of bones from all the other animals he had killed and hidden under the porch. She said there were at least 15-20 dogs and cats in various states hastily buried or bones dug up and stripped by animals.
He was always a violent asshole to her, but somehow had a great outward personality to the public. I wonder if he's killed anyone or been put in jail yet. Time to Google.
Farrrrrrrrk. I feel so bad for your ex friend, and all those animals đ˘ please let us know what you find. Hopefully that heâs restricted from all people and animals.
For sure. I've come across more than a few sketchy rescue organizations that would absolutely do this. They see the animals as their pets and seem to dislike anyone who isn't one of them adopting the animals. It's weird as hell, and they're usually very small, independent organizations, but yeah. They're absurd.Â
Yeah, I've heard about a cat rescue in Memphis where the owner/manager is actively hostile to anyone wanting to adopt a pet. I guess no one can provide the ideal situation of scores of cats crammed into one storefront together like she can.
Absolutely. There are also some that I'm positive are clearing houses for backyard breeders or something. Like, they have lots of purebreds (or "purebreds") but charge hundreds of dollars for them. No history either, like, they won't say if it was surrendered, seized, or found as a stray. Sketchy as fuck.Â
Iâm not really sure why OOP has chosen not to escalate with the shelter to have that addressed, because thereâs no way anyone in upper management knows that happened.
Hi, I work in animal care and my responsibilities include being admin on our records software. There's only so many of those, and they tend to all have one way or another to check edit history. Rescues often use the same or similar software.
There's *very* likely an unalterable record of these changes, who made them, when, etc. Editing these without good reason and notations would look *very* bad in front of whatever agency oversees this.
I'd bet a friend of OPs former roommate who is still working there did this, and if it comes to light their job is probably on the line. I'd probably fire someone for doing similar and exposing us to that kind of risk.
People get pretty up in arms about cats and dogs. I would leak the story to your local cat ladies who have 30 cats. They will happily play hardball on this.
Yay, the adoption place is sketch as hell.
And my husband and i have been married for more than 20 years and we flip a coin/ rockpaperscissors over whose name goes into any animal we adopt, because the humane society (and other rescues we've used) makes it REALLY CLEAR that they want to talk to both of us and have all of us ok with adopting but legally there is one person's name on the form.
There is no way in hell Harriet is actually going to sue for the cat. Lawsuits, even if you represent yourself, arenât free and they take at least months to resolve.
Holy shit, I ran a marathon out of spite, too.
I argued with a buddy that it was all mental fortitude and that most people could finish 26.2 miles in a strictly physical test. He told me my body would shut down before I finished. I won.
Have you ever seen the Simon Pegg movie about him running a marathon? I used to run track in high school because a friend wanted me to. Said friend was a definite athlete and got placement in multiple cool events. I was not an athlete and was placed in the mile event. What. The. Hell. I had *walked* plenty of miles in my life! Or you know, running for tag games was fun. A straight-up mile was not. Not was I a secret runner in the making. On the last day a bunch of schools got together and there were too many girls for one heat. I knew I was in trouble when they split us into best times...which equaled the under & over 5 min. crowd. Best time for me was 8 flat. I was in the 2nd group. And I was literally the last person across the finish line. My parents came - I guess to cheer me on? Kinda? And afterwards, they were like, your coach was so positive while you were running that last lap by yourself; he really helped you pick up your pace!" Said coach had jogged off the track parallel to me for the 2nd half of the last lap yelling (loudly enough to be heard by my parents in the bleachers), "There's a man with a knife after you! Run like your life depends on it! It's a big knife! You can run faster!" Yeah. I could not. If the guy with a knife got me, so be it. He could only put me out of my misery. Worst of all, my best trait is that I don't give up. So, I was not fast, and in the meantime, everyone had to watch & wait for me to finish in order for the next event. Not humiliating at all. I mean, I really loved the attention because "not giving up" is the personality trait EVERYONE respects. Kinda. Well, not really. Watch the movie. Minus the romantic love interest and the swelling music and the sense of purpose, the ending was much like my run. But hey, Simon Pegg didn't have the encouragement of my coach. And, in the end, that's an embarrassing story I can share with internet strangers.
So OP "loses" the cat. Happens all the time, hope it turns up.
Edit: even better, "lose" the cat and counter sue for all of the bills the supposed owner should've been paying.
How often have your friends said, "I'm so glad you like me and I hope I never piss you off"? And do you acknowledge this as the highest praise one can bestow? Also can I be your friend?
Usually if there is a dispute over property like this itâs rare that they are required to return the property. If anything they will be required to pay the market value of the property so op may need to pay Harriet for the value of the catâs replacement or half the adoption fee, but itâs unlikely to force it to be returned.
Op could also countersue for any costs she incurred with upkeep, vet bills, food etc if it is shown it wasnât 50/50.
And even if they are - not sure about FL, but in my jurisdiction enforcement of small claims orders is a whole other process. Sure, in the end youâll get what you want, but not before you spend even more time and money to do it.
Harriet works (volunteer) at the adoption place and had the ownership papers and microchip changed to her name is that even legal? Something tells me this woman broke a few laws and so did the adoption place. A lawyer is now needed an a trip to police station maybe.
Yeah. I'm thinking whoever is in charge of that adoption place might want to know that a volunteer tricked them into fraudulently changing records. If word about that got out, it could lead to some serious problems.
It sounds like the digital copy could easily have been made/altered later. With OP's signature it's likely not valid as just Harriet's either. At best wouldn't that make both of them listed as new owners?
Paper copies outweigh digital every time.
when a friend found her stolen bike on Craigslist, the cops made her make a printout and write the info on it about where it was seen, etc.
The police wouldnât really do anything other than file a report about your claims. You basically need to gather evidence and go to the magistrates office to file what you have and theyâll set you a court date to argue it to a judge. A lawyer would be the best route because theyâll know what to look for, what a judge will care about and what they wonât, and what to look out for from the other party.
Even if Harriet sues and wins, she's likely owed the cat or if OP refused, just the cost of the cat- so the adoption fee. It can be really difficult to actually force someone to give back an animal.
in most US jurisdictions, in small claims you can only recover money; they won't order specific performance (the return of property, in this case). so the most the roommate could hope to recover from small claims court would be the value of a used rescue cat.
if she wants the cat back, she'd have to file in Superior court (or whatever it's called in her jurisdiction).
>...the value of a used rescue cat.
"I'm sorry, this cat is clearly used. It's been petted a lot, so that's wear and tear on the fur, plus look at how stretched out it's gotten since it was new. Sorry, but I'd only be able to give you $15."
Iâm not aware of any jurisdictions where a small claims filing for this minor a claim would cost more than $300, which is almost always automatically recoupable if you win (not suggesting the roommate will, but that may make her more inclined to file). The form in most states is 1-2 pages. Yes, thereâs a wait time, but thatâs not really going deter anyone.
Small claims is designed to be as easy and accessible as possible. If the roommate is willing to file a police report (already more time and effort than filling out small claims paperwork), sheâs going to sue.
She's already gone much farther than what is probably reasonable. This would be a small claims kind of situation. Probably would only cost a couple hundred bucks. Could definitely see it going that far based on what she has already done.
This would be in small claims court, which costs about $100 to file and (in most states) lawyers aren't allowed to represent you. The caveat is that the lawsuit has to be under a certain amount, such as 5k (or equivalent for property).
Harriet is a piece of work. She's not thinking of the best interest of the cat, she's just using the cat as part of her feud with OOP. I'm really hoping for a positive resolution for OOP and the cat. So glad she took the cat anyway.
I hope Harriet steps in a pile of cat puke.
Better yet. She wakes up around 245am, stumbling, bleary eyed to the bathroom while wearing her favorite socks and trying desperately to keep the sleepiness going despite the unforgiving urge to pee. She steps in something wet, which soaks her socks. Waking up a little more, she removes her socks as quickly as she can and sits on the toilet a little extra longer to get the sleepy back. She stands up, bleary eyed and shuffling, makes it almost back to bed, and steps in something moist, squishy, and sticky that mushes between all her toes and coats the arch of her foot.
Boom, full awake.
I would publicly expose that the shelter has tampered with adoption paperwork and is illegally trying to assist in the theft of your cat. See how quickly they retract that forged paperwork after that.
Not a lawyer never been sued so I honestly have no idea if Iâm right in being concerned about this, but I would be worried posting about what the shelter did would harm OOPâs case. I feel like Harriet could use the post to argue that OOP was âthreateningâ the shelter to âchangeâ ownership.
