[nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader

Tue Mar 3 19:15:14 UTC 2009

Marion,

I think that an explanation of exactly what the contracts state in the
form of an article (and at least a page on the NAGDU website) would be
very beneficial to members and prospective guide dog users.

Call me at home later to discuss.

Craig

Craig Borne
NHTSA/DOT
(202) 493-0627 
craig.borne at dot.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Marion & Martin
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 1:13 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader

Craig,
    Would you be interested in co authoring the aforementioned article
or, 
at the least, being used as a reference? This is a serious offer! Would 
by-line credit be "consideration"? (smile)

Fraternally,
Marion

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <craig.borne at dot.gov>
To: <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader

> Hi Marion,
>
> The 5th Amendment applies to Federal action against individuals, and
> State action is also incorporated through the 14th Amendment.  The
U.S.
> Constitution also has a clause, known as the "Contract Clause," which
> disallows the government from interfering in private contracts.  So
the
> 5th Amendment really wouldn't apply because it is not the feds that
are
> doing the taking.
>
> If a school contract states something like, "Upon graduation, the
> student has full ownership of the dog, unless the school deems the
> student to be blah, blah, blah," then this really is allusory.  This
> means that it is not really an enforceable contract because the school
> has not offered sufficient legal detriment.  I would be interested in
> exactly how the below contract is worded.  A school may contract to
> place conditions on ownership, but a blanket "you own the dog until we
> feel you should no longer own the dog" is not ownership and thus is
> allusory.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig Borne
> NHTSA/DOT
> (202) 493-0627
> craig.borne at dot.gov
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of Marion & Martin
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:40 AM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader
>
> Nicole,
>    If this is the case with GDB, then it doesn't really sound like
> ownership. Though I am not an attorney, it seems as if the 5th
Amendment
> to
> the U.S. Constitution states that I cannot be deprived of my property
> without due process! To me, that seems to imply that, without
sufficient
>
> cause and evidence, if I own something, including a dog, no one has
the
> right to take it from me without a hearing. At the same time, if I do
> not
> own the property, the owner of the property has the right to repossess
> it at
> any time and for any reason allowed by the agreement between us to use
> the
> property. It would be interesting to read the various ownership/lease
> (or
> whatever terminology is used) from the various schools.
>    So, what do you think? If I decided to write an article for the
> Braille
> Monitor about this issue, do you think all of the schools would
> cooperate by
> sending me their agreements? If not, what sort of objections would I
> face?
> Do I have the right to see them? Would such an article be of interest?
>
> Fraternally,
> Marion
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Nicole B. Torcolini" <ntorcolini at wavecable.com>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader
>
>
>> If you are allowed, do you mind me asking what school this was? It
>> certainly
>> does not sound like something that GDB would do. In any case, GDB has
> the
>> right to take the dog, regardless of ownership.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Marion & Martin" <swampfox1833 at verizon.net>
>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 7:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader
>>
>>
>> Dear Ron and All,
>>    The problem with a school retaining ownership is the holding of
> this
>> fact over the heads of the user. In many cases, graduates who do not
> have
>> ownership are hesitant to ask for help when needed, thus compromising
> the
>> integrity of the team due to training or behavioral issues.
> Furthermore,
>> handlers who do not own their dogs have little recourse should the
> school
>> decide to repossess the dog and the schools need no justification for
> this
>> action. Lest anyone think a school would not do such a thing, I will
> share
>> a
>> real example of this occuring.
>>    I advocated for a couple in Florida who were very outspoken and,
>> because
>> of this, made a few adversaries. Several of these adversaries filed
>> complaints against the couple, charging that their dogs were out of
>> control
>> and were being abused. One of the complaintants was a guide dog user
> who
>> worked for the state agency for the blind where each member of the
> couple
>> was engaged in rehabilitation. This person's dog was agressive toward
> the
>> wife's dog and the dog naturally defended itself. This state employee
>> contacted the school and asserted that the wife's dog was the
agressor
> and
