Healthy Bichon Frise Reports & Reviews (2)
Healthy Bichon Frise Contacts
If you know any contact information for Healthy Bichon Frise, help other victims by adding it!
Add new contacts
SCAMPULSE
|
SCAMPULSE
If you know any contact information for Healthy Bichon Frise, help other victims by adding it!
Total money lost $5,150
Type of a scam Online Purchase
This issue revolves around the attempted purchase of a Bichon Frise puppy from a breeder whose business website is https://healthybichonfrisehome.com. If it helps your investigation, the IP address of this URL is 162.213.253.39. The apparent operator of this business is an individual named Frank Jenkins, whose apparent business address is 3642 Randolph Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95051, and whose apparent business telephone number is (669) 302-1217. I preface all these items with the adjective “apparent” because I am not entirely sure that this information actually represents a business whose objective is to breed and sell Bichon Frise puppies. As you read this submission, you will understand my level of distrust with both the breeder and the shipper. I did not get any of this information on the breeder from the above website; I got it all from the shipping status webpage of the shipper.
On August 9, we selected a puppy, apparently named “Sadie”, from the breeder’s website, and expressed interest to the breeder in purchasing her. We were seeking to replace an American Eskimo Dog whom we were preparing to euthanize the following morning. We arranged to purchase Sadie for $450 plus $150 for shipping, for a total of $600. We were given instructions on how to send the money via Zelle and sent it that evening to arrive the following morning (see Exhibit A attached – the transfer on August 9 to “Soup Stanley” for $600). From there, the breeder apparently delivered the dog the following day (August 10) to the shipper whose business website is https://smartsdeliveryservices.com. For the sake of your investigation, the IP address for this URL is 167.71.52.35. There is no known address or contact individual for this “Smart’s Delivery Service” business; the only contact means of contact we had for them was their telephone number (720) 502-1187. The idea was that Sadie would be shipped directly from the Bay Area to Detroit, the nearest major airport to where we live, and we would pick her up at that airport. It is at this point that the real shenanigans began.
I have informed both the shipper and the breeder that, if I had not received satisfaction from this transaction, I would be going to the media to expose them as dishonest businesspeople. This was revealed in Exhibit E, attached to this submission. I also indicated that I reserve the right to pursue civil and criminal action against them in Federal Court under 18 US Code ss 1343 (wire fraud). I have not commenced any such action against them at this time, but I continue to reserve the right to do so if WXYZ Call For Action is unable to achieve a suitable result.
On August 11, we received an email from Smart’s Delivery Service (Exhibit B) stating that we had to pay $1000, all of which was refundable on delivery of the dog to us, for insurance for the trip. We asked certain questions of the shipper, none of which was answered, and all we received was continued demands for payment and instructions on how to send the money via Zelle. We sent it on August 12 (Exhibit A – the transfer to Smarts Delivery Svc – email). At this point, for some reason I still believed this was a good-faith transaction.
Later on August 12, we got another email from Smart’s requiring us to select one of three crate options for Sadie, considering that she was in Arizona at the time for whatever reason. It being summer, it can get excruciatingly hot in Arizona this time of year, so I selected the rental of the least expensive crate offered and paid $1500 (Exhibit C) for that crate. This fee was supposed to be 99% refundable on delivery. See Exhibit A – the transfer to Smarts Ebanda Svc – email. The email messages started at that point, as did other communication (text and voice), to take on a noticeably more extortive tone. Please look near the end of Exhibit C where Smart’s instructs as follows:
It began at that point to sound like Smart’s w[censored]ding the dog for whom we paid already for ever-increasing ransom money. Also, I indicated that I was tired of constantly being solicited for new fees for every excuse they could imagine, and they informed me that they were clear on this as well. That proved to be complete and total balderdash.
This was proven to be the case the very next day. On Friday the 13th around noon our time, we got another email from Smart’s demanding that we immediately fork over $1300 for a veterinary checkup for Sadie (Exhibit D). This fee would be 98% refundable on delivery of the dog. We were planning to take Sadie over the border into Canada later this month, and Canadian customs requires that all dogs entering Canada be vaccinated against rabies, so we paid this money (see Exhibit A – August 13 – Hudson email). I also made it clear – again – that I was not going to put up with more expenses to receive the dog for whom we’d already paid.
Of course, like clockwork, at 6 pm on Saturday night our time August 14, we got yet another demand for money, this time for food and lodging for Sadie. This one was sent via text, not email. Originally the fee was $770, but in a later quote, the fee became $750. Here is the text chain. Notice that the shipper communicated consistently in all caps, which is interpreted in electronic communications as screaming.