Personally what I would do is get permission to record a conversation (since Florida is a two party consent state), have the shelter confirm that Harriet changed the adoption paperwork after OOP moved out and get a record of Harriet volunteering there. Again not a lawyer and have no experience with the court system, but I feel like having the shelter themselves confirm that the adoption papers were changed would be in OOPâs favor.
ETA: definitely do agree with people saying she should report the shelter though. What theyâre doing is massively fucked up.
Edit 2: would DEFINITELY recommend OOP lawyer up because the new adoption papers are almost definitely fraud. A lawyer would be much more equipped to get their hands dirty to get evidence especially the way I suggested.
It wouldn't be considered threatening. You're allowed to voice your opinion and state facts as you believe them to be. Harriet could claim anything she wants but since she altered the documentation and the shelter said that their records show her name while they have her volunteering, then the shelter opened themselves up to a lawsuit by not investigating and instead siding with the person they know.
This would be like if you buy a new laptop from Bestbuy and it already has someone logged in and Best Buy refuses to replace it with a new model. You're allowed to go on social media and say "They lied to me and refusing to do anything". The shelter could sue but all they'd have to do is look at the paperwork and see that's not Harriets signature and know they're fucked.
I'd also avoid talking to a lawyer in this case unless you can get free legal advice through the library. A lawyer would cost a LOT of money when you're going to small claims court. All OOP has to do is go to the shelter, ask to talk to the manager and let them know what's going on. Mention that they can either be included in the lawsuit or give them time to figure things out. OOP has the physical, original document which is all the evidence she needs with small claims. No need to spend hundreds of dollars for an easy victory case, especially since the shelter wouldn't want to be dragged into this. Hell, in small claims, a judge will just take the document Harriet has, ask for hers and OOPs drivers licenses and notice it matches OOPs. Easy.
>I feel like Harriet could use the post to argue that OOP was âthreateningâ the shelter to âchangeâ ownership.
This does not matter, she has the original paperwork, she can say whatever she wants, and Harriet can say whatever she wants. At the end of the day the shelter is full of shit and in no world are fraudulent papers legally binding.
I thought that, it needs reporting somewhere surely, a volunteer being able to access and change paperwork after it's been signed is more than a little worrying.
Iâm sorry but why on earth would someone adopt a cat jointly with their roommates? Like, if this is a super stable roommate situation that you expect to last a few years, maybe it would make sense to get a geriatric cat (like age 15+). But if youâre getting a non-geriatric adult cat, you have to be prepared for it to live 10-15 years minimum. Definitely should have had a plan for when someone inevitably moved out, got a job in another town, graduated, moved in with their SO, etc.
Iâm sure in a lot of cases it works out because one person naturally becomes the catâs main carer and then the cat stays with them when the roommate situation ends. But itâs wild to me not to even think about a scenario in which two or more people want the cat, or if everyone moves out and NO ONE wants the cat alone.
I was living with three roommates in college when I adopted a cat. The household loved her but we were all clear that she was mine, for this reason. Iâm 36 now and I STILL HAVE HER.
Yup!! Iâm a lucky case. Me, my boyfriend, and our roommate paid the initial price for two cats and more or less shared everyday responsibilities (food, litter box). Two of us paid for pretty much everything (this was agreed beforehand) and then the other person moved out. I broke up with my boyfriend and the cats stayed with me because 1) heâs allergic 2) they bonded with me. Iâm extremely surprised by how not messy this ended up being, but I think we were probably the exception to the rule
We got our childhood cat this way. Some students adopted him and he ran away, ended up in our house. We called them multiple times to come get him but they never did. And then it was summer, they all left town, and he bonded with us so much it became clear he wouldnât willingly go back with them even if they tried to collect him in the fall.
It was supremely irresponsible to let them adopt him in the first place but Iâm glad someone did. We never would have had him otherwise and I loved that cat so dang much.
We adopted adult rats as roommates in college. Lifespan is like 2 to 3 years tops so we knew they were gonna be gone before we graduated, which was indeed the case. Loved those gals, it's sad rats are so short lived but it worked out in that context.
One time a friend and I decided to buy a pair of shoes to share even though it didnât fit either of us very well. But when youâre around 18 lots of things seem logical.
My friend and I bought a weird embroidered caftan at a thrift sale in HS in the 1970s. I used it as my costume in a HS Shakespeare play (bit part). She and I just reminisced about it and neither of us have any idea where it ended up.
My sister, 10 years younger, and her HS BFF bought a green mermaidy dress same deal in the 1980s. I'll have to ask her where it is.
That's what you do. Not cats.
Because you don't think long term stuff like that as a young adult, you just want a cat and having others to help makes it less intimidating to own together.
When I adopted my cat I was in college. The lady expressed similar concerns. She said 3 cats had been returned a couple of years later by college students and told me I could always call her if I wanted to return that cat.
I think she was especially skeptical because I had never actually been around cats, knew nothing about them, and didnât actually know how to hold them. But she was a black cat and I guess my home passed her inspection so she let me have her.
I was able to contact her a decade later, she had moved out of town but I had a friend who worked in cat rescue who helped me track her down, I let her know the cat was doing great
I work as a RA and the amount of cats we find abandoned during winter break or after move out is much higher then you think :(Â
They donât see them as living animals, just fun toys
I got a cat with my college best friend/roommate. She insisted on a kitten but I said we needed an adult cat because of our schedules. I told her it would be *her* cat but also anticipated taking it because she also really wanted a dog in the future.
I was correct, when she moved out she gave the cat to me so she could get her dog.
In fairness to her I don't think she would've surrendered the cat if I hadn't expressed me being okay with taking the cat.
That's the only way it works, if you're prepared to either take or leave your joint animal.
I think the adoption fee for my cat, admittedly back in 2007, was $150. If you can't afford the fee, you can't afford all the expenses that come with a cat IMHOÂ
I did this with my roommate. But before we ever adopted our cat, we agreed that if we went our separate ways, I'd be the one who kept the cat. Can't remember why we decided that, but when I moved years later I did take the cat and it was all very civil. (Tbf I also joked I'd flee to Mexico with the cat if she changed her mind. She loved the cat but I NEEDED the cat.) So it's possible, but I think I got very lucky to make that agreement with someone who held her end of the bargain. I'd recommended anyone who adopts a pet with someone they aren't married to have that kind of discussion before you actually bring your new little friend home.
Epilogue: The cat is now approaching 20 years old and is diabetic, which requires me giving her two insulin shots a day, which I suspect my former roommate (and still good friend) would have struggled with, so the cat would probably agree we made the right call on who kept possession of her.
>"They have also changed the microchip information to reflect this."
OP needs to get her paperwork all in a row and see a vet about removing that microchip and then blast the rescue all over social media. Chips don't actually *legally* prove ownership, they just help you recover your pet if lost. You can literally buy those chips and injection needles off Amazon and DIY. It's still completely inappropriate for them to retroactively change any information on it without the legal owners approval.
>Due to personal conflicts between myself and Harriet (and the end of our lease), we will no longer be living together
Harriet definitely does not care about the cat and is only caring about it now to spite OOP due to the personal issues between them. I do hope for the best for OOP.
Look at the tags at the top. Posts with 'ongoing' or 'inconclusive' are not (yet) resolved. Posts with 'concluded' are. You can just skip the other ones if you only want the ones with a final update/resolution.
This makes no sense. In what world does a modified digital version of a legal paper take precedence over an older hardcopy? Like I could take the hardcopy of my mother's will, digitize it, and cut my ex-brother out of any inheritance?
This is what Iâm trying to understand as well. Like wouldnât someone question as to why the digital paperwork & chip had been changed, especially without the original ownerâs consent? Surely it would look suspicious seeing as Harriet is trying to take the cat, *volunteered at the place they adopted the cat from*, and suddenly has these shiny new digital docs âproving ownershipâ when the original paper docs *and* vet bills all have OOPs name on them, right?
Wouldnât something like that raise alarm bells and potentially work in OOPs favor? Because I would definitely get with a lawyer to push the fact that the rescue either allowed a volunteer to change official docs or that said volunteer had access to client docs and altered them without their knowledge and are now refusing to fix the error.
I would send a registered letter to all of the top people at the rescue informing them that a volunteer at their organization has âhackedâ into its computer to change the ownerâs name on the catâs microchip from the original owner to the volunteerâs name without the consent of the original owner, and as an ethical organization, they need to fix this egregious and unauthorized attempt to steal the cat from its registered owner.
OOP could also cc the message to a lawyer and any government agencies that regulate rescues so the organization gets the strong message that they might face legal action. Believe me they wonât want to get involved in this dispute.
