Couple Outraged After Dog Shaved Almost Bald by Groomer

[GroomerTALK Coordinator]

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/12/...-shaving-spca/

ISLIP, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — A Long Island couple is outraged after their dog, Coconut, came home bald after visiting a local pet grooming salon.

Denis and Michael Boufis, of Islip, told CBS2’s Steve Langford that Coconut came home wounded after a trim at Pooch Pad in East Islip on Saturday.

“The vet said you know they couldn’t believe they were shaved so close and there was some visible razor burns,” Michael Boufis said..............

[Particentral]

REALLY glad he stood up, had photos and had the hair in a ziplock bag.....there are things you can do to avoid this however, and he may not be fully trained in that, but IMO the owner holds as much of the responsibility here as the groomer .

[Naturally Furry]

If he was a little better at public speaking he could have easily redirected the conversation to the fact that the owners neglected to care for their animal with regular grooming thus resulting in a short clip that exposed and aggravated underlying skin problems that are caused from severe matting . Then supported his claim with the evidence of pictures and the saved fur. Good to see that the vet acknowledged the pet's condition.
This is a key example of why groomers have matted pet release forms to be signed at drop off.

[Cyn]

REALLY glad he stood up, had photos and had the hair in a ziplock bag.....there are things you can do to avoid this however, and he may not be fully trained in that, but IMO the owner holds as much of the responsibility here as the groomer .

Yea, but the vet sure tried to throw him under the bus!

[violet2]

These are the kind of things that I think are more important than others in licensing groomers. Every licensed
These are the big little things that licensing, should that be, should focus on. Every groomer should know "how the system" can work against them. He did OK, But as an industry we should have forms of releases specifically to our local laws to protect us as well. And specific instructions what we need to say according to current laws etc....rather than learning the hard way. All that stuff, this is just a beginning of one topic. Sure we get some advice from others that is great, but I mean also legal experts with up to date forms, and instructions to protect our interests too in the areas where we work. We would be better groomer business people and know how to deal with things in a hostile business world.

[Particentral]

These are the kind of things that I think are more important than others in licensing groomers. Every licensed
These are the big little things that licensing, should that be, should focus on. Every groomer should know "how the system" can work against them. He did OK, But as an industry we should have forms of releases specifically to our local laws to protect us as well. And specific instructions what we need to say according to current laws etc....rather than learning the hard way. All that stuff, this is just a beginning of one topic. Sure we get some advice from others that is great, but I mean also legal experts with up to date forms, and instructions to protect our interests too in the areas where we work. We would be better groomer business people and know how to deal with things in a hostile business world.

If you think licensing would help in ANY of those things you are wrong. Licensing, where it exists, does not protect the GROOMER it protects the CUSTOMER. It is there to keep customers safe and collect fees. Nothing more. Don't get me wrong. I am all about having regulations, but they are not going to provide you with forms, make you a better groomer or offer you legal advice. They are all about taking a complaint from the grooming client and BELIEVEING THEM to be 100% accurate and YOU have to prove you didn't do anything wrong. The rest is up to the individual to make sure they are #1 well trained, #2 utd on legal information and #3 smart enough to say "I refer you to my attorney or insurance company". States laws are going to do nothing to help with any of that and in fact they will make it harder on someone that has an incident like this.

ALSO you dont know that he didnt have a release form,. Those dont hold up in court in most cases because in the USA you cannot sign away your rights to protection from negligence. They would have made the couple aware on paper but that doesnt translate to understanding. I mean, they allowed both dogs to get matted and apparently have a history of doing that and they havent learned anything at all from the past experiences.

There is so much that we do not k now. I mean, he had photos. He had hair in a ziplock bag. He Covered his butt. Licensing would not have helped here at all.

[violet2]

Parti I think you are right, but you read things into what I said, as I didn't say licensing would help US. Whether he had a form or not is not what I was commenting on. When I go to oral surgery and surgery I know you had, you sign release forms and those forms were written based on disclosure rules and more to in part meet expectations of a licensed professional. Most of today's release forms passed around groomers are woefully inadequate and not reviewed by local professionals. IF there is licensing I would think groomers would be trained in HOW TO DISCLOSE to meet laws and use adequate forms prepared by legal professionals. All those forms I sign at the doctor disclose this could happen, that could happen, and you acknowledge you understand and they are quite specific. I said I was hoping our procedures would get better, never said anything about getting away with negligence, and I was not commenting on this case. I understand your points and glad he did what he did, but how many groomers know any of this? That was my hope there would be change within the industry to be more professional and use more legally reviewed materials and have every groomer taught not only the basics of grooming, but customer interaction.

[Emma123]

I feel sorry for the groomer and the dogs. Owners can be amazingly blind to the dire condition of their dog and cat's fur and skin.