Public Mediation

My Claim vs. Rainforest Coastal Labs-Gigi Strauss

  • FREE crypto coins; suggest a fair resolution to this case
  • 50% of recovery offered for best resolution
J. L. vs. Rainforest Coastal Labs - Gigi Strauss
103 Camfield Square Dr, Saint Louis, Missouri, 63141-8337, United States
  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (1,000)
Statement of Claim
"Dec 2017, I made an agreement with GiGi Strauss with Rainforest Coastal Labs that her stud chocolate labrador, Brownwaterdogs Raising Cain would be collected for semen to breed with my labrador, Faith.Preceding Dec 26th collection day, both GiGi and I had multiple conversations via phone, email and text messages. Thru this process I could tell she was inexperienced and would only casually collect from her dog at her Vet office and not utilize a teaser female for optimum quality and quantity of semen for best possible opportunity of success with fresh chilled semen being overnighted to California. She placed it in writing she would do take in one one of her females and she didn't. The Vet she went to did not provide a number for the collection when he had a machine thatmonitors this process. The number is important to supply to the female dogs owner so she can evaluate if it should be sent and then decide to pay and send the semen or not.  I was not provided this number. The Vet office pressured me for my credit card number as the shipping company was waiting for the package. I provided this as I was promised the number after the Vet office hung up with me. They neversent me the number. I was verbally informed it was of high concentration.  Once the semen was delivered both my Vet and I reviewed the semen and paperwork. The teaser was not used and the collecting process took a few tries and in the end was of low volume. It was of good concentration but was of low volume.Both my Vet and I have tried to express to the GiGi that 30% of low volume does not pregnate a female labrador.
It is important to point here that breeding outside of natural breeding has its shares of risks but we are beyond the dark ages when it comes to Reproduction. On the female end, we do vaginal smears, we monitor the progesterone levels sowe can target the timeframe that is best for breeding for either natural, fresh chilled semen or frozen. Progesterone tests costs each time $145-350. We run 3 to 7 progesterone tests per breeding normally. On the male end, they should but most stud dog owners take it for granted their dogs semen is healthy and plentiful. At the day they need to get collection done, they take the male dog in and Reproduction Specialists that are good atwhat they do always have a female in heat to collect most quantity and quality. GiGi mentioned to me her dog gets aroused just driving into the parking lot. Well, that may be the case, but I pointed out to aheadof time that does not give optimum collection of semen that I am one paying for and two, for best possible chances of success. Reproduction specialists run the semen thru a machine that analyzes it for quality and count.There is a form that is filled out. On that form where one can put a number at is a line drawn thru it. So, it was not an oversight but obviously omitted. It shows the volume for 1st and 2nd collections. 1st collection was poor 1.5 ml. This is very poor.Why was the teaser female not brought in? The 2nd collection was better but only good and volume 2 ml. And that was any better? The stud dog owners I have a good working relationship with that do their part on their end by checking on their male dogs semen on counts and quality 2 weeks prior to collecting for shipment for my breeding, plus refrain from having their dogs in cold water, also work with a top notch Reproduction Specialist. They email me the filled out form prior to approving the send out and receiving my payment. They also see to it there is a teaser female dog there to help in the collection for optimization. In this case, this was not done. It is the male dogs owner that chooses the Vet they go to to handle the process. That means itis their responsibility and accountability of mistakes from their end if they occur.
In the dog world, not saying this is fair and correct it is this way but the side that carries all the risk and finances is the female side. Then why is it ok when there is a halfway try from the male end for the collection process? To tango it takes two. To play a game of tennis it takes two. In this case, it takes team play and I was the only player living up to the game for success.
So, When I received the semen at my end at my Reproduction Specialist office, my Vet was disappointed about the quantity and had concerns. Again, I asked for the number collected from both GiGi and her Vet and was denied. If a Vet has the machine to monitor the number and analyze the semen, it is normally used. Experts feel it was used and the Vet and GiGi knew the number was low.
I called GiGi from the Vet office and shared all this info with her and asked her to please look into this as I was not impressed with whom she chose as her Vet on her end. GiGi claimed there was a number on the paperwork we were sent and her Vet was upset we did not see the number. She said she was told from her Vet that it was a good collection and of great volume.When I spoike with her Vet, he was upset she had lied as he admitted he did not use his machine and he never provided a number.
At the low volume at 30% it was a 50 to 50% chance my girl would be pregnant. And if so, would be a small litter. A week later, GiGi writes to me that with low volume that at least I would have a small litter and that was ok. OK? Per her agreement and industry standards,a small litter of 4 or less puppies are considered an unsuccessful breeding. This GiGi talks out of both sides of her mouth and has proven to be a liar multiples times.
I asked for my expenses and one lost customer totaling $2543. She laughed at me and denied any reimbursements. Then,  I have asked for my $400 deposit to GiGi returned. Letter 2/18/2018 GiGi said she would send me my deposit $400 back and requested my address. I sent her my address.Since then she has placed conditions on the return and requests I never share with anyone the truth about her. I am doing circles here. She is just giving me the run around.
Also, I paid for 3 DNA tests to be done on her dog, which was a waste of money now! Per our conversations she knew that health clearances were extremely important to me. She claimed herdog, Cain was clear on everything up to the additional 3 DNA tests I paid for to be done on her dog. Recently, I found out that she lied and mis-represented her dog as her dogs elbows were never cleared and the eyes tested are not current to clearances. GiGi mis-represented her information for her dog. Is this fraud?
$400 deposit at a minimum has been promised, I requested it returned in a reasonable amount of time and latest she has placed conditions. So, I go back now to my original request for all of my expenses and lossesto be reimbursed since she did not perform on her end to industry standard but more importantly what she wrote to me that she would do! That is a breach of the original agreement Along the way more lies and deception.
Help! I am seeking reimbursement for $2543"
Reply Have a similar problem?
Additional Communication Between Claimant and Rainforest Coastal Labs - Gigi Strauss Hide
  • Mar 19, 2018, Rainforest Coastal Labs - Gigi Strauss (responding party) added:
  • Dear,

