WE BEGIN WITH REAL ESTATE

 

As of June 2025, Ruff House Rescue retains ownership of a residential property in Freeport, NY. It was purchased in 2020 for $242,000, in poor condition, and is zoned strictly for single-family residential use—not for housing animals.

​

When the house came to light, it sparked public pushback, with people questioning why an animal rescue would own such a property. The organization decided to classify it as an investment, and it appears on their IRS 990 as such—yet it shows a $13,265 loss in rental income. With a loss like that, it’s a curious investment. Not exactly what most people expect when they support an animal rescue.

​

In a September 2022 post, Diane wrote that the house would hopefully be on the market in October 2022, with new siding and a new kitchen, calling it “adorable.” That projected timeline came and went. Nearly three years later, they still own the house.

​

And then there are the taxes. Ruff House fell behind on property taxes for this home. A lien notice was issued—a matter of public record. It was eventually paid off, but it’s one more piece of the pattern: questionable choices, poor planning, and zero transparency.

 

On top of all that, FEMA flood maps confirm the property lies within Zone AE (EL8), a high-risk flood zone where homes are required to be elevated to meet base flood elevation standards. The original real estate listing even warns that “based on FEMA guidelines, this property may need to be raised,” and advises consulting local authorities before making renovations. These kinds of restrictions significantly complicate the property’s use, value, and any renovation plans.

​

So while the market value may look better on paper, the flood risk, zoning restrictions, and failure to generate income raise serious questions about what the property is really worth—and why the organization bought it in the first place.

​

What makes it worse is what was happening while this house sat empty or unusable.

​

DOGS. IN. VANS.

​

In October 2022, after being ordered to vacate the kennel in Nassau County, Ruff House Rescue didn’t secure a safe or legal alternative for the dogs.

​

According to multiple accounts, they were kept in adoption vans—for up to three weeks.

​

Not just transported. Housed. In parked vans. On the street. Collecting parking tickets.

 

But what mattered most wasn’t the fines. It was what was happening inside.

​

No room to move. No consistent access to relief. Just confinement, chaos, and confusion. For many dogs, this kind of stress leads to immediate behavioral fallout. It’s unthinkable.

​

No animal should be treated this way—least of all by an organization claiming to rescue them.

​

Speaking of vans...

​​

MEET THEIR TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE

​

Nearly four years after pleading guilty to animal cruelty, Luisa Montalvo is still listed in 2025 as Ruff House Rescue’s registered agent in Texas.

​

That detail isn’t just troubling—it’s telling.

 

​Luisa also played an active role in operations—transporting Ruff House Rescue dogs across state lines.

 

In 2021, Luisa was criminally charged under New York’s Agriculture & Markets Law 353D—after leaving her paralyzed dog alone in a cold van. A police officer, initially there to issue a parking ticket, discovered the dog and intervened.

​

Luisa had walked two blocks to spend the night in a hotel—leaving the dog alone in the freezing cold. 

​

She later pleaded guilty. In court, the judge expressed shock that additional charges hadn’t been brought—and even more shock that the law gave him no option but to return the dog to the very person who had abandoned him. He seemed frustrated that all he could do was assess a $100 fine for the cruelty charge—less than what she’d paid for parking illegally in a handicap spot.

​

After the case, Luisa claimed she cut ties with Ruff House Rescue. But four years later, she’s still listed as their Texas agent. If she truly left—why haven’t they replaced her? And if she hasn’t—what does that say about their judgment? About how seriously they take their duty to protect animals?

​

The answer becomes even clearer when you look at what they’ve done to dogs like Lenny and Roger.

​

FROM "RESCUE" TO THE TOWN SHELTER

 

Lenny and Roger were once Ruff House Rescue dogs.

 

They were adopted. They had families. They were promised forever.

​

But like so many others, life took a turn. When their adopters couldn't keep them, Ruff House Rescue should have honored their own adoption contract by taking them back.