Shipper: DEAR CLIENT, YOU HAVE A PENDING FEEDING AND ACCOMMODATION FEE OF $770 AND THE VET DEPARTMENT SAID YOUR BABY IS UNDER OBSERVATION BECAUSE THEY CAN'T JUST GIVE HIM SHOTS AND DISCHARGE HIM JUST LIKE THAT SO YOUR BABY WILL BE LEAVING ON MONDAY. THANKS FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Me: To start with, she's a her, not a him. Is this so-called feeding and accommodation fee refundable, and mandatory for Sadie's release? And can you absolutely confirm that, when she leaves Monday, there will be ABSOLUTELY NO MORE STOPS and ABSOLUTELY NO MORE FEES for the transportation of Sadie to us? We are extremely near to an ultimatum point in this transaction. You do not want me to explain what that means. So make sure we get the dog either late Monday or Tuesday.
Shipper: DEAR CLIENT, YES THIS FEE IS REFUNDABLE AND YES YOUR BABY WILL BE LEAVING ON MONDAY.
Me: Mandatory?
Shipper: YES!
Shipper: Zelle Address: [email protected] Name: Hudson
Me: What percentage is refundable? And can you confirm that her next and final stop will be DTW, as specified above? You really do not want to consider the consequences of any further delay on this.
Shipper: 90% WILL BE REFUNDABLE AND THE NEXT TRANSIT WILL BE TEXAS BEFORE DTW BUT DELIVERY WILL BE SAME DAY BECAUSE THERE IS NO DIRECT FLIGHT DUE TO THE TORNADOES THIS DAYS. THANKS FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Me: There will be no new fees in TX, right? As I've said in the past, neither of us wants to go to the next, apocalyptic step that will happen if we do not get our dog this Tuesday at the latest.
Shipper: YES MR DAN
Me: BTW, who is Jayjuan Hudson?
Shipper: THAT'S ONE OF OUR CASHIERS
Me: Is he (I presume it's a he) in a position to receive the payment so that Sadie' food and lodging will be properly accounted for immediately?
Shipper: YES
Me: Considering it's the weekend, the money may not arrive in Jayjuan's Zelle account until Monday morning (8/16). Is that acceptable?
Shipper (clearly agitated by the delay in me getting the money to him): WAIT WHY IS IT SUPPOSED TO ARRIVE ON MONDAY?
Me: I'll check with my bank to see when a transaction sent after hours on a Saturday will post. I doubt it would post on a Sunday, but I'll check. I think their help line is open 24/7.
Shipper: OK. MAKE THE PAYMENT AND LET ME KNOW
Me: Well, so much for the help desk being open 24/7. Based on my previous limited experience with Zelle, I'd still assume the transaction won't post (meaning you won't get the money) until Monday 9:00 am your time at the earliest. This must not impact delivery timing for the dog; i.e. she still leaves Monday, bounces in TX later that day, and arrives in DTW later that night or the following morning. Please confirm this to continue to be the plan.
Shipper: ALRIGHT SEND
Me (also getting agitated by being pressed for quick payment): Give me some time. Do not rush me!
Me (beginning to doubt there’s even a dog in the equation at all): I'm in the process of setting up the transaction. Can you send photos (more than one) of Sadie where she is now, so we can know she's safe, healthy and being taken care of? If not what should make us think she is?
Shipper (using customary poor grammar and sentence structure): DEAR CLIENT, YOU ARE TALKING WITH THE CUSTOMER SERVICE AND WORKERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO WORK WITH THEIR CELL PHONES DUE YO DISTRACTIONS ANF WE DO HAVE RULES AND REGULATIONS SO WHEN YOU GET TO RECEIVE YOUR PUPPY YOU CAN TAKE PICTURES AS MUCH AS YOU WANT. THANKS FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Early on Sunday morning, August 15, I sent the email in Exhibit E. I shall tell you confidentially that the “attorney” to whom I referred in that email is fictitious; I have not retained legal counsel on this issue, although as I said earlier, I retain the right to do so. This email obviously touched a nerve with both the shipper and the breeder. First, the breeder:
Breeder: Good morning Dan, I went through your email and all I can say is that I’m so disappointed. How could you write me such?
Me: Firstly, how may “Sadie”s are there? My attorney (actually my son under a pseudonym) wrote you recently asking about Sadie’s availability, and you said she was available, even after she had been shipped out of your care. What gives?
