Cat Clause: Pet ‘Loan’ Disputes Spread in China
It seemed a deal too good to refuse: an adorable white and gray kitten to take home for free, in return for signing a contract to buy a year’s worth of pet products.
In need of a companion, university student Xiaomo was instantly drawn to the small British Shorthair and “ended up adopting it on the spot,” she told Sixth Tone.
But things quickly turned sour. The kitten, sick when she purchased it, died within a week. That didn’t free Xiaomo from the contract, which still required her to pay nearly 250 yuan ($34) monthly to the shop even if she chose not to take a replacement pet.
“They claimed it was free cat adoption, but in reality, they lured us into making purchases and signing a contract for buying cat food,” Xiaomo wrote in a social media post. The student declined use of her full name to preserve anonymity.
She is one of many cash-strapped Chinese consumers who feel trapped by a business model which has rapidly spread across China in response to a steep rise in demand for pets.
Stores across the country, often in shopping malls and labeled as pet ‘adoption’ companies, offer animals for free, so long as customers agree to future pet food and accessory purchases. They have become the subject of court cases and government warnings, and generated intense online debate.
A hashtag complaining about one such company has garnered over 18 million views on social media platform Weibo. On rival platform Xiaohongshu, or RedNote, a hashtag used by posters seeking help to cancel their contracts after their adopted pets fell ill or died has tens of thousands of views. Users jokingly refer to the contracts as “cat loans.”
The rise of the issue to prominence highlights how crucial domestic animals have become to Chinese society: the number of pet cats reached over 70 million in 2024, according to information platform PetData, alongside around 50 million pet dogs.
China’s pet industry has grown at an annual rate above 13% over the last decade, reaching a value of 300 billion yuan last year, according to Petdata, fueled by rising affluence, and more people living alone.
The disputes over “adoptions” reflect a more serious issue: in an economy increasingly reliant on consumption, new avenues for scams and customer manipulation are emerging. And with China’s government making boosting consumer spending its top economic priority this year, officials are cracking down on shady practices, trying to ensure people feel more confident about spending.
Xiaomo said the “adoption” contract seemed more affordable than the typical price of a cat. But breaking the contract could lower her credit score on the payment app she used to make the purchase, making it harder to access some of the app’s other services, such as bike rentals.
This was how, two weeks after her kitten’s death and still grieving, Xiaomo came to accept the shop’s offer of another kitten. This time, she took it for a health examination at her own expense — revealing it was infested with mites. Despite regular cleaning for ear mites, the second kitten stopped eating and drinking, and it died of dehydration.
Xiaomo tried to file complaints through the government’s national consumer hotline, but was advised to negotiate with the business instead. Because the contract placed the responsibility for the pets’ health on consumers, legal action seemed challenging.
Legal status
Part of the problem is determining which laws the pet “adoption” contracts fall under.
The contracts combine elements of sales with gift agreements, which are covered by China’s Civil Code, according to which a gift giver or seller is required to bear some responsibility for defects, explained Xu Guipeng, a lawyer at Chongqing Hezong Law Firm.
“The provisions requiring consumers to purchase cat food in the contract are not illegal,” he told domestic media. If the business intentionally hides, misleads, or deceives consumers, they have the right to request the cancellation through a court or arbitration institution, he added.
In a 2023 dispute between a pet adoption company and a customer who received a sick animal, a court in the southwestern Sichuan province ruled that the company had a contractual obligation to provide a healthy pet and that a customer’s refusal to purchase pet food after the animal’s death was “in line with common sense.”
The court decided that the customer was only obliged to pay four months of the contract. Neither side appealed the verdict. “Seemingly free pet adoption is prone to problems such as adopting sick pets,” the court added, including “a rise in abandonment behaviors among young people who make impulsive purchases.”
Wei Wei, a partner of Beijing JAVY Law Firm, said other local courts have ruled such adoption agreements are essentially sales contracts, and businesses are obliged to bear liability for defects. A contract clause that limits a consumer’s choice to the purchase of a potentially overpriced product is potentially illegal, Wei added.
In the case of sick animals, courts or government departments could impose “remedies such as a refund, replacement, or compensation for losses,” she told Sixth Tone.
As consumer complaints about “free pet adoption” practices spread, some local authorities have weighed in with public warnings.
In August, the Consumer Protection Council of Chongqing Municipality in southwestern China recommended people only adopt from “reputable” pet stores and request health or vaccination certificates before adoption, carefully review contracts, and keep purchase records.
The Consumer Protection Council in the eastern Anhui province issued a warning in December, advising, “In the face of ‘tricky marketing tactics,’ be sure to keep a sharp eye and don’t be tempted by bargains.”
Fighting back
Despite such warnings, the “adoption” business model has spread quickly. A search on Qichacha, a leading Chinese business intelligence platform, yields 35 such businesses registered in the past year. One of the biggest companies in this field is Yaoshe Pet, founded in Hangzhou, capital of eastern Zhejiang province, in 2020. It has opened chain stores in at least seven cities across China.
Unlike traditional “adoption” of abandoned animals, pets available in the stores are typically bred for sale. Growing demand for pets is driven by the rising number of single urban professionals, who are more likely to have a pet, according to an industry report by iiMedia Research, a data analysis firm.
“Single individuals are more likely to invest their emotions in pets, viewing them as important members of the family,” according to the report.
Lulu, another young consumer, signed a pet “adoption” contract last August at a Shanghai shop called “One More Time.”
To receive an American Shorthair cat, she signed a contract requiring her to deposit 800 yuan per month for two years into the business’s online shopping platform account. The balance could then be used to purchase any products on the platform, like pet food, toys, supplements, and cat litter.
As a new pet owner, the price seemed reasonable to Lulu. But after taking her cat home, a friend explained that cat care expenses are typically much lower than the contract amount. Additionally, the platform offered limited pet food options and few supplies, such as toys.
“It feels like being deceived,” Lulu, who also requested anonymity due to privacy concerns, told Sixth Tone. The penalty for breaking the contract was specified as 1,500 yuan.
When Sixth Tone visited the Shanghai shop as a potential customer, a staff member explained that their cats could be purchased outright, and the “adoption” model helps ensure customer responsibility.
“It is mainly to prevent customers from reselling them or being irresponsible towards the cats,” a member of staff said.
Lulu managed to negotiate with the store, successfully canceling the contract without paying the penalty the following day.
After the death of both her adopted cats, Xiaomo refused to pay any remaining fees. In response, she has received payment reminders and even implicit threats of potential legal action — the business sent her articles about previous lawsuits.
She remains defiant, saying she is unafraid because she knows she has supporters online.
“These businesses profit from innocent lives, deceive customers, and shirk all responsibility,” she said. “If they insist on taking legal action, I can learn from other people’s experiences and then fight back.”
Editor: Tom Hancock.
(Header image: Visuals from VCG, reedited by Sixth Tone)