​

They didn’t.

​

Lenny was surrendered to the Town of Hempstead Animal Shelter in October 2022.

​

He started to unravel almost immediately—overwhelmed, anxious, and clearly struggling. The stress clung to him, and he stopped showing well. It was heartbreaking. You’d think the rescue that once called him theirs would rush to his side. But Ruff House Rescue never came.

​

Instead, Lenny was shipped off to a fake sanctuary, where he was confined to a crate inside a rented camper—used as a fundraising prop for people who believed he was safe.

​

He wasn’t safe. He was suffering.

​

Eventually—after legal pressure and a fight from people who cared—he was brought back to the Town of Hempstead shelter. And finally, in 2025, after years of being passed around and exploited, Lenny was adopted. Not because of Ruff House Rescue. In spite of them.

 

And then there’s Roger.

​

He ended up at the same shelter in February 2023. As of June 2025, he’s still there.

​

Another dog discarded by Ruff House Rescue when an adoption didn’t work out. Another life handed off to an already-overburdened public shelter—left for taxpayers to cover the fallout.

​

Ruff House’s excuse? That the shelter director wanted Roger to stay. But that’s not rescue. That’s passing the buck.

​

You don’t get to claim you're the “largest 501(c)(3) non-profit rescue on Long Island” and then abandon your own dogs when things get tough. If you can’t make room for the animals you already promised to protect, how can you justify importing more—especially from out of state and overseas?

​

Roger has been waiting for years. He deserves better. 

​

So did Kinsley.

​

KINSLEY'S TRAGIC TALE

​​​

Kinsley was a gentle, happy dog—and she was pregnant. She arrived in New York in early April 2021. Videos promoting her for adoption were posted on April 3rd and again on April 13th. But by April 18th, Ruff House Rescue was looking for a maternity foster for her.

​

How did they not know she was pregnant until then? And why was she being treated for heartworm with doxcycline, which is a medication known to be unsafe for pregnant dogs?

​

Kinsley gave birth to 7 puppies. She wasn't doing well and was taken to the emergency vet—but later returned home. She died shortly after. Her foster pulled each nursing baby from her, one by one. Later all of the puppies died, too.

​

Ruff House Rescue claimed the veterinarian advised to send Kinsley home. However, the vet's recommendations included CBC, Chemistry, iCa++ and, depending on those results, bringing in the puppies to nurse if she needed continued monitoring. The rescue instead decided to send her home. 

​

Afterward, Diane posted a fundraiser for an incubator for the surviving puppies. But with an incubator needed immediately, what good was a fundraiser to obtain one? Were they not receiving this care at the vet? The rest of the puppies passed away too. There’s no evidence an incubator was purchased, and veterinary records were never made public.

​

Kinsley’s story isn’t just a tragic case of neglect—it also raised a disturbing question:

 

Why were so many dogs arriving pregnant in New York in the first place?

​

THE MATERNITY CRISIS

​

Between November 2020 and April 2021, volunteers began noticing something that didn’t sit right: a sharp increase in the number of pregnant dogs arriving at Ruff House Rescue. At one point, the number was reportedly as high as 26 litters—with around 130 puppies in the program at once.

 

But here’s the thing—a dog’s gestation period is only about two months, and transports don’t usually happen right away. There were concerns that dogs may have been interacting freely at the Texas property without proper separation, which raises serious questions about when and where these pregnancies were actually happening.

​

No one wants to believe that a rescue could allow this. But we have to ask: Are they truly committed to preventing more litters?

​

And pregnancy hasn’t been the only thing traveling unchecked across state lines.

​

Disease has too.

​​

THE COST OF CUTTING CORNERS

​​

Parvo. Distemper. Heartworm.

Illnesses that can be devastating, even deadly, especially for already vulnerable animals.