Also me: I’m disappointed too that I had to write it. I shouldn’t have had to. If we had our dog by now, that email wouldn’t have gone out; instead you would have gotten a glowing testimonial from us.
Breeder: I believe I explained that to your wife already. My daughter replied to clients that night as usual and left the phone for me to continue talking to them. Our website needs to be updated. There are 2 puppies that have to be removed from the website.
Me: That's my only concern with you. My main beef is with how the shipper does business. I was told originally that Sadie would be sent on a direct flight from San Francisco to Detroit - no stops, no detours. Next thing I know, they need a pet insurance policy. Makes sense, so I bought it. Then they said they needed to stop in Arizona and get her a climate-controlled dog crate. It's hot this time of year down there (we used to live in Texas, so we know from experience), so we complied. Next comes news that Sadie needs vet attention in New Mexico (I presume she was perfectly healthy when she left your care), so I sent payment on that too. With each successive demand for money, Smarts have been getting less patient and more demanding. Now they want $750 for food and lodging. I'm thinking about whether to pay this; I will be texting them with the full details of exactly what I require to happen with Sadie after I pay. This includes certainty of delivery tomorrow (Monday 8/16). I'm assuming you're not happy with their performance either in this regard. Perhaps you could send them an email explaining our mutual disappointment in how they've handled Sadie. Let them know you've been a client of theirs for a while, and there are many other shipping companies that would love to give a new family pet the white glove treatment. If you send such an email to Smarts, please copy me. Thanks.
Breeder: Sure, no problem. I will definitely do that.
I have not been copied on any correspondence between the breeder and the shipper. I later requested the physical address to which the breeder delivered Sadie to the shipper for transportation to me. No such address has been provided. Now, here is my text exchange with the shipper, after the email was sent:
Shipper: DEAR CLIENT, WE RECEIVED YOUR MAIL AND REGARDING THE CONCLUSIONS AND THREATS YOU MADE YOU ARE VERY FREE TO TAKE ACTION ANYTIME ANYWHERE BUT MAKE SURE YOUR THREATS ARE WELL FOUNDED FOR IT WON'T LOOK GOOD TO FIND OUT AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG AND CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT WE ARE HAVE TERMS AND POLICIES WHICH PROTECTS US WE WILL BE FORCE TO RETALIATE. AS EARLIER SAID SADIE YOUR PUPPY NEEDS FOOD AND ACCOMMODATION FEE WHICH COST $750 AND HAS TO BE PAID AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THANKS FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Me: Did you disclose those "terms and conditions" at the beginning of our client-supplier relationship? I don't recall seeing anything of the sort.
Shipper: MR DAN, WE ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO DELIVER YOUR PUPPY IN A GOOD SHAPE AND HEALTH WITH YOUR REFUNDS BUT IF YOU WISH TO COMPLICATE THE PROCESS THEN YOU CAN GO AHEAD BUT WE WON'T QUENCH THE FIRE YOU WILL ENGAGE FOR YOU ARE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT THAT WILL BRING AS CONSEQUENCES AND MORE TO THAT WE BELIEVE YOU HAVE BEEN THREATENING US ALL DAY OF TAKING AN APOCALYPTIC STEP SO IF YOU FEEL THAT'S A SOLUTION THEN YOU ARE FREE TO DO THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE IF NOT THEN YOU CAN PROCEED WITH THE FEE REQUIRED AND GET YOUR PUPPY AND REFUNDS ON MONDAY. THANKS
Me: You now know the "apocalyptic step" I am contemplating. It would have been heavily preferred, and very ethical, for you to have disclosed ALL your fees to me on receipt of the animal, and not proceeded with the shipment without arrangements having been made for payment. This would have precluded you from adding more fees as you went. This is really the chiefmost of that to which I object. That's why I had a lawyer look at what was going on. The fact that we have to take you at your word regarding Sadie's health, without photos attesting to it, is also a real sore spot with us.