    I am in receipt of the claim made against me by Jana Love (1115 Madison St NE, Salem, OR 97301, 541-580-5159) dated 3-19-2018. The claim is basically the same as the claim that this individual asserted against me earlier this month with the better business bureau (BBB). Attached below, please see my response to the BBB, which remains unchanged and is a matter of public record.

    I sincerely appreciate the role that organizations such as yours or the BBB serve to mediate good faith solutions. Sadly, good faith efforts are not always successful. Please note that our legal assistance is already established. No additional outside fee-for-service offers of assistance are desired please.

    Sincerely yours,
    Gigi/Rainforest Coastal Labs LLC
    Better Business Bureau
    211 N. Broadway, Suite 2060
    St. Louis, MO 63102

    Re: ID 12715452
    Dear Dispute Resolution Department,
    I would like to express my appreciation for your time and the important role that the BBB plays in finding a solution to disputes between individuals, or in this case, between two small businesses. This is the first complaint that has ever been filed against us and follows a failed “across-the-country” breeding attempt between two dogs; the female Labrador retriever, Faith (owned by the party filing the complaint), and my experienced and well-titled breeding male, Brownwaterdogs Raising Cain. While I remain optimistic and open-minded, I am doubtful that you will be able to find a mutually acceptable solution, as the complainant has discarded or disregarded the written agreement of services that she acknowledges having received ahead of the breeding, and then engaged in threatening behaviors-- hostile and harassing repetitive texting, name calling, and ongoing threats to harm my reputation. Despite this, I have exchanged several emails looking for a solution, including going beyond that stipulated in the written agreement. We are happy to provide documents and correspondence to the BBB staff on request, so that they can see that we have acted professionally and in good faith, and have exhausted reasonable efforts to find a solution. For the record, the lengthy written customer’s statement of the problem provided to us terminates abruptly in the middle of a sentence.