I think I would use the words FRAUD and FORGERY liberally throughout any letter I sent to the rescue and the microchip place. I'd also stop communicating completely. Let her sue, let her pay to find OOP, let her pay to serve OOP over a rescue cat. She has to sue in small claims and doesn't get an attorney. The work it will take is ridiculous. She wants to scare and intimidate OOP but if OOP sits tight and enjoys her car until she's served,I bet it will never happen. The more she responds, the more she goes in to the police station to respond, the more energy this ex roommate gets.
Those are good ideas! I also have to question if itâs even possible to sue for custody of the cat in small claims court, as opposed to the monetary value of the cat, which would be pretty negligible since itâs a rescue cat, not a purebred champion.
That said, Iâm not a lawyer, but have sued a couple of deadbeat clients in small claims court and the forms I filled out to do so asked for the dollar amount that was in dispute.
Edit: typo
The ex roommate would need to sue for property. You can't sue for pain and suffering because animals are just property to the judge. It sucks because we animal lovers know that these guys are family but the law is a simple thing.
She would probably have an easier time using if it was a show cat. I can see a judge laughing over this. Sure, they would handle it seriously but I bet at some point the judge will say "why not get a new cat at the rescue?" If she does sue, I'd counter sue for the fraud and forgery.
So I worked in a shelter doing adoptions and Return-to-Owners through chips and chips are actually not that easy to change. Itâs only one piece of paper sure, but there is definitely some information needed that you canât just switch up without both parties agreeing.
But also we might have two people listed on the cat for contact purposes, but the person signing is the legal owner of the cat. We also explain that thoroughly to unmarried couples and friends adopting jointly. Everything about this on the paperwork side just seems so shady as hell and frustrating.
The other thing is that out in the real world microchips don't matter for ownership. Veterinarians aren't really supposed to check microchips without the consent of the client/owner as that is who we represent and that is the VCPR that is being maintained. And certainly we are not to contact anyone behind the owner's back. Obviously lots of wonderful people bring in found pets and absolutely want us to reunite them with their owners. We do that all the time and chips are so wonderful when they allow that. What they don't work great for is proving ownership if two people want the animal.
If the "owners" are too honest of how they acquired the pet I will jump in and start explaining animals are technically property that can be stolen (not finders keepers) and that if they didn't go through the proper channels (advertising lost dog, etc.) and have it checked for a microchip then they could have someone else's dog or cat. I can sometimes get them to at least confirm if there isn't a microchip. I will tell them that they can keep me from checking but next time the dog is lost and if it does has a microchip it will be returned to the first owner anyways. Or if the dog has an unregistered shelter microchip they can just claim it for themselves.
People that "rescue" found pets often won't take steps to reunite them to their families and think the previous owners were neglectful abusers. If they find the pet with a single flea, cut, scratch, lean body condition, dirty, or acting scared then they consider the old owners unfit and will not cooperate to reunite the dog they have rescued. And since most lost dogs will look like this after a few days you can see the problem.
I got one of my cats through a local rescue and hadn't immediately realized that it was possible to change the information tied to a microchip. But I later worked at a pet store where the same rescue would have adoption days. I was about to move out of state and talked to the lady about getting it changed and she just said they don't do that. They absolutely refuse to change the microchips because (to them) if an animal gets lost and returned to them then the owner is \*obviously\* negligent and shouldn't get the animal back.
I just got my cat a second chip when we moved. She was the type that looked at an open door and went "Are you effing stupid? I have food in here" and refused to go out, so I wasn't concerned, really. (She was born feral and turned domesticated when she was young.)
Hmm a shelter altered ownership papers for a volunteer? Did that volunteer have access to the computers? Or are they ok with this? If so, how many times have they done this before?
This is lawyer/news worthy or at least worthy of talking to main office if there is one.Â
OP needs a cat lover lawyer friendÂ
OOP needs to file a complaint about the rescue, too. Once a lawyer is involved, a request for letter for when the digital copy was printed, Harrietâs involvement with the rescue and who printed the info out might be helpful. Those places usually have cctv, too, to prevent/refute abuse claims.
Harriet absolutely cried on someoneâs shoulder and got forged docs or created them herself.
Working at a shelter myself, Harriet probably lied through her teeth. OP should contact the person who runs the cat side of the shelter and explain the situation. Maybe the person is fooled by Harriet, maybe she isnât. But having the shelter change the info is a big deal. In my area, if thag happened, the shelter would stop letting Harriet volunteer.
>If you tried to sue her for it, the cat is only basically worth the adoption fees.
If true then If she tried to sue you for it, the cat is only basically worth the adoption fees.
Not a lawyer, but she should send via certified mail a âsettlement offerâ in the amount of the adoption fee.
Not legal advice, but something along the lines of âWhile I fully believe Iâm the true and sole owner of cat, in an effort to avoid costly legal proceedings, Iâm willing to pay $xxx, which reflects the portion of adoption fees paid by roommate. By accepting this, roommate terminates any future ownership claims, and agrees to pay OPâs legal costs if she goes to court after taking the $$â
Even if roommate declines, it looks great to a judge that one litigant is being reasonable.
Edit to add: Would also be extra smart to have a deadline in which she can accept the offer, 30 days would be very reasonable, but even 14 would suffice.
The idea of roommates adopting a pet together is fucking wild. Did they think theyâd just live together forever? Cats can live for like 20 years. How did they not go into it already knowing who the primary owner would be and who the cat would eventually live with when they stopped living together?
Iâm not surprised by the shelter. Our local shelter had to be completely revamped because the previous director was keeping âpurebredâ dogs for puppy mills and for âfriendsâ to adopt.
The new director is truly doing their best to fix everything the previous one messed up.
Shelters can be corrupt, especially if theyâre government owned.
Yeah it sounds like Harriet and/or someone at the rescue agency abused their power because Harriet volunteers there, and modified the documents to suit Harriet after the adoption had gone through. I wouldnât trust the rescue agency that claims the digital one is the only valid one.
OP should also get the former roommates to sign affidavits confirming that Harriet had not been taking care of the cat in case they are difficult to reach if this does go to court.
> Three years ago my roommates and I decided to adopt a cat at my suggestion.
This was a terrible decision on OOP's part. If you want a cat, and your roommates agree to it, ***YOU*** adopt a cat. Alone, with just ***YOU*** making financial contributions to it. It just makes for additional, unneeded complications to a situation that doesn't require it.
Having worked in rescue for dogs and cats I can 100% believe theyâd forge the paperwork. People that stay in animal rescue long term really start to think they (and only they) know best for animals. Itâs very frustrating.
I would blast what that rescue did ALLLLLLL over social media. I volunteer with several rescues and believe, shit like that doesnât fly in the community
Without Harriet's signature, the document should mean nothing - and I'd ask for the manager of the shelter. Harriet may have had a friend alter a document.
I've drawn up countless leases for prospective (commercial) tenants. Without a signature - it isn't worth the paper it is printed on, even with their names all over it.
I hope someone tells the OOP that.
Digital documents are interesting. They are dated from the moment they're made and/or changed; a digital paper trail. If OOP has physical paperwork dated before these documents were made and the chip was changed, could these be used as evidence? I mean, if documents can be altered after the fact wouldn't that mean everyone could do it when claiming property? Also, are statements from the other roommates helpful?
I would be naming and shaming that organisation. People need to know how underhanded they have been and are willing to be. I donât think they should be allowed to operate like that. If anyone tried to take my babies from me they would be in for the fight of their lives not just legal I would take them out back and sort them right out.
I'm confused by the shelter still having access to (much less control of) the microchip account? That should have been transferred to a new email/password as soon as they adopted the cat. In my experience, the companies don't even require proof of ownership, you just have the registration number that comes with the chip packet, and then you set up the account đ¤ˇđťââď¸.
Why are you believing the adoption place? They are not lawyers nor do they know the laws plus they are friends/coworkers of the roommate and are willing to lie and have committed fraud for her. You may want to contact the owners of the rescue and inform them of the lies and fraud they have committed on ex-roommates behalf. Tell them when ex sues you you will turn around and sue them for fraud.
The new digital paperwork will prove that it was created long after the cat was originally adopted.
Talk to a lawyer who has knowledge of the laws involving pets and don't fret.
Op needs to find the highest ranked person at the adoption agency and let them know a past volunteer used her connections to have the registry changed.
Contact the rescue and tell them that it is obvious what they are doing, and ask if they are comfortable getting a reputation in the pet owner community for playing games with adoption papers. Indicate that you 100% have hardcopies of the original papers, and it is very easy to see when changes were made, and that a civil suit for altering those documents will likely discourage other potential pet owners from adopting from them.
