Pre-Script:
Search HEAR Long Island on Reddit. I wish had…read more
Original Post:
I'm a person living with a disability, seeking a non-service companion to join my family with my aging service dog. HEAR was aware of this via my detailed application and references.
I reached out to HEAR via PetFinder very interested in a pup, Relish, who appeared to be a good match with my family. I entered the adoption process, got all of my references confirmed, completed a virtual home visit, set a meet time, and was sent additional pics and videos of Relish after the visit--all validating Relish as a potential match. It was a very hopeful and exciting moment.
However, in the same text I was informed I was approved for adoption from HEAR, I was also informed Relish was just adopted, within 18 hours of my confirmed meetup. Prior to this, I was not informed I was competing for the match. Had I advance notice, I might've made other arrangements, but I wasn't offered the opportunity or the warning.
I've volunteered for and dealt with more than a dozen rescue agencies in my region as an advocate and supporter, as well as several others throughout my childhood. None of the agencies I've worked with have been less transparent than HEAR.
No one wants to be in the position of visualizing a potential family member in their lives, and planning for that hopeful first meeting, only to have them cancelled from the equation less than 18 hours before the meet--removed with no notice of other variables.Instead, they sent pics of other dogs.
I've requested my adoption application with HEAR be closed, as I would never recommend anyone who wishes to ethically enter a relationship with a rescue rely on HEAR for the availability of the hopeful companion, or transparency in general.
Reply to HEAR's response to this post:
HEAR says there were delays. HEAR says I'd rather garden?? These are absolute falsehoods. The timeline below is clear. All communications and appointments were honored.
May 11, Kristie confirmed my May 10 application and requested documentation of my landlord's permission to have a second dog. May 12, I submitted that documentation. May 14, Kristie apologizes for *her* delay, and informs me she'll be reaching out to my three references. All references responded the same day, after I let them know to check their "unknown numbers" folder. Friday, May 15, at 7:28pm, a virtual home visit is requested by Kristie. I was already on my farmstead for the weekend--I detailed the farmstead in my application. I let Kristie know I was upstate, and offered to FaceTime from there or when I got back home. She said she'd wait. I proposed a meet time, but Kristie said it could happen whenever, to just text her when I'm home, that she'd be "around." I texted Monday, May 18 to make arrangements. We set it for the next day, May 19. The virtual visit happened with her partner, Sam, because Kristie was unavailable when I texted. During that meeting, an appointment was made to specifically meet Relish on May 23 at the HEAR event.
Prior to the arranged meet date, I inquired of its flexibility because planting became a factor--planting is absolutely critical and 100% dependent on weather and climate. Sam responded that probably wouldn't work. So, I CONFIRMED the original meet time. I very clearly confirmed my motivation and intent to meet and spend time with this specific sweet boy, Relish. Still, he was adopted out from under me.
NOT ONCE was I informed there were other applicants for him. Not once were any other factors or obstacles to adopting Relish mentioned. And not once did I miss any appointments or communications.
I've dealt with much more honest and ethical agencies. It's HEAR's opaque practices that might hurt their ability to adopt, not this honest review.
Post-Script:
Sam even mentioned she didn't want to leave Relish alone at night with her dogs, because "god forbid something happen." Apparently, that was a legitimate risk as per Reddit. It's absolutely shocking that injury to fosters is still a risk they take.