​

To legally cross state lines into New York, every dog is required to have a valid rabies vaccination and a Certificate of Veterinary Inspection, or CVI. It’s not optional. It’s the law. And there’s a reason for that: CVIs are meant to stop disease traveling across the country and landing in our homes and communities.

​

So where are Ruff House Rescues’s CVIs?

​

Over the years, a few have shown up—sporadically. These records are available through the New York Agriculture and Markets’ public database, which clears out the third month back every time a new one is added. We’ve been checking. And we’re not seeing them. (See here.)  For the Suffolk law, see here.

​

So, what exactly is being done before these dogs are put on a van? Are they actually being examined by a licensed vet? Because fosters and adopters have received dogs with serious illnesses—families who thought they were bringing home a healthy, protected dog, only to face emergency vet visits, long-term treatment, and heartbreak that could have been prevented.

​

Heartworm is especially troubling because it’s entirely preventable with simple monthly medication. Is it common in Texas? Absolutely. Can we know exactly when each dog was infected? No. But we do know they should be on preventatives—and tested and treated in a timely manner.

​

Yet dogs have continued to test positive only after arriving in New York, sometimes not even tested until months later. Why? Why weren’t they tested before transport?

​

The ranch failed inspections. They weren’t keeping proper records. Without documentation of preventatives, how can anyone be sure what these dogs actually received—or didn’t?

​

In high-risk states like Texas, responsible rescue work means being thorough: testing, protecting, and documenting. Because when that part gets skipped, it's the dogs, and the adopters, who pay the price.

 

That doesn’t mean every dog gets sick, or that no one gets paperwork. Those who don't get a sick pet should consider themselves lucky. But when transparency is inconsistent, records are missing—or the ones that do exist aren’t from a licensed veterinarian—and basic care can’t be verified, what are we trusting? Because rescue isn’t just about the dogs who make it out okay. It’s about the ones who don’t, too.

 

And disease care isn’t the only place where corners have been cut.

​​

THE SPAY/NEUTER BREAKDOWN

​

We all know how important spay and neuter is—one of the most basic responsibilities of any rescue. While Ruff House Rescue generally spays and neuters their dogs, hundreds were still sent to adopters unaltered. That’s a serious concern, especially given their own mission statement and the risk of contributing to more unwanted litters.

​

Here’s what one volunteer shared:

“During the pandemic we were meeting people on the side street by the motel in Island Park and we were handing dogs to people in cars. They would literally pull up, fill out a form, and leave with the dog. We were sending loads of dogs home every Saturday and Sunday for months. Everyone wanted a dog because they were home. At one point there were over 900 dogs in the field that had not been spayed or neutered when Diane passed them off. Joanne put out a post asking for volunteers to help call adopters off that list to find out if they had spayed or neutered their dog.

"I was part of that team. I had over 50 phone calls to make the first time I signed up to help. I would call the person, identify myself, and ask if the paperwork had been sent in that they had the dog spayed or neutered. Some people were saying they sent the paper and haven’t received the money. Many that I spoke to said just keep it as a donation. And then there were many people that said it was very expensive to get the dog spayed/neutered and they were forfeiting the $150 deposit. We had explained to Diane that that is what would happen and that goes against her mission statement about the overpopulation of animals and spay and neuter your dogs. But this was I guess just another way to capitalize on bringing in more money. Lastly Diane was charging other people $150 on spay/neuter even though the dog had already been spayed or neutered.”

​

This is a failure to uphold the core purpose of rescue. Spaying and neutering is essential to reducing overpopulation. Yet Ruff House Rescue skipped this step for too many dogs.

​

And then there’s the adoption contract. It states that if a dog adopted from Ruff House Rescue has a litter of puppies, those puppies must be returned to RHR. But how can that even happen—if the dog was already spayed?

​

It’s just one more example of the disconnect between what this rescue claims to stand for, and what actually happens.

​

And sadly, the lapses didn’t stop there.

 

DAWN DETERGENT ISN'T A CARE PLAN

​​

If you know, you know.