If an actual suit is filed, would it help if OOP offered settlement to the tune of the difference in the adoption fee? On top of all the paperwork issues muddying the waters, a tangible (and documented) attempt to resolve would work in their favour. A pair of affidavits from the other roommates testifying to the care falling distinctly on OOPâs shoulders wonât hurt either.
Man I donât know why people get pets with roommates. My ex had a dog that was definitely her dog (had her for years before we met) and when we broke up it broke my heart to leave that dog. Iâd never enter into a situation where I knew that would happen.Â
This is actually giving me stress for OOP. Hope it works out in her favor! She can also get her old roomies involved if they are willing to provide statements. And she can get statements from the vet as well. Not just bills, but actual statement from the vet.
I think [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/s/0K565FidVh) adds some context to the relationship between OOP and Harriet. Harriet is hostile, verbally abusive, and makes OOP feel unsafe.
So the understanding that veterinarian offices (United States) have is that whoever has the file for the animal and is paying for well and sick visits is the legal owner. It can be really difficult to claw back ownership of a pet that a "good Samaritan" takes over, for example. Some people want to scan every "new" pet for a microchip and force a reunion. But if people bring them in as "their" pet we would basically need consent to scan them or just live with the knowledge the pet has another owner and there is nothing we can do about it. I think the gist is in claims court the microchips aren't holding up as ownership proof. Possession is 9/10 of the law so keep up your veterinary care paper trail as well as keep all other expenses well documented.
I tell people this when I install microchips. That it is a permenent ID and if someone with good intentions (neighbor, animal shelter) wishes to find a pet's owner then it will assist in that mission. But obviously with how easy it is to do your random neighbor could microchip your dog and register it to them and you might never know. So it's not a slam dunk on proof of ownership.
I think the microchip being switched isn't that big an issue unless the two of them are completely sharing all expenses and the vet office file.
I would go full petty mode and counter-sue if it came to that.
Then I'd bring the smoke and start reporting the situation to regulators and drag the adoption folks who permitted it to happen. The adoption folks might back the room-mates sob story and help a little, but they'll back the hell off when they get dragged into actually having to defend themselves in court.
My heart goes out to OP, but the moral of the story is never, ever "go in" on a pet with people you casually live with. In the end, a pet has one owner and that needs to be decided on beforehand.
I know a few people in situations like this, and it never ends well.
#Do not comment on the original posts Please read our [**sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/wiki/subrules). Rule-breaking may result in a ban without notice. If there is an issue with this post (flair, formatting, quality), reply to this comment or your comment may be removed in general discussion. **CHECK FLAIR** For concluded-only updates, use the [CONCLUDED](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3ACONCLUDED) flair. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BestofRedditorUpdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So Harriet volunteers there and suddenly the alterable parts of the file are altered. đ¤how in the would could that happen. Hmm. Maybe if we all think real hard we will figure it out.
Would be a shame if people found out the shelter forges adoption paperwork. Would make the IRS wonder what else the organization has been altering.
Fraud they committed fraud.
That's exactly it. You can't just alter a legally binding document after the fact.
Transferring over someone's signature to a new document that they never saw and doesn't actually give them the same rights as the one they signed, is going to look REALLY badly in court. Why Harriet didn't just sign the new copy herself I cannot figure out.
I was thinking about this too, and the only thing I can come up with that makes sense is; when signing ownership over to a new person, the original owner also had to sign the document to prove that they are agreeing to said ownership change. So she just used the one from the original document.
And that's why so many documents require that you have a notary public verifying that everyone signing is present and have ID. Because you don't want anyone to have a plausible argument that they never saw, and didn't sign, any paperwork of importance. The paper documents are unimpeachable. Harriet will have to acknowledge she signed them in order to have any right to the cat at all, and those documents show OOP having ownership rights too. But OOP can, and should, loudly dispute that the new paperwork has any legitimacy. Harriet has the burden of proof to show that OOP actually did complete the new paperwork, and she's starting from WAY behind. She doesn't have a paper copy of that transfer, with OOP's signature in pen. She doesn't have a good argument for why OOP would have signed over the cat or would be lying now. She can't prove she was providing food and medical care after the transfer. As soon as the judge starts actually asking, Harriet can get herself in serious fucking trouble for giving wrong answers.
It's fraud plain and simple.
The minute the new digital document came up OP could have called the shelter Karen-screaming whhhy diiiiid yoooou uuuuuse myyyy siiignaturre on a document iiiive neeeever seeeeen befooooore. (That was fun to type)
I donât care about speculating about their taxes and the IRS here. But if a review was made about this agency allowing an employee to forge documents and remove ownership without consent, that would be horrible PR. If it was shared throughout the community, the public would lose respect and trust with them. They are playing with fire and should be burned.
In my community, an elderly woman had a medical emergency with her very expensive dog with her in her vehicle. The woman went to the hospital, then to a rehab facility to recover. In the meantime, the dog went to the overcrowded animal control and a local rescue swooped in to help with the dog, who was immediately placed with a volunteer who had several of the expensive dogs. It took the elderly woman several months to recover enough to begin tracking down her dog, and she was told it was safe. In the meantime, the private rescue declared the dog abandoned and the volunteer adopted her dog. About nine months later the woman returned to her home and was told that her dog was no longer hers because she had abandoned it for too long. She managed to track down her dog (small town, distinctive breed) and the volunteer told her that she was too old to properly care for the dog. She was heartbroken and began a campaign to regain her dog, culminating in finding a reporter to do an expose in the local paper. The dog was returned within the week, and that rescue organization lost rights to work with animal control.
If I were a betting man I feel like that Dog would have been returned ASAP if it was a cheaper breed.
Yep, it was a $2000 dog, with a lot of good years left in it. And animal control is filled with pit and pit mixes.
I like you.
Imagine how angry Animal Control, who are fully officers of the law, would be. How many cases would that call into question? Wouldnât the mayor love to have that shiny accomplishment on his record?
Harriet is the shady shelter forger.
Thatâs a good title for her in the **BoRU Hall of Shameâ˘**!
Would this benefit OOP somehow?
OOP might be able to sue the shelter for creating fraudulent ownership document, claiming damages of emotional distress.
Potentially. It's unlikely that law enforcement would get involved but OOP could use the threat of negative social media coverage to try and convince the shelter management to denounce Harriet's documents. It's a bit of a long shot and a lot depends on how much noise OOP can make and how close Harriet is to the shelter management.
I mean, if there is genuine fraud happening, more likely that there are regulating bodies to report them too and have their licencing removed. It's very useful to the OP as a threat to get them to reverse there stance on the subject.
Exactly. It shows evidence of possible fraud.
It's more of a possible crime of wire fraud with the microchip registry that those involved should be aware of.
The forgery is local. The microchip most likely crossed state lines because the company is no doubt based elsewhere. That means the fraud is tried on two separate levels. If she is aggressive enough that shelter is double fucked.
This is what Iâm thinking too.
I really like how You both are thinking.
I'm surprised no one brought up letting the rescue know what they did is fraud and illegal and see if they change their tune. You can't just change the information on a document someone has signed. If this goes to court, even small claims court, and a judge sees that, it could fall back on them with criminal charges. If Hannah pisses off the judge enough and the judge wants that to bite her in the butt....
Most (non-city) shelters I know of are ran as a non-profit with a board. The one of the employees running the day to day or a volunteer would be the person with access to documents. What's weird is that she talked to one person who said the digital copy was binding. That's an accomplice. Anyone not in the know would mostly be confused and probably kick it up the chain to see if it can get sorted. She should get more information from the shelter and get management involved. They probably don't want any part of anything shady. She'd also get her side of the story out, because you know Harriet spun some BS to get whoever helped her to do that.
Yes, the owners might not know what the workers are doing and the pile of shit it will pile on the shelter for knowingly committing fraud.
Whatâs the saying? Never interrupt your enemy when theyâre making a mistake or something like that. Maybe itâs better to not tell them.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/07/06/never-interfere/?amp=1
Yeah, surprised the top advice wasn't police report for fraud / forgery against both shelter and H, then inform shelter, possibly with a demand of their rectifying issue (and preventing it happen in the future) to oop's satisfaction or he takes his evidence to the relevant regulatory agencies. Police report should have been top advice IMO, as it would go a long way to proving fraud, and should H submit her documents to the court as evidence, make charges of perjury that much easier.
Yeah, IANAL but forgery like that sounds like a felony to me
No I doubt itâs a felony. Itâs fraud but not a felony.
