Consumer Law, Warranties contract not signed by receiving party

[tmg1963]

my friend who is a breeder of Newfoundlands, shipped a puppy to California. the breeder is in Illinois. The puppy was in good health, vet checked and up to date on all it's shots. I was with her at the time she shipped the puppy. the people who received the puppy have now stated that there are multiple problems with the puppy. My friend paid for a 2nd opinion vet visit and now the people are stating that she must pay for all vet bills incurred. Her contract states that if there are any congenital or heriditary issues with the puppy she will replace the puppy when she has another litter. The people are threatening legal action, etc... because she does not have another puppy at this time but will in the spring when her next litter will be due. The woman who received the puppy is stating that she never signed the contract therefore, the contract is null and void. Even though it states the contract will be adhered to if it is signed and returned within 30 days. It has been over 30 days now since she has had the puppy and is stating that the puppy has now infected her other animals... my friend offered to replace the puppy as stated in the contract... is she wrong?

 

[dee_dub]

Is it true that the buyer never signed the contract?

And what is the problem with the dog? Is it hereditary/congenital and thus covered by the contract (in the event the contract is binding)?

And why are the other puppies sick? That sounds like a communicable disease, not a hereditary disease, and might not be covered by the contract, and might conceivably be due to your friend's negligence.