 

Fosters and adopters have routinely been told to bathe dogs in Dawn detergent to treat flea infestations. It's even listed on paperwork. These dogs should have been properly treated beforehand—bathed, quarantined, cleared of parasites, protected. Instead, too often, the burden has been passed on to the foster or adopter.

​

And while families were scrubbing dogs with dish soap, Diane was racking up a shopping spree—with stolen Amazon points.

​​

THE AMAZON POINTS INCIDENT

In an incident that resulted in a police report, Director Diane Indelicato was accused of using a former volunteer’s Amazon-linked credit card points—over $3,000 worth—without permission. The haul included a few pet items, but most of it was personal: teas, supplements, beauty products, and hundreds of dollars in gift cards to places like Best Buy, Amazon, and The Cheesecake Factory.

​​

And a plush doll.

 

A doll that lives rent-free in our nightmares.

 

We're not making this up. We couldn't if we tried. We'll show you the doll below.

​​

To avoid arrest, Diane reimbursed the volunteer. And get this: she used rescue funds to do it. $3,140, meant to help animals, used to reimburse someone for personal purchases she never should have made in the first place.

 

And believe it or not, that wasn’t the only time Diane dipped into donated money for herself. Meet...

​

THE BAGEL JAR RAID

​

Ruff House Rescue had a donation jar at a bagel shop in Oceanside. You know the kind: customers drop their spare change in to help animals. Heartwarming. Community-driven. Feel-good.

​

But here's what we hear. One morning, a store employee saw a woman help herself to the donation jar—and use the money to buy herself food.

​

Not long after, a volunteer wearing a RHR shirt stopped in to grab breakfast. The employee explained what had happened—describing the woman who took the money.

It was Diane Indelicato.

​

The employee was understandably upset. Customers had been donating in good faith to support animals in need—not to fund breakfast for the rescue director.

 

But why stop at bagel money when you can furnish your laundry room, too?

​​

THE WASHING MACHINE SWITCH-A-ROO — TIMES TWO

​

At the first Island Park location, a brand new washing machine was purchased for the kennel. A volunteer used their discount, and another donated a gift card to help cover the cost. But when they called PC Richards to check on the delivery, they were told it had already been delivered—to Diane’s home address.

​

Shortly after, Diane had a friend deliver her old washer to the kennel. She kept the new one.

​

Now we're hearing that it happened again.

​

Following a donation reportedly meant to support the dogs in West Islip with essentials like food and toys, the same pattern repeated. A brand new washer-dryer went to Diane’s house. The shelter got another hand-me-down.

​

Again, people gave to help animals. And again, Diane helped herself instead.

 

But when it comes to the basics—like having enough staff to feed and clean and care for the animals—somehow, there’s never enough.

​

STAFFING STRUGGLES: TOO MUCH ASKED

Ruff House Rescue has repeatedly issued desperate calls for more volunteers and stretched those already there well beyond reasonable limits—and beyond what they originally agreed to. Hours get extended, tasks pile up, and it’s clear volunteers have been relied on to fill roles they didn’t sign up for.

​

Rather than hiring the necessary staff to properly care for the animals, the rescue has pointed fingers at volunteers for not stepping up enough. But the real responsibility lies with the organization to have the resources—and people—needed to provide proper care. Taking in more animals than they can handle while expecting volunteers to carry the load isn’t rescue—it’s setting everyone up to fail.

​

If they want to truly care for these animals, they need to hire staff (or at least stop bringing in more animals than their volunteers can manage) and stop using desperation as an excuse to avoid doing what’s necessary.

​​

FINAL THOUGHTS

​

People trust rescues to put animals first. They donate, foster, and adopt because they want to make a difference. If you believe in true rescue, you deserve to know what’s really happening behind the scenes.

​

The animals can’t speak for themselves. That’s why we’re speaking up. In our view, rescue isn’t just about saving lives, it's about doing right by them, too.