Short answer, is it depends. If OP requested documentation and it was mailed it would get an additional Federal charge, as it stands they probably have Fraud, Conspiracy to commit theft, and probably some other things. It's easy to rack this shit up, them being a non-profit would probably get them into some hot water too since they are modifying their records.
Feline-ony?
Lmao get out.
The microchip would constitute wire fraud if it crossed state lines. That's a felony no matter how large or small.
This is what I'm thinking too. She needs to get a lawyer to draft a letter pressing for clarification about how it came to be - like, "Consider this informal discovery, with which you should absolutely cooperate because I will FUCKING END YOU if it comes to actual legal proceedings." But in legal speak. That shelter, almost certainly a non profit, cannot possibly have deep enough pockets to tolerate a fraud-maker in their midst. They likely rely heavily on donations and grants, both of which rely on excellent PR. They'll figure it out fast, fix the paperwork, and ghost whomever did the dirty deed. It very well may be the roommate herself, but she easily could have a helper with admin access to documents. ... Setting all that aside, it may just be a bad Photoshop job the roommate did herself. The shelter might not be involved, even unwittingly. Step 1 is finding out what their records actually say.
What boggles my mind is how Harriet won't lift a finger for her own cat, yet manages to volunteer at a shelter. Some people...
Well ya see, caring for an animal in a private residence doesn't give the good PR that volunteering in a shelter does.
Volunteering is also the equivalent of shift work whereas actually caring for a pet is an ongoing, thankless thing. I know Iâm not the only cat owner that has said âyouâre lucky I love youâ to my cats as I scrub some vomit out of the carpet, or scoop a particularly stinky pooâŚ. The day to day reality of pet ownership is not as glamorous as the short term commitment of volunteering
My personal theory is that cats look and act so cute specifically so they wouldn't get strangled to death.
Nailed it!
My ex friend's little brother worked as an assistant at a veterinary office, and he murdered her cats and hid them under her parents back deck. She didn't find out for five years until her sister told her out of guilt. He helped her look and everything and never said a word. The worst thing about the situation was that when she went to go find their bodies, she couldn't separate them from the piles of bones from all the other animals he had killed and hidden under the porch. She said there were at least 15-20 dogs and cats in various states hastily buried or bones dug up and stripped by animals. He was always a violent asshole to her, but somehow had a great outward personality to the public. I wonder if he's killed anyone or been put in jail yet. Time to Google.
Farrrrrrrrk. I feel so bad for your ex friend, and all those animals đ˘ please let us know what you find. Hopefully that heâs restricted from all people and animals.
Well god damn that took a hard left into What-The-Actual-Fuck-Ville. ....and I'm also curious in the Google result lol.
How did the googling go? Killing animals like that is one of the biggest possible red flags...
Pharisee.
For sure. I've come across more than a few sketchy rescue organizations that would absolutely do this. They see the animals as their pets and seem to dislike anyone who isn't one of them adopting the animals. It's weird as hell, and they're usually very small, independent organizations, but yeah. They're absurd.Â
Yeah, I've heard about a cat rescue in Memphis where the owner/manager is actively hostile to anyone wanting to adopt a pet. I guess no one can provide the ideal situation of scores of cats crammed into one storefront together like she can.
Absolutely. There are also some that I'm positive are clearing houses for backyard breeders or something. Like, they have lots of purebreds (or "purebreds") but charge hundreds of dollars for them. No history either, like, they won't say if it was surrendered, seized, or found as a stray. Sketchy as fuck.Â
No lawyer or judge will be able to untangle this intricate plot!
Iâm not really sure why OOP has chosen not to escalate with the shelter to have that addressed, because thereâs no way anyone in upper management knows that happened.
Hi, I work in animal care and my responsibilities include being admin on our records software. There's only so many of those, and they tend to all have one way or another to check edit history. Rescues often use the same or similar software. There's *very* likely an unalterable record of these changes, who made them, when, etc. Editing these without good reason and notations would look *very* bad in front of whatever agency oversees this. I'd bet a friend of OPs former roommate who is still working there did this, and if it comes to light their job is probably on the line. I'd probably fire someone for doing similar and exposing us to that kind of risk.
I would post on social media that the adoption place allowed one of their volunteers to update adoption paperwork is is refusing to correct it.
Make a great human interest story for local newsÂ
People get pretty up in arms about cats and dogs. I would leak the story to your local cat ladies who have 30 cats. They will happily play hardball on this.
Bonus if theyâre retired and bored đ
Good idea, local cat facebook groups will go hard on this.
Local news is often the best advocate you can get for a case too small for the police but also not worth an expensive lawyer.
Yay, the adoption place is sketch as hell. And my husband and i have been married for more than 20 years and we flip a coin/ rockpaperscissors over whose name goes into any animal we adopt, because the humane society (and other rescues we've used) makes it REALLY CLEAR that they want to talk to both of us and have all of us ok with adopting but legally there is one person's name on the form.
Yeah and/but they can easily include a second persons' contact details als a secondary contact. Keeps everything nice and unambiguous.
I would never go there knowing they could essentially steal my pet years after the fact if someone they know decides they want it.
Also include the information about Harriet not taking care of the cat, eg. not cleaning the litterbox. What an awful volunteer for a rescue to have.
There is no way in hell Harriet is actually going to sue for the cat. Lawsuits, even if you represent yourself, arenât free and they take at least months to resolve.
Spite. Have to factor in spite.
I once ran a marathon out of spite, just because my mom said I couldnât do it.
Sure, you made your point, but did you win in the long run?
Dad???? Is that you???
Still looking for that pack of smokes, son.
Take your upvote and get out.
Holy shit, I ran a marathon out of spite, too. I argued with a buddy that it was all mental fortitude and that most people could finish 26.2 miles in a strictly physical test. He told me my body would shut down before I finished. I won.
Thatâs what Iâm talking about! Winning arguments out of spite!
Have you ever seen the Simon Pegg movie about him running a marathon? I used to run track in high school because a friend wanted me to. Said friend was a definite athlete and got placement in multiple cool events. I was not an athlete and was placed in the mile event. What. The. Hell. I had *walked* plenty of miles in my life! Or you know, running for tag games was fun. A straight-up mile was not. Not was I a secret runner in the making. On the last day a bunch of schools got together and there were too many girls for one heat. I knew I was in trouble when they split us into best times...which equaled the under & over 5 min. crowd. Best time for me was 8 flat. I was in the 2nd group. And I was literally the last person across the finish line. My parents came - I guess to cheer me on? Kinda? And afterwards, they were like, your coach was so positive while you were running that last lap by yourself; he really helped you pick up your pace!" Said coach had jogged off the track parallel to me for the 2nd half of the last lap yelling (loudly enough to be heard by my parents in the bleachers), "There's a man with a knife after you! Run like your life depends on it! It's a big knife! You can run faster!" Yeah. I could not. If the guy with a knife got me, so be it. He could only put me out of my misery. Worst of all, my best trait is that I don't give up. So, I was not fast, and in the meantime, everyone had to watch & wait for me to finish in order for the next event. Not humiliating at all. I mean, I really loved the attention because "not giving up" is the personality trait EVERYONE respects. Kinda. Well, not really. Watch the movie. Minus the romantic love interest and the swelling music and the sense of purpose, the ending was much like my run. But hey, Simon Pegg didn't have the encouragement of my coach. And, in the end, that's an embarrassing story I can share with internet strangers.
So OP "loses" the cat. Happens all the time, hope it turns up. Edit: even better, "lose" the cat and counter sue for all of the bills the supposed owner should've been paying.
How often have your friends said, "I'm so glad you like me and I hope I never piss you off"? And do you acknowledge this as the highest praise one can bestow? Also can I be your friend?
Oh, and fraudulent documents with a forged signature. You know, the digital ones with OP's signature on them? That isn't a good thing for her to keep.
Along with the digital dating that will prove the digital copies were created long after the original hard copies were produced.
You should be the head of seccret ops planning in your country.
They lost the cat in a tragic boating accident. Or does that only work for firearms?
Only thing stronger than good ol fashion Spite is that first gulp of a McDonaldâs fountain Spite
Spite is the guiding force of my life.
Usually if there is a dispute over property like this itâs rare that they are required to return the property. If anything they will be required to pay the market value of the property so op may need to pay Harriet for the value of the catâs replacement or half the adoption fee, but itâs unlikely to force it to be returned. Op could also countersue for any costs she incurred with upkeep, vet bills, food etc if it is shown it wasnât 50/50.
And even if they are - not sure about FL, but in my jurisdiction enforcement of small claims orders is a whole other process. Sure, in the end youâll get what you want, but not before you spend even more time and money to do it.
