AITA for "backing out" of an agreement I never made?
Two months ago, a young woman’s long-held dream came true when her father offered her a chance to buy a female Labrador puppy from his friend Joe, a respected breeder.
The puppy came at a steeply discounted price, a gesture she accepted with trust and excitement, unaware that the seemingly generous offer would soon unravel into som**hing far more complicated and painful.
What started as a joyful moment quickly turned into confusion and heartache, as hidden conditions about the puppy’s ownership surfaced after the sale—conditions never disclosed or signed for.
The silence from both her father and Joe left her grappling with betrayal, questioning the true cost of her dream companion.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox.
The original poster (OP) feels betrayed and cornered after discovering a secret breeding agreement allegedly made by their father on their behalf regarding a newly purchased puppy.
The central conflict lies between the OP's a*sertion of legal ownership and personal autonomy—refusing to adhere to unagreed-upon terms—and the expectations set by the seller (Joe) and the OP's father, who believe the heavily discounted price implied a binding obligation to use the dog for breeding purposes.
Given the lack of consent and the significant personal obligations involved in breeding, is the OP ethically or legally required to honor the undisclosed breeding agreement facilitated solely by their father, or does their legal ownership nullify any obligation to the seller, regardless of the initial discount?
A Wave of Opinions Just Hit the Thread:
What started as a simple post quickly turned into a wildfire of opinions, with users chiming in from all sides.