Frequency Canine Dog Training

Choosing Frequency Canine was a mistake, here’s why: My husband and I sought professional behavioral training for our 3-year-old German Shepherd after he began exhibiting aggressive behaviors approximately six months ago. Prior to that, he had no significant behavioral concerns, and we have raised him since he was 8 weeks old. We were initially advised to enroll in a 10-week training program; however, due to the cost, we opted for the 6-week option. In hindsight, I am grateful we chose the shorter program, as we do not feel the services provided were commensurate with the cost. Training began with the use of a prong collar (an additional out-of-pocket expense), and for the first three weeks we were instructed to reinforce commands our dog had already learned using this method. During this period, we observed a noticeable increase in aggressive behaviors. When we raised these concerns, we were advised that this response was normal and would subside over time. Unfortunately, the behavior continued to escalate to the point where I no longer felt safe around my own dog. After expressing our concerns again, we chose to discontinue use of the prong collar and requested alternative approaches. At that time, we were advised to purchase and begin using an electronic (shock) collar—specifically the “No Bad Dog” brand—again at our own expense, and to essentially restart the training process. While we have since seen some improvement in our dog’s behavior, it remains a work in progress, and we do not attribute the progress solely to this program. Overall, we found that the training lacked individualization and did not adequately address our dog’s specific needs. Additionally, the level of communication and accessibility did not align with what was initially presented. For first-time dog owners with minimal training experience, this program may provide some basic foundational guidance. However, in our experience, the cost was not justified by the value received. Much of the information presented is widely available through reputable trainers via books and online resources. For example, the e-collar product we were instructed to purchase includes access to training materials directly from the manufacturer. If I could make a different decision, I would invest more time in researching training methods—particularly the use of e-collars—so that I could make a more informed and independent choice. Doing so may have saved us significant time, frustration, and expense. Additionally, our experience with customer service was disappointing. When we attempted to share our concerns and request a partial refund due to dissatisfaction and an incomplete final session, our concerns were met with a dismissive and, at times, unprofessional response. Our request was denied on the basis that some progress had been made and that services had been fulfilled. We were instead offered the option to use the remaining session in the future, despite our repeated statements that we were dissatisfied with the program. We also found it concerning that our feedback was, at times, misrepresented. We were told that we had expressed satisfaction throughout the program, which is not accurate. We communicated concerns on multiple occasions and have documentation to support this. Additionally, we were informed that the program was not structured on an “hour-by-hour” basis, despite each session being conducted in one-hour increments. In summary, while there were isolated elements of the program that we found helpful, these were limited and did not reflect the overall value of a six-week course. Our experience did not meet expectations, and we encourage others to thoroughly research training approaches and providers before making a financial commitment.