Harriet works (volunteer) at the adoption place and had the ownership papers and microchip changed to her name is that even legal? Something tells me this woman broke a few laws and so did the adoption place. A lawyer is now needed an a trip to police station maybe.
Yeah. I'm thinking whoever is in charge of that adoption place might want to know that a volunteer tricked them into fraudulently changing records. If word about that got out, it could lead to some serious problems.
It sounds like the digital copy could easily have been made/altered later. With OP's signature it's likely not valid as just Harriet's either. At best wouldn't that make both of them listed as new owners?
Paper copies outweigh digital every time. when a friend found her stolen bike on Craigslist, the cops made her make a printout and write the info on it about where it was seen, etc.
The police wouldnât really do anything other than file a report about your claims. You basically need to gather evidence and go to the magistrates office to file what you have and theyâll set you a court date to argue it to a judge. A lawyer would be the best route because theyâll know what to look for, what a judge will care about and what they wonât, and what to look out for from the other party.
Even if Harriet sues and wins, she's likely owed the cat or if OP refused, just the cost of the cat- so the adoption fee. It can be really difficult to actually force someone to give back an animal.
This. You can't sue to reclaim a particular cat. You can only sue for the monetary value of the cat.
Itâs small claims court
in most US jurisdictions, in small claims you can only recover money; they won't order specific performance (the return of property, in this case). so the most the roommate could hope to recover from small claims court would be the value of a used rescue cat. if she wants the cat back, she'd have to file in Superior court (or whatever it's called in her jurisdiction).
>...the value of a used rescue cat. "I'm sorry, this cat is clearly used. It's been petted a lot, so that's wear and tear on the fur, plus look at how stretched out it's gotten since it was new. Sorry, but I'd only be able to give you $15."
There are still fees, forms, and wait times. Not to mention the time and stress the litigants spend preparing their cases.
Iâm not aware of any jurisdictions where a small claims filing for this minor a claim would cost more than $300, which is almost always automatically recoupable if you win (not suggesting the roommate will, but that may make her more inclined to file). The form in most states is 1-2 pages. Yes, thereâs a wait time, but thatâs not really going deter anyone. Small claims is designed to be as easy and accessible as possible. If the roommate is willing to file a police report (already more time and effort than filling out small claims paperwork), sheâs going to sue.
If Harriet goes that route she opens herself up to paying any costs OOP had to pay. It would be dumb of her
Itâs not like sheâs coming off as Einstein here anyway.
Does harriet sound smart to you?
She's already gone much farther than what is probably reasonable. This would be a small claims kind of situation. Probably would only cost a couple hundred bucks. Could definitely see it going that far based on what she has already done.
This would be in small claims court, which costs about $100 to file and (in most states) lawyers aren't allowed to represent you. The caveat is that the lawsuit has to be under a certain amount, such as 5k (or equivalent for property).
_(in most states) lawyers arenât allowed to represent you_ For clarityâs sake: in Florida, where OOP is, they are.
Harriet is a piece of work. She's not thinking of the best interest of the cat, she's just using the cat as part of her feud with OOP. I'm really hoping for a positive resolution for OOP and the cat. So glad she took the cat anyway. I hope Harriet steps in a pile of cat puke.
In her bare feet
in her favorite socks
Puke in her socks, dead mouse in her bare feet.
Better yet. She wakes up around 245am, stumbling, bleary eyed to the bathroom while wearing her favorite socks and trying desperately to keep the sleepiness going despite the unforgiving urge to pee. She steps in something wet, which soaks her socks. Waking up a little more, she removes her socks as quickly as she can and sits on the toilet a little extra longer to get the sleepy back. She stands up, bleary eyed and shuffling, makes it almost back to bed, and steps in something moist, squishy, and sticky that mushes between all her toes and coats the arch of her foot. Boom, full awake.
With a lego piece hidden inside the puke
That warm squish between her toesÂ
I think cold is worse
No, warm is absolutely disgusting, cold is gross too, but warm absolutely is worse. And yes, I hate I know this
Hopefully not OP's cat's puke tho
At 3 in the morning
I would publicly expose that the shelter has tampered with adoption paperwork and is illegally trying to assist in the theft of your cat. See how quickly they retract that forged paperwork after that.
Not a lawyer never been sued so I honestly have no idea if Iâm right in being concerned about this, but I would be worried posting about what the shelter did would harm OOPâs case. I feel like Harriet could use the post to argue that OOP was âthreateningâ the shelter to âchangeâ ownership. Personally what I would do is get permission to record a conversation (since Florida is a two party consent state), have the shelter confirm that Harriet changed the adoption paperwork after OOP moved out and get a record of Harriet volunteering there. Again not a lawyer and have no experience with the court system, but I feel like having the shelter themselves confirm that the adoption papers were changed would be in OOPâs favor. ETA: definitely do agree with people saying she should report the shelter though. What theyâre doing is massively fucked up. Edit 2: would DEFINITELY recommend OOP lawyer up because the new adoption papers are almost definitely fraud. A lawyer would be much more equipped to get their hands dirty to get evidence especially the way I suggested.
And they have a volunteer who is terrible at caring for a cat.
It wouldn't be considered threatening. You're allowed to voice your opinion and state facts as you believe them to be. Harriet could claim anything she wants but since she altered the documentation and the shelter said that their records show her name while they have her volunteering, then the shelter opened themselves up to a lawsuit by not investigating and instead siding with the person they know. This would be like if you buy a new laptop from Bestbuy and it already has someone logged in and Best Buy refuses to replace it with a new model. You're allowed to go on social media and say "They lied to me and refusing to do anything". The shelter could sue but all they'd have to do is look at the paperwork and see that's not Harriets signature and know they're fucked. I'd also avoid talking to a lawyer in this case unless you can get free legal advice through the library. A lawyer would cost a LOT of money when you're going to small claims court. All OOP has to do is go to the shelter, ask to talk to the manager and let them know what's going on. Mention that they can either be included in the lawsuit or give them time to figure things out. OOP has the physical, original document which is all the evidence she needs with small claims. No need to spend hundreds of dollars for an easy victory case, especially since the shelter wouldn't want to be dragged into this. Hell, in small claims, a judge will just take the document Harriet has, ask for hers and OOPs drivers licenses and notice it matches OOPs. Easy.
>I feel like Harriet could use the post to argue that OOP was âthreateningâ the shelter to âchangeâ ownership. This does not matter, she has the original paperwork, she can say whatever she wants, and Harriet can say whatever she wants. At the end of the day the shelter is full of shit and in no world are fraudulent papers legally binding.
She needs to report the shelter for fraud to their local authority!
I thought that, it needs reporting somewhere surely, a volunteer being able to access and change paperwork after it's been signed is more than a little worrying.
Thereâs a couple three letter agencies that I think would be very interested in fraud, not just on paper work but on things they reportâŚ
Iâm sorry but why on earth would someone adopt a cat jointly with their roommates? Like, if this is a super stable roommate situation that you expect to last a few years, maybe it would make sense to get a geriatric cat (like age 15+). But if youâre getting a non-geriatric adult cat, you have to be prepared for it to live 10-15 years minimum. Definitely should have had a plan for when someone inevitably moved out, got a job in another town, graduated, moved in with their SO, etc.
I work with college students and so many of them do this. No clue why.
Iâm sure in a lot of cases it works out because one person naturally becomes the catâs main carer and then the cat stays with them when the roommate situation ends. But itâs wild to me not to even think about a scenario in which two or more people want the cat, or if everyone moves out and NO ONE wants the cat alone. I was living with three roommates in college when I adopted a cat. The household loved her but we were all clear that she was mine, for this reason. Iâm 36 now and I STILL HAVE HER.
Yup!! Iâm a lucky case. Me, my boyfriend, and our roommate paid the initial price for two cats and more or less shared everyday responsibilities (food, litter box). Two of us paid for pretty much everything (this was agreed beforehand) and then the other person moved out. I broke up with my boyfriend and the cats stayed with me because 1) heâs allergic 2) they bonded with me. Iâm extremely surprised by how not messy this ended up being, but I think we were probably the exception to the rule
We got our childhood cat this way. Some students adopted him and he ran away, ended up in our house. We called them multiple times to come get him but they never did. And then it was summer, they all left town, and he bonded with us so much it became clear he wouldnât willingly go back with them even if they tried to collect him in the fall. It was supremely irresponsible to let them adopt him in the first place but Iâm glad someone did. We never would have had him otherwise and I loved that cat so dang much.
