When she asked him if he wanted it back, and he said no she could keep it. He "gave" it to her at that point. The legal definition of gift is voluntary tranfer from one person to another without charge or consideration.
I reread the thread and nowhere does the OP mention that the original owner (the BF) state that he said no, she could keep the dog.
She did ask the BF 4 months ago if he wanted the dog then.
Originally Posted by Imzadi View Post
Following New Rule:
Questions:
How long have you had the dog?
Nearly five months.
Have you verbally asked your friend if he still wants the dog and when is he going to pick it up?
Yes, four months ago.
Do YOU want the dog? If so, you should make written arrangements on the transfer of ownership of the dog with him.
Yes, she has become a member of the family. If the gf has the receipt, how would anything written by him be of any use? I doubt he has any interest in the dog.
Or, do you mind if the GF has the dog? Have you told her that she has to make arrangements with ex-BF for the dog?
She didn't want the dog for the past four + months, so no, I don't think she should have this or any dog, really.
Also, I've noticed that when a police officer says something is a civil matter, they don't necessarily then know the legalities and rules regarding that civil matter. Just because the cop says it's an abandoned dog doesn't make it one.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to even know a little bit about this kind of thing.
But, in the dog show world, I have heard about similar situations come up - ie, an owner leaves the dog with a handler long after the contract is done and then wants the dog back.
From what I recall, if it goes to court, it is all going to come down to what arrangements were agreed upon or even implied.
IF, when she asked the BF if he was going to pick up the dog 4 months ago and he said "no" and she didn't tell him he had to pick up the dog, it would seem that it would be implied that she entered into another agreement to keep the dog for him.
Also, since she knew the dog was both of theirs, if she did not contact the GF at that time and ask her to come pick up the dog, then she again was agreeing to keep the dog for the owners.
The GF could say that the BF had told her that the OP was still keeping the dog for them willingly until she was ready to pick up the dog and that she had no knowledge that the OP wanted them to come pick it up. She is the legal owner with a receipt, so the OP is going to have to prove that the dog was given to her or that she made attempts to return the dog and they would not take it back.
The lack of charging from the outset might also put a kink into the equation. For a dog handler, if the owner just stops paying the handling fees and doesn't pick the dog up, the handler can sue for back payment, taking the dog. But if the OP was doing it for free in the beginning, there is no concrete way to prove that a contract was being violated.
So, if she just kept quiet hoping they owners would never return, then it would seem she was just continuing her agreement to watch the dog for the owners.
The dog is property no matter how we love a dog (except in my town where you cannot legally own a dog - you are its guardian.) The court is not going to care one whit who the dog is attached to as it is not a child.
If this dog is really now part of your family, then you should definitely fight for it. But check out your legal options with real lawyers

as you don't want to get stuck for legal costs if you lose as another poster suggested.