We responded with the below email and we are still waiting for a reply –
“Hi Deaira.
You have said “I’ve escalated this to management who will be undergoing extensive research and testing on the matter.” I am particularly concerned with this response because you and I both know that extensive research and testing takes time. The standard playbook of responding to complaints isn’t going to work. i.e. acknowledge the response to a complaint, follow up with a letter several days later to say the matter will be thoroughly investigated, an additional letter sometime after about the complexities of the ongoing investigation and that the matter is being taken seriously, and of the utmost importance. The purpose here is to put as much distance in time between the initial complaint and the emotional customer in the hope that this will just go away.
Regarding your proposed “extensive research and testing” you should have done that before you launched the product.
Seeing that you are now expressing concerns with this product and the need to do research and testing, do you not think that it is prudent to immediately remove the product from sale whilst you carry out your tests? Your tests may take a lot of time and you will be continuing to put your customers’ animals at risk.
It is also of particular concern that you have now deleted the welfare advice that said “Rabbits have a great sense of smell, so avoid any bedding that has been laundered with scented detergent and may smell foreign to them. Use only unscented litters.” Is this a live example of you tearing up your old ethical business model that I suspected? Is that what your trying to show me?
https://smallpetselect.com/rabbit-aggression-when-good-rabbits-go-bunzilla/
There is a permanent record of the original version of that page in the internet archive https://web.archive.org/web/20200919191919
At your own admittance you are selling an unsuitable product that even you don’t recommend. Regarding the Animal Welfare Act if you have a reasonable suspicion that you are putting animals in harm’s way or not providing a suitable environment you must Act. I certainly think that I now have enough evidence to prove that you are knowingly selling an unsuitable product to your customers. The Animal Welfare Act also applies to your customers and it is their responsibility to provide a suitable environment and by selling this product when you know you shouldn’t give rabbits scented bedding you are also misleading your customers to break the Animal Welfare Act.
Well done you have acted accordingly and done the right thing for your product regarding hamsters so why not Rabbits? You have said the same advice on your website against scented bedding for both Hamsters and Rabbits. Why are you not following your own advice for rabbits?
You may have spotted that when you search “Scented hamster bedding” in google we come up no 1 and I feel that may be the reason why you have only acted for hamsters. Please don’t think that because we are not specialising in rabbits or guinea pigs or other animals that we don’t care about them and we won’t fight for their cause. I am now having to consider writing an article titled “Small Pet Select are they really ethical!” and i’m sure it will show up very high on google. I already have plenty of evidence to include and I would rather not have to waste my time then have to warn customers against your lavender product and the issues that you have presented. (It’s a great shame because on the other side of the coin your bedding that Tiffany uses is really great for hamsters and we really want to promote you but we can’t promote an unethical company).
You guys make out that you are a very ethical company but you are starting to prove that you are actually very unethical and you’re more keen to fill the demands of customers who want their house to smell nice than providing a suitable environment for the animals that have to use your product.
Please respond within seven days if not I will assume that the situation is as it is!
Kind Regards,
Mark Diner”