We adopted adult rats as roommates in college. Lifespan is like 2 to 3 years tops so we knew they were gonna be gone before we graduated, which was indeed the case. Loved those gals, it's sad rats are so short lived but it worked out in that context.
One time a friend and I decided to buy a pair of shoes to share even though it didnât fit either of us very well. But when youâre around 18 lots of things seem logical.
Can confirm - my high school best friend and I bought and shared a corset đ
My friend and I bought a weird embroidered caftan at a thrift sale in HS in the 1970s. I used it as my costume in a HS Shakespeare play (bit part). She and I just reminisced about it and neither of us have any idea where it ended up. My sister, 10 years younger, and her HS BFF bought a green mermaidy dress same deal in the 1980s. I'll have to ask her where it is. That's what you do. Not cats.
Because you don't think long term stuff like that as a young adult, you just want a cat and having others to help makes it less intimidating to own together.
There's a reason I'm reluctant to adopt out to college kids. This kind of shit (and other shit you wouldn't imagine) happens all the time.
When I adopted my cat I was in college. The lady expressed similar concerns. She said 3 cats had been returned a couple of years later by college students and told me I could always call her if I wanted to return that cat. I think she was especially skeptical because I had never actually been around cats, knew nothing about them, and didnât actually know how to hold them. But she was a black cat and I guess my home passed her inspection so she let me have her. I was able to contact her a decade later, she had moved out of town but I had a friend who worked in cat rescue who helped me track her down, I let her know the cat was doing great
Yeah there are plenty of responsible college kids. I was one, caring for an elderly special needs cat. But there are also a LOT who are not.
I work as a RA and the amount of cats we find abandoned during winter break or after move out is much higher then you think :(Â They donât see them as living animals, just fun toys
I got a cat with my college best friend/roommate. She insisted on a kitten but I said we needed an adult cat because of our schedules. I told her it would be *her* cat but also anticipated taking it because she also really wanted a dog in the future. I was correct, when she moved out she gave the cat to me so she could get her dog. In fairness to her I don't think she would've surrendered the cat if I hadn't expressed me being okay with taking the cat. That's the only way it works, if you're prepared to either take or leave your joint animal.
I think the adoption fee for my cat, admittedly back in 2007, was $150. If you can't afford the fee, you can't afford all the expenses that come with a cat IMHOÂ
I always wonder the same thing when I see stories like this.
I did this with my roommate. But before we ever adopted our cat, we agreed that if we went our separate ways, I'd be the one who kept the cat. Can't remember why we decided that, but when I moved years later I did take the cat and it was all very civil. (Tbf I also joked I'd flee to Mexico with the cat if she changed her mind. She loved the cat but I NEEDED the cat.) So it's possible, but I think I got very lucky to make that agreement with someone who held her end of the bargain. I'd recommended anyone who adopts a pet with someone they aren't married to have that kind of discussion before you actually bring your new little friend home. Epilogue: The cat is now approaching 20 years old and is diabetic, which requires me giving her two insulin shots a day, which I suspect my former roommate (and still good friend) would have struggled with, so the cat would probably agree we made the right call on who kept possession of her.
Damn. I thought thereâd be a new update.
Yeah this sub posts so many things w like 1 update. Why lol
>"They have also changed the microchip information to reflect this." OP needs to get her paperwork all in a row and see a vet about removing that microchip and then blast the rescue all over social media. Chips don't actually *legally* prove ownership, they just help you recover your pet if lost. You can literally buy those chips and injection needles off Amazon and DIY. It's still completely inappropriate for them to retroactively change any information on it without the legal owners approval.
Can confirm, I bought my horse's microchip off an equine mc site, chipped him and registered him to me without needing any proof of ownership.
>Due to personal conflicts between myself and Harriet (and the end of our lease), we will no longer be living together Harriet definitely does not care about the cat and is only caring about it now to spite OOP due to the personal issues between them. I do hope for the best for OOP.
I wish I had not read this since itâs unresolved
Look at the tags at the top. Posts with 'ongoing' or 'inconclusive' are not (yet) resolved. Posts with 'concluded' are. You can just skip the other ones if you only want the ones with a final update/resolution.
I know that, Iâm mad at myself because I didnât look at the tags and now Iâm worried about the cat.
Sounds like the roommate had the place the cat was adopted from do something they shouldn't have done.
This makes no sense. In what world does a modified digital version of a legal paper take precedence over an older hardcopy? Like I could take the hardcopy of my mother's will, digitize it, and cut my ex-brother out of any inheritance?
This is what Iâm trying to understand as well. Like wouldnât someone question as to why the digital paperwork & chip had been changed, especially without the original ownerâs consent? Surely it would look suspicious seeing as Harriet is trying to take the cat, *volunteered at the place they adopted the cat from*, and suddenly has these shiny new digital docs âproving ownershipâ when the original paper docs *and* vet bills all have OOPs name on them, right? Wouldnât something like that raise alarm bells and potentially work in OOPs favor? Because I would definitely get with a lawyer to push the fact that the rescue either allowed a volunteer to change official docs or that said volunteer had access to client docs and altered them without their knowledge and are now refusing to fix the error.
[ŃдаНонО]
Harriet would drop it off at another shelter. The point is not to own the cat, but to prevent OOP from owning the cat.
This is basically the people fighting over kids in a divorce
I would send a registered letter to all of the top people at the rescue informing them that a volunteer at their organization has âhackedâ into its computer to change the ownerâs name on the catâs microchip from the original owner to the volunteerâs name without the consent of the original owner, and as an ethical organization, they need to fix this egregious and unauthorized attempt to steal the cat from its registered owner. OOP could also cc the message to a lawyer and any government agencies that regulate rescues so the organization gets the strong message that they might face legal action. Believe me they wonât want to get involved in this dispute.
I think I would use the words FRAUD and FORGERY liberally throughout any letter I sent to the rescue and the microchip place. I'd also stop communicating completely. Let her sue, let her pay to find OOP, let her pay to serve OOP over a rescue cat. She has to sue in small claims and doesn't get an attorney. The work it will take is ridiculous. She wants to scare and intimidate OOP but if OOP sits tight and enjoys her car until she's served,I bet it will never happen. The more she responds, the more she goes in to the police station to respond, the more energy this ex roommate gets.
Those are good ideas! I also have to question if itâs even possible to sue for custody of the cat in small claims court, as opposed to the monetary value of the cat, which would be pretty negligible since itâs a rescue cat, not a purebred champion. That said, Iâm not a lawyer, but have sued a couple of deadbeat clients in small claims court and the forms I filled out to do so asked for the dollar amount that was in dispute. Edit: typo
The ex roommate would need to sue for property. You can't sue for pain and suffering because animals are just property to the judge. It sucks because we animal lovers know that these guys are family but the law is a simple thing. She would probably have an easier time using if it was a show cat. I can see a judge laughing over this. Sure, they would handle it seriously but I bet at some point the judge will say "why not get a new cat at the rescue?" If she does sue, I'd counter sue for the fraud and forgery.
So I worked in a shelter doing adoptions and Return-to-Owners through chips and chips are actually not that easy to change. Itâs only one piece of paper sure, but there is definitely some information needed that you canât just switch up without both parties agreeing. But also we might have two people listed on the cat for contact purposes, but the person signing is the legal owner of the cat. We also explain that thoroughly to unmarried couples and friends adopting jointly. Everything about this on the paperwork side just seems so shady as hell and frustrating.
The other thing is that out in the real world microchips don't matter for ownership. Veterinarians aren't really supposed to check microchips without the consent of the client/owner as that is who we represent and that is the VCPR that is being maintained. And certainly we are not to contact anyone behind the owner's back. Obviously lots of wonderful people bring in found pets and absolutely want us to reunite them with their owners. We do that all the time and chips are so wonderful when they allow that. What they don't work great for is proving ownership if two people want the animal. If the "owners" are too honest of how they acquired the pet I will jump in and start explaining animals are technically property that can be stolen (not finders keepers) and that if they didn't go through the proper channels (advertising lost dog, etc.) and have it checked for a microchip then they could have someone else's dog or cat. I can sometimes get them to at least confirm if there isn't a microchip. I will tell them that they can keep me from checking but next time the dog is lost and if it does has a microchip it will be returned to the first owner anyways. Or if the dog has an unregistered shelter microchip they can just claim it for themselves. People that "rescue" found pets often won't take steps to reunite them to their families and think the previous owners were neglectful abusers. If they find the pet with a single flea, cut, scratch, lean body condition, dirty, or acting scared then they consider the old owners unfit and will not cooperate to reunite the dog they have rescued. And since most lost dogs will look like this after a few days you can see the problem.