>> had been aggressive toward other dogs at the rehabilitation center.
> The
>> complaintant also stated that the wife had been barred from bringing
> her
>> dog
>> to the rehab center. This latter fact was absolutely false and the
>> complaintant was disciplined by the agency for saying this.
>>    The school sent a trainer to visit the couple and their case notes
>> state
>> that the trainer spent "two or three hours" with the graduate. The
> first
>> thing I thought when I read this entry was "Did the trainer spend two
> or
>> three hours with the person?" In any case, the graduate asserts that
> the
>> trainer spent about ten minutes with her and that most of the time
the
>> trainer was on the telephone. In any case, the school sent another
> trainer
>> to "investigate". The traner went door-to-door in the couple's
> apartment
>> complex questioning neighbors about the allegations of abuse. Finding
> no
>> one
>> who would coroborate the abuse alleged by only one neighbor who the
> wife
>> said observed her correct her dog after it became distracted and ran
> her
>> into a trash can on the sidewalk, the school contacted Animal
Services
> to
>> investigate the claims of abuse and neglect.
>>    The Animal Services officer - a sworn law enforcement officer -
>> investigated the charges by visiting the couple's home unannounced.
He
>
>> told
>> me ( and wrote in his official report) that he found the couple's
>> apartment
>> clean and orderly, there was a bucket of water on the floor, plenty
of
> dog
>> food, both of the dogs were well-groomed, and the female dog even had
> its
>> nails painted! The officer concluded that there was no evidence of
> abuse
>> or
>> neglect and closed the case.
>>    The school sent a trainer, nonetheless, to the couple. Since the
> couple
>> owned their dogs, the school could not take the dogs away from them;
>> however, since the school retains ownership of the harnesses, they
> took
>> them
>> away. In addition, the Animal Services officer who was present when
> the
>> harnesses were taken told me that the trainer was verbally abusive to
> the
>> couple who, in his opinion, had done absolutely nothing wrong. In his
> own
>> words, he said, "I arrest people every day for serious crimes and
> would
>> never treat one of them the way this couple was treated!"
Furthermore,
> the
>> trainer went to the police department and told officers that the dogs
> were
>> no longer service animals, that they had no right to use them as
guide
>
>> dogs,
>> and that they  had no right of access. When I spoke with the police
>> department, this was confirmed; however, I was told by the police
>> department
>> that they had no intention of interfering with their rights of
access,
> as
>> this would violate both Florida and Fedeeral laws.
>>    Fortunately, this couple had ownership of their dogs. The only
> recourse
>> the school had was to repossess their harnesses, another issue I have
> with
>> schools' policies and why I have purchased my own harness. If the
> school
>> had
>> ownership, the dogs could have been taken away from them in spite of
> the
>> fact that there was no objective evidence of abuse or neglect.
>>
>> Fraternally,
>> Marion Gwizdala
>>
>> owned the dogs,
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Ron Davidson" <fuzzy_1 at cox.net>
>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] O&M, Ownership, & Leader
>>
>>
>>>I was told that once a dog is returned it is retired or adopted out
> and
>>>they do not retrain and match with another student. As far as
> ownership I
>>>don't see what the big deal is if the school retains ownership for a
> year
>>>or two years. If they feel you are abusing or not taking care of the
> dog I
>>>would want them to take it. I have known too many people get the dog
> and
>>>don't follow the feeding guidelines and feed table scraps etc and it
> ruins
>>>the dogs digestive system and they will go for food left on floors of
>>>restraunts etc. To me all that does is ruin a good working dog and
> make
>>>the
>>>rest of us look bad. The school I went to kept ownership for two
years
> and
>>>it was no big deal to me but everyone is different. I also was told
> that
>>>Seeing eye gives ownership upon graduation when you pay a fee of
> 150.00
>>>and
>>>this came from one of their field reps. I don't know what Leader dog
> does
>>>I
>>>went to Guiding Eyes and was very pleased with them and their
> follow-up.
>>>If I have a problem I gave them a call and we solved it over the
phone
> or
>>>a
>>>field trainer would come down if serious enough. I know everyone has
> their
>>>own preference of schools just like me and this is just my opinion.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
>>> nagdu:
>>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40ve
> rizon.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40wave
> cable.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40ve
> rizon.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/craig.borne%40dot
> .gov
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40ve
rizon.net 

_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/craig.borne%40dot
.gov