    Like the other party, I have a small women-owned business and understand the financial pressures on small businesses. I am truly sorry that this breeding was not successful. However, across-the-country artificial inseminations (AI) are understood by all to be inherently risky, with success rates that are cited in veterinary literature typically ~65- 85%. The standard dog breeding practice is that the female either; i) comes to the male for 2 or 3 natural breedings on subsequent days (likely with higher success rates), or ii) assumes the risk of a lower pregnancy rate and the financial cost of collecting and shipping fresh stabilized or frozen sperm and the AI procedure. Following a successful breeding of dogs of this caliber, the owner of the stud male receives a modest total payment, in this case of $800, while the owner of female may collect sales of around $14,000-18,000. This “reward discrepancy” explains why the financial risks of a failed pregnancy fall on the female party. We received one payment of $400 from the complainant as a deposit on sperm for this breeding. The written agreement of the services that we provide stipulates that our responsibility in the event of a failed liter is solely to provide sperm for a second breeding attempt. This is common to many other canine breeding agreements. Common sense also dictates that nobody would offer to provide stud services for the modest fee of $800 if they were also asked to assume responsibility for paying any of the female’s expenses should the breeding be one of the 15-35% of AIs that do not end in successful pregnancy. In order to optimize outcomes from our breeding services to our clients, for collection and shipped sperm we utilize one of two excellent veterinary groups; the Theriogenology repro group at the University of Missouri Veterinary School and an experienced Veterinary practice in St. Louis- both having many years of experience in collection, analysis, processing and shipping of fresh chilled or frozen sperm.

    The BBB complaint provided seems to revolve around one general area- the quality of the collection and sperm provided. Concerns included; the lack of a “teaser” in-heat female at the time of collection (which can increase the collection), concerns about the sperm number or volume, and assertions of concealment or fraud on the part of the vet specialist in not providing a machine sperm count. The complaint further cites Dr. Boillat having to make multiple sperm collections. This is wrong and shows that Jana is ignorant of the fact that a sperm ejaculate from a single collection consists of different fractions-- with one fraction containing nearly all the sperm. The Synbiotics form that was provided from the collecting vet shows that the second fraction was assessed for overall appearance, had excellent quality, was fast and had 90-95% motility, and that the visual assessment of sperm quantity (performed on a calibrated chamber slide) was adequate. Even the industry-standard Symbiotics paperwork indicates that a machine count is “optional”. Many/most specialists in the field consider the visual assessment of quality, morphology and quantity to be more important and informative than a machine count. The collection notes indicate that extra “Fresh Express” stabilizing buffer was added and that 8.5 milliliters (ml) of the sperm in the stabilizing buffer was shipped (by overnight air). The records further instructed, “if 8.5 ml is to large for insemination, centrifuge at low speed and decant to smaller volume.” The receiving vet’s analysis of the shipped sperm in the buffer noted it to be “good concentration.” Their notes also indicate that excess insemination material refluxed back out of the cervix during the transcervial insemination (TCI). These unbiased veterinary records completely refute all the complainant’s concerns about the quality, count/concentration, volume and lack of an available teaser bitch at the time of collection. It is widely known that a single collection results in enough spermatozoa that can be frozen and used for upwards of 5- 10 successful breedings. Failures more commonly result from mistiming the female’s ovulation and breeding/insemination or other health issues beyond the control or responsibility of the stud dog owner. Despite false assertions made by the complainant, there are no statements in either of the DVM’s collection or insemination medical records that contemporaneously raised any concern regarding the sperm at the time of the collection and shipping, or receipt, analysis and artificial insemination.

    There were however red flags in the record that potentially could indicate a problem with the female; i) the timing of the AI based on the progesterone measurements, ii) the fact that the female was on antibiotics, iii) the choice of AI technique (the vet had discussed a surgical AI, but a TCI was performed), iv) DVM notation of a vaginal discharge. While these factors don’t require further discussion in this correspondence, they are raised to remind the BBB staff that there are many potential factors that could underlie this failed breeding attempt.

    In summary, much of what is asserted in the lengthy rambling complaint is simply wrong, misinformed or misleading. I will certainly abide by our written agreement that provides an additional sperm collection for a repeat breeding attempt. I would be willing to instead refund her deposit of $400, with assurances that the complainant could put this dispute to rest without further issues, threats or propagation of incomplete or misleading information. However I have recently learned of other professionals that experienced similar problems after providing breeding services to the complainant and then watched as she propagated negative social media commentary in an attempt to damage their reputation. Based on my horrible experience, I would seriously caution anyone about doing business with this disreputable individual.
    Sincerely yours,
    Gigi Strauss

  • Apr 01, 2018, Rainforest Coastal Labs - Gigi Strauss (responding party) added:
  • Dear Jana-
    You go have your $550 polygraph test performed- but on your nickel. Sadly it won't be a helpful diagnostic test of your problem with the actual facts or your personal issues. The sperm was collected and analyzed by an independent specialist, was deemed high quality by both vets and even you called afterward to report how well it went. Gee- do you remember any of that?