I got one of my cats through a local rescue and hadn't immediately realized that it was possible to change the information tied to a microchip. But I later worked at a pet store where the same rescue would have adoption days. I was about to move out of state and talked to the lady about getting it changed and she just said they don't do that. They absolutely refuse to change the microchips because (to them) if an animal gets lost and returned to them then the owner is \*obviously\* negligent and shouldn't get the animal back. I just got my cat a second chip when we moved. She was the type that looked at an open door and went "Are you effing stupid? I have food in here" and refused to go out, so I wasn't concerned, really. (She was born feral and turned domesticated when she was young.)
Hmm a shelter altered ownership papers for a volunteer? Did that volunteer have access to the computers? Or are they ok with this? If so, how many times have they done this before? This is lawyer/news worthy or at least worthy of talking to main office if there is one. OP needs a cat lover lawyer friendÂ
OOP needs to file a complaint about the rescue, too. Once a lawyer is involved, a request for letter for when the digital copy was printed, Harrietâs involvement with the rescue and who printed the info out might be helpful. Those places usually have cctv, too, to prevent/refute abuse claims. Harriet absolutely cried on someoneâs shoulder and got forged docs or created them herself.
Working at a shelter myself, Harriet probably lied through her teeth. OP should contact the person who runs the cat side of the shelter and explain the situation. Maybe the person is fooled by Harriet, maybe she isnât. But having the shelter change the info is a big deal. In my area, if thag happened, the shelter would stop letting Harriet volunteer.
>If you tried to sue her for it, the cat is only basically worth the adoption fees. If true then If she tried to sue you for it, the cat is only basically worth the adoption fees.
Not a lawyer, but she should send via certified mail a âsettlement offerâ in the amount of the adoption fee. Not legal advice, but something along the lines of âWhile I fully believe Iâm the true and sole owner of cat, in an effort to avoid costly legal proceedings, Iâm willing to pay $xxx, which reflects the portion of adoption fees paid by roommate. By accepting this, roommate terminates any future ownership claims, and agrees to pay OPâs legal costs if she goes to court after taking the $$â Even if roommate declines, it looks great to a judge that one litigant is being reasonable. Edit to add: Would also be extra smart to have a deadline in which she can accept the offer, 30 days would be very reasonable, but even 14 would suffice.
That's what my sister did when she divorced her husband to keep the dog. Harriet will probably go away for the adoption fee.
What an interesting idea!
The idea of roommates adopting a pet together is fucking wild. Did they think theyâd just live together forever? Cats can live for like 20 years. How did they not go into it already knowing who the primary owner would be and who the cat would eventually live with when they stopped living together?
Seriously! We've had three cats who lived to 21-22 years old. How do you not have a plan?
>In Florida *here we go*...
Iâm not surprised by the shelter. Our local shelter had to be completely revamped because the previous director was keeping âpurebredâ dogs for puppy mills and for âfriendsâ to adopt. The new director is truly doing their best to fix everything the previous one messed up. Shelters can be corrupt, especially if theyâre government owned.
Yeah it sounds like Harriet and/or someone at the rescue agency abused their power because Harriet volunteers there, and modified the documents to suit Harriet after the adoption had gone through. I wouldnât trust the rescue agency that claims the digital one is the only valid one. OP should also get the former roommates to sign affidavits confirming that Harriet had not been taking care of the cat in case they are difficult to reach if this does go to court.
> Three years ago my roommates and I decided to adopt a cat at my suggestion. This was a terrible decision on OOP's part. If you want a cat, and your roommates agree to it, ***YOU*** adopt a cat. Alone, with just ***YOU*** making financial contributions to it. It just makes for additional, unneeded complications to a situation that doesn't require it.
Having worked in rescue for dogs and cats I can 100% believe theyâd forge the paperwork. People that stay in animal rescue long term really start to think they (and only they) know best for animals. Itâs very frustrating.
I would blast what that rescue did ALLLLLLL over social media. I volunteer with several rescues and believe, shit like that doesnât fly in the community
Without Harriet's signature, the document should mean nothing - and I'd ask for the manager of the shelter. Harriet may have had a friend alter a document. I've drawn up countless leases for prospective (commercial) tenants. Without a signature - it isn't worth the paper it is printed on, even with their names all over it. I hope someone tells the OOP that.
Digital documents are interesting. They are dated from the moment they're made and/or changed; a digital paper trail. If OOP has physical paperwork dated before these documents were made and the chip was changed, could these be used as evidence? I mean, if documents can be altered after the fact wouldn't that mean everyone could do it when claiming property? Also, are statements from the other roommates helpful?
I would be naming and shaming that organisation. People need to know how underhanded they have been and are willing to be. I donât think they should be allowed to operate like that. If anyone tried to take my babies from me they would be in for the fight of their lives not just legal I would take them out back and sort them right out.
babydoll altering paperwork without consent is called fraud and thatâs â¨super illegalâ¨
Seems like Harriet photoshopped the digital copy
I would be reporting that shelter so fast for fraud.
I need an update to this right meow
I'm confused by the shelter still having access to (much less control of) the microchip account? That should have been transferred to a new email/password as soon as they adopted the cat. In my experience, the companies don't even require proof of ownership, you just have the registration number that comes with the chip packet, and then you set up the account đ¤ˇđťââď¸.
Why are you believing the adoption place? They are not lawyers nor do they know the laws plus they are friends/coworkers of the roommate and are willing to lie and have committed fraud for her. You may want to contact the owners of the rescue and inform them of the lies and fraud they have committed on ex-roommates behalf. Tell them when ex sues you you will turn around and sue them for fraud. The new digital paperwork will prove that it was created long after the cat was originally adopted. Talk to a lawyer who has knowledge of the laws involving pets and don't fret.
That is a shady damn rescue
Op needs to find the highest ranked person at the adoption agency and let them know a past volunteer used her connections to have the registry changed.
Contact the rescue and tell them that it is obvious what they are doing, and ask if they are comfortable getting a reputation in the pet owner community for playing games with adoption papers. Indicate that you 100% have hardcopies of the original papers, and it is very easy to see when changes were made, and that a civil suit for altering those documents will likely discourage other potential pet owners from adopting from them.
Hey Harriet, fuck you !Â
If an actual suit is filed, would it help if OOP offered settlement to the tune of the difference in the adoption fee? On top of all the paperwork issues muddying the waters, a tangible (and documented) attempt to resolve would work in their favour. A pair of affidavits from the other roommates testifying to the care falling distinctly on OOPâs shoulders wonât hurt either.
Man I donât know why people get pets with roommates. My ex had a dog that was definitely her dog (had her for years before we met) and when we broke up it broke my heart to leave that dog. Iâd never enter into a situation where I knew that would happen.Â
This is actually giving me stress for OOP. Hope it works out in her favor! She can also get her old roomies involved if they are willing to provide statements. And she can get statements from the vet as well. Not just bills, but actual statement from the vet.
I think [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/s/0K565FidVh) adds some context to the relationship between OOP and Harriet. Harriet is hostile, verbally abusive, and makes OOP feel unsafe.
So the understanding that veterinarian offices (United States) have is that whoever has the file for the animal and is paying for well and sick visits is the legal owner. It can be really difficult to claw back ownership of a pet that a "good Samaritan" takes over, for example. Some people want to scan every "new" pet for a microchip and force a reunion. But if people bring them in as "their" pet we would basically need consent to scan them or just live with the knowledge the pet has another owner and there is nothing we can do about it. I think the gist is in claims court the microchips aren't holding up as ownership proof. Possession is 9/10 of the law so keep up your veterinary care paper trail as well as keep all other expenses well documented. I tell people this when I install microchips. That it is a permenent ID and if someone with good intentions (neighbor, animal shelter) wishes to find a pet's owner then it will assist in that mission. But obviously with how easy it is to do your random neighbor could microchip your dog and register it to them and you might never know. So it's not a slam dunk on proof of ownership. I think the microchip being switched isn't that big an issue unless the two of them are completely sharing all expenses and the vet office file.
I would go full petty mode and counter-sue if it came to that. Then I'd bring the smoke and start reporting the situation to regulators and drag the adoption folks who permitted it to happen. The adoption folks might back the room-mates sob story and help a little, but they'll back the hell off when they get dragged into actually having to defend themselves in court.
Nooooo. I needed this to be concluded
Makes me glad I rescued my cats from the alley behind my last apartment with no other people involved.
"In Florida" Say no more
My heart goes out to OP, but the moral of the story is never, ever "go in" on a pet with people you casually live with. In the end, a pet has one owner and that needs to be decided on beforehand. I know a few people in situations like this, and it never ends well.