Shipper (being extremely defensive): MR DAN THIS IS OUR JOB AND NO ONE CAN COME TEACH US OUR JOB SAME AS YOU HAVE YOUR JOB AND NO ONE CAN COME TEACH YOU YOUR JOB BUT ATLEAST I STRONGLY BELIEVE MY WORD IS ENOUGH TO MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER NO ONE HERE EATS PUPPIES OR STEALS THEM SO AFTER ALL WE ARE JUST TRYING TO GET HER HOME TO YOU ACCORDING TO OUR PROCEDURE AND UNFOR- SEEN SITUATIONS WHICH OCCURS SO WE ACTUALLY APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY AND ASK YOU TO PLEASE COOPERATE WITH US TO GET DONE WITH YOUR DELIVERY AND REFUNDS. THANKS FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Me: I shall be sending you an email asking you to commit to certain conditions for Sadie's delivery to us, including a welfare check on her in New Mexico. Please read the email, and indicate your agreement to the terms in it (nothing in those terms has not been previously promised by you nor should anything in them be regarded as unreasonable in terms of shipping a dog) as soon as possible. Thank you.
After securing such agreement, which I believe they have utterly no intention on keeping, I sent $750 through Zelle (see Exhibit A – August 15 – Hudson – email) to keep the dog fed and sheltered in transit. The transmission was sent on Sunday morning, August 15. Repeated telephone calls to my bank confirmed that the transaction would not be available for the “Jayjuan Hudson” mentioned in the text chain above until Monday morning, August 16, at the earliest. I inquired with the bank after Smart’s complained again about not timely getting their payments. I told Smart’s what the bank told me, and that was that Wells Fargo (Hudson’s bank) had not yet sent the email informing Hudson that the money was available for him to withdraw. I also phoned Wells Fargo seeking information on whether they had sent that email to Hudson but was told that because I am not a WF customer, they could not disclose that or any other information to me. Jayjuan Hudson had to contact WF himself for information and I informed Smart’s to that effect. Effective then, they and the breeder have stopped all communication with me, via text, email or phone.
In Exhibit E, the shipper agrees to send Sadie to one final stopping point in Texas before finally sending her to Detroit and us, without additional charge to us. See the one-line response at 11:17:28 AM on Sunday, August 15. Based on the pattern of behavior illustrated above, I believe that the shipper would have turned this commitment into yet another lie, and dreamed up additional stops on the route, complete with a new fee for some other purpose somehow related to the transportation of a pet from California to Michigan.
The pattern of behavior demonstrated by the above communications indicates that the breeder and the shipper may not be the most honest of businesspeople.
1. The shipper’s high level of anxiety and agitation in their repeated demands for payment can indicate the type of desperation associated with criminal activity.
2. The poor grammar, bad sentence structure and consistent use of all caps by the shipper, in their emails, texts and even their webpage, can also indicate a lack of professionalism in the way they do their business. This could mean that this is not a legitimate business, but rather a front for illicit activity.
3. The shipper’s refusal to deliver photographs of the dog as she languishes in a warehouse, presumably somewhere in New Mexico, as well as the breeder’s refusal to provide the address at which the dog was dropped off with the shipper in the first place, can reasonably suggest that no dog has been shipped at all, and that this whole exercise is a gigantic fraud. Additionally, we have no way of absolutely ascertaining that the dog mentioned on the breeder’s website as being Sadie was actually the one to be delivered to us, as there was only one photograph of Sadie on the website. That picture could just as easily have been cut-and-pasted from stock photography of Bichon Frise puppies anywhere on the internet.
4. The silent treatment given me by both the shipper and the breeder since Tuesday 8/17 can indicate that the two of them are in cohort with one another and are possibly trying to straighten their stories in case a criminal investigation occurs.
The most recent communication I have received from either the breeder or the shipper occurred on Wednesday, August 18. This makes me believe that the puppy involved in this transaction either has died or, far more likely, never existed in the first place.
To receive full satisfaction without having to pursue legal action, which if necessary and successful would be far, far more costly to the shipper and the breeder, I would require one of two outcomes.
1. In the extremely unlikely event, in my opinion, that there exists a living Bichon Frise puppy somewhere in the southwestern United States named Sadie, waiting to be finally united with her forever dog parents, I require that the puppy be sent to me without delay, and that the entirety of the money due me as refunds, $4,434 (see Exhibit E for an explanation of this sum), be paid me by the shipper on the occasion of us receiving the dog.
2. In the more likely event that there never was a dog involved in this exercise, I require a full refund by the breeder of the $600 paid him to purchase Sadie, and a full refund by the shipper of all the monies that have been paid them, which total $4,550.
If I am not able to get this result, I shall be forced to seek remedy in Federal court, as I said above. As I also said above, I have not yet retained legal counsel on this matter, but reserve the right to do so.
Hoping for a quick, happy result on this issue, we respectfully submit this request.