    I don't want to be a party to your war on stud dog owners. If you are having that many problems with stud dog owners, did you ever consider the possibility that the problem isn't the stud dog owners or their dogs? I will absolutely live up to the terms specified in our prebreeding agreement of services. Reach out to me if you want that. Otherwise good bye!

  • Apr 02, 2018, Claiming party added:
  • Well GiGi as usual you are not keeping your facts strraight. Typical of a liar !!

    You said you were going to take a girl of yours that was in heat for the collection. You did not. You didn't share this information with me up front. Your Vet wrote on the form the 1st collection poor.
    The 2nd was a mere 2 ml. I don't know what circles you run with but 2 ml is a very low amount of semen. Your Vet wrote on the form 'adequate'. I requested a number of count prior to the shipment, was denied by
    your Vet's office. I requested the number the following morning and was denied. I requested for you to look into this and you did not. Unprofessionalism from both your Vet's office and as well, YOU.
    Once received in my Vet's office he shared with me it might be 200-300 mil of semen but was very low. I called you and shared that there was a problem and that the number was low.
    My Vet shared with me it was about 30% of where it should be. You said your Vet had written a number and your Vet was upset we didn't see a number. THERE WAS NEVER A NUMBER ON THERE. YOU LIED.
    YOU LIED AND LIED AND LIED. A team player would've called me with all information before sending the semen to me. But you chose not to. I truly believe you didn't know what the number should be at and exactly
    why a teaser should be there.....this is why I had a very stern conversation regarding this prior to collection day. If you were not taking one in, I was going to cancel and would've gone to a different stud dog.

    You lied that your dog was cleared for health clearances. Cain was not. His eyes need to be done each year to be cleared. He was not current since age 6 months of age. That is fraud as you mis-
    represented your product. You also had not done the clearances for the elbows. You bring up that I had paid for 3 additional DNA tests and you were upset you were not allowed to use this
    information. GiGi, are you delusional in how this world works?

    You wrote to me that you would send me back my $400 deposit multiple times and still have not. No integrity!

    You only offer up another breeding. Why would I try another breeding with your dog, your Vet and you since the last one went sooooo well? I can trust it would be done properly this time?
    Oh please, GiGi you still don't get it. I will be in touch with the Attorney General once again this week to make certain this is moving forward with his office. He needs to do an investigation on your
    fraudulent business.

  • Apr 03, 2018, Rainforest Coastal Labs - Gigi Strauss (responding party) added:
  • As usual, your statements misrepresent the facts. Please re-read the facts from the Better Business Bureau complaint. You like calling everyone names but do not understand, or desire to understand, the truths. There were never two collections, there was one- and it was within normal medical standards for canine sperm collection. The temperature controlled overnight shipment went well, as did the insemination on your end. The medical records recorded at the time document that. As far as returning your deposit, we would happily do that, even though that goes beyond our written agreement of services. We will put that check in the mail just as soon as you agree that your dispute with us will be resolved. Somehow I doubt that you will do that, based on your behavior in similar disputes you have had with others when your females didn't get pregnant. Have you entertained the possibility that the problem may not be "everyone else's dogs". I'm willing to bet that as your ethics and harassment become more common knowledge you will find it increasing difficult to find any other professionals who will work with you. I am sincerely sorry that the across the country AI didn't take, but the medical facts and Cain's breeding track record suggests that you look to your house to understand why.

  • Apr 28, 2018, Claiming party added:
  • WritBottomline, GiGi you have very little ethics and integrity and your character is obviously questionable. You go about things half way. You only test your dogs only so far. You only try to get
    semen from your dog only so far.

    This will never be resolved until you pay me full restitution. Kind of you to offer the deposit but you know you offered up a teaser bitch you had on hand and promised you were taking her in
    with you but in the end you changed your mind, didn't inform me ahead of time, lied about things along the way, lied about what your Vet said and point the finger back at me.

    There are many other stud dog owners just like you that I have come across, and yes, if I have a poor reputation with that crowd of poor character sorts then so be it. I surround myself with class
    A1 crowd and that wouldn't be you or the other stud dog owners like yourself.

    I am in the process in writing a book about my truthful experience of the dog world industry. A tell ALL book. This dog world business is an industry full of deceit. You are one of them.

    As time goes on and I see others questioning doing business with you.......I will share my truthful experience. I will share simply the truth.

    Jana Love
    e your message here

What Claimant Wants Hide
1. Compensation: Deposit Returned Apr 03, 2018 $400.00
2. Damages: Cost for breeding Apr 03, 2018 $1,143.00
3. Recovery of Losses: Lost customer Apr 03, 2018 $1,000.00
4. Pay for claim posting cost Apr 03, 2018 $14.99
Cash total : $2,557.99
  • 0
Do you agree with the claimant’s demands?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Help out — earn RHUcoin
  • Suggest a fair resolution: 5 RHU
  • Yes-vote from community: 5 RHU
  • Yes-vote from disputant: 25 RHU each
  • Get the case resolved: 100 RHU
Respondent's Counteroffer Hide
What By When How Much
1. the remedy in the prebreeding agreement provided to Jana Love Oct 29, 2018 N/A
Non-cash: 1 items
  • 0
Do you agree with the respondent’s Response?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Help out — earn RHUcoin
  • Suggest a fair resolution: 5 RHU
  • Yes-vote from community: 5 RHU
  • Yes-vote from disputant: 25 RHU each
  • Get the case resolved: 100 RHU
  • Show:
  • Sort by:
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1
  • Contributed Solution: by George Maxwell On 06-06-2018
    Take return of deposit and agree to close complaint - or take it to court More...
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
Get fast access to our Resolver community, for...
  • help with a PeopleClaim or any other complaint
  • assistance with a purchase or contract
  • expert advice
Other PeopleClaim resolvers
Get Free alerts when claims post in your area.
Get Alert

Need help resolving a dispute? Learn more.

Public Mediation

The shortest path from your problem to its resolution.
Peer to Peer

Engage the other party and use powerful tools to negotiate the best resolution.

If Unresolved
Community Resolution

Post your case online and get help from legal professionals, industry experts, consumers & advocates competing to find the best resolution to your claim.

$14.99 + optional reward for best resolution
Full refund if not resolved to your satisfaction
If Unresolved
Private Mediation

Lets you mediate your case privately with the help of our professional mediators and industry experts.

Free to claimant. Mediator fees negotiable.
If Unresolved
Engage a Professional

Find the best community-reviewed professionals near you to resolve your issue in private online mediation or traditional court/mediation.


A wonderful serenity has taken possession of my entire soul, like these sweet mornings of spring which I enjoy with my whole heart.

I am (not) alone, and I feel the charm of existence in this spot, which was created for the bliss of souls like mine...~ Goethe

Get a public verdict — create an online trial $50 public trial / $50 reward for successful resolution
Important: All information contained herein is the opinion of the posting parties, who are solely responsible for its content. PeopleClaim offers both free and paid services to help consumers, patients, employee, tenants, and others resolve disputes without lawyers or courts, through negotiated online settlement and public disclosure of wrongdoing or unfair treatment.
Claims against parties operating under bankruptcy protection, by law must be processed solely through the appropriate US bankruptcy court. Any claims against this party currently posted on PeopleClaim are available for purposes of public business review only and are not an attempt to collect money or recover assets subject to protections under the United States Bankruptcy Code.
*IMPORTANT: PeopleClaim is a public dispute resolution system, independent of the BBB, small claims court, or other dispute resolution services. PeopleClaim is not a law firm and does not provide legal services, opinions, or advice. PeopleClaim facilitates peer-to-peer negotiation and resolution and crowdsourced input on issues of fairness to help resolve complaints. Users should contact professional legal counsel on any matters of law or regulation regarding their claims. PeopleClaim does not review or evaluate the merits of claims submitted through its site, and users are solely responsible for all content filed in their claims.
© reserved by PeopleClaim