 |
STRAY DOG VICTIM CLAIMS PUBLIC MISLED
(Cutting Gloucester Citizen 22/8/01 by?) Thankyou Sandra
AN ANIMAL charity is urging the public to be more aware of its role after a former supporter says she is "disgusted" with them.
Jenny Newman, 53, said she was imprisoned in her own home by a stray dog and claims RSPCA officers refused to help remove it.
Mrs Newman from Bodiam Avenue, Tuffley, said she would never donate money to the RSPCA again. "The public is being misled," she said.
But the RSPCA regional spokeswoman Jo Cunningham said: "The legal responsibility to care for stray dogs falls to the local authority under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. "If a representative of the local authority is not available then the police have a statutory duty to care for the dog. "If there was someone available from our organisation we would go out and we will assist if we can but we do not have the manpower necessary to go out to all calls." She said the RSPCA cannot infringe the services already paid for by the local authority, (????)such as dog wardens, because of regulations enforced by the Charities Commission.
Jo added: "There are four dogs listed under the Dangerous Dogs Act and this was not one of them. "However, it is an offence to have any dog out of control in a public place and this is an area for the police."
Mrs Newman thought she was being burgled when a huge bull terrier jumped into her garden on Saturday night. She was too scared to venture out to the dog, which was by now barking furiously. She called the RSPCA and the police several times to ask them to help her, but says they refused.
It was only when an anxious neighbour heard the hullaballoo and called the police at 4am thinking Mrs Newman had been hurt, that officers came out to the house. "The police told me that by law says the dog was on my property and therefore I was responsible for it," she said. "Therefore, if I let it out and it bit someone else technically I would have been responsible. I was too scared to do anything. "One police officer wouldn't enter my premises and refused to go past the gate but they asked me to catch it. "The police said their kennels were being rebuilt and the dog couldn't be put in there." A veterinary nurse finally came to collect the dog the next morning. It later turned out to belong to a neighbour who had been out on Saturday night. A police spokeswoman confirmed that the police's dog kennels were being refurbished. /cutting ends
*******************************************************************
Does this story make any sense to you when compared with the previous day's stories?.
If you have a bitch in season....you may have a visit from an male dog escapologist.
If he's a Staffordshire bull terrier as above it is said that he's the responsibility of the person into whose property the visitor is found?!
Just think if that dog had a scratch and he could be said to look as if he had been fighting. Now look at the stories from Georgina's collection and see just how many innocent Staffordshire/cross dogs were picked up and destroyed on the evidence of the RSPCA. This story is a conundrum!!........AND a warning!
******************************************************************
Here's a legal explanation of the situation by Fenris Wolf which I picked up from Uk.rec.pets. This in response to a chap who's had a Staffordshire bull terrier getting into his garden and doing a lot of damage ie tearing down his smart garden doors etc. (Uk.misc.pets0
) Where the court is satisfied on an application under this section that it is reasonably necessary to carry out any basic preservation works to the dominant land, those works shall be taken for the purposes of this Act to be reasonably necessary for the preservation of the land; and in this subsection "basic preservation works" means any of the following, that is to say (a) the maintenance, repair or renewal of any part of a building or other structure comprised in, or situate on, the dominant land; (b) the clearance, repair or renewal of any drain, sewer, pipe or cable so comprised or situate; (c) the treatment, cutting back, felling, removal or replacement of any hedge, tree, shrub or other growing thing which is so comprised and which is, or is in danger of becoming, damaged, diseased, dangerous, insecurely rooted or dead; (d) the filling in, or clearance, of any ditch so comprised; but this subsection is without prejudice to the generality of the works which may, apart from it, be regarded by the court as reasonably necessary for the preservation of any land. (5) If the court considers it fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case, works may be regarded for the purposes of this Act as being reasonably necessary for the preservation of any land (or, for the purposes of subsection (4) above, as being basic preservation works which it is reasonably necessary to carry out to any land) notwithstanding that the works incidentally involve (a) the making of some alteration, adjustment or improvement to the land, or (b) the demolition of the whole or any part of a building or structure comprised in or situate upon the land. ****************************************************************** You want to erect a fence right up against the boundary. Party Wall Act 1996
. You should notify your neighbour of your intention to build on or near the boundary. They may object, but you engage a Party Wall Surveyor to act independently and issue an "Award" detailing access etc. Again this is legally binding on your neighbour. Incidentally, I can find no penalty in the act if you fail to notify your neighbours. The only way to stop such work would be for your neighbours to obtain an injunction which is costly. Would they do this?
That is your judgement call. And if you are going to even consider doing anything with such legal implications you simply *must* go and see a good solicitor. Not least because if you do not fence right up to the boundary itself, your neighbour may at some future time try to pull a claim of adverse possession on the land between the true boundary and your new fence .... Before doing any of this check for covenants or easements on both your deeds to allow you access or detailing who is responsible for the maintenance of the boundary. And yes, it is going to cost you.
So why don't you *talk* to the neighbour however grumpy they are, and offer to put the wall in good order. Try to get them to agree to contribute, but if they say the cannot afford it, which do you prefer to spend the money on? A good boundary fence and good neighbour relations, or legal costs mounting rapidly, neighbour rows, and your property going down in value? Remember also that legal disputes like this can go on for years and literally bankrupt you. >
>This dog owner has repeatedly over the years told me that its my fault that the wall is crumpling, I have lived here for the last 5 years whilst he has lived there for approx 15 years !
Then get him to explain what he thinks you are doing wrong.
Dog is left out whilst there are distrubances going on. Fireworks, thunder storms etc... dog gets frightened and jumps over low part of the stone wall and makes a bee line for our hard standing area where there are a large pair >of wooden doors / gates and starts to attack the bottom of these doors in its attempt to flee.
Ah, I see. Can you higher the low part of the wall? Won't help the dog, but then such disturbances are not really all that frequent. > >If we are in whilst all of this is in progress, we open the gates and the >dog runs wildly away. Now this is where the real fun bit begins, when the >owners find out that THEIR dog has escaped THEIR garden they wonder why we >let it go !!!! >This dog is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier and when aroused is quite menacing. If you open the gates and knowingly let the dog out, then you are going to find yourself in trouble. Sorry, but that is the way of the law. > >So the story continues, by and large different solicitors have told me >different things - firstly this will cost me more money !! for his >responsibilities. They have told you different things because there are different ways of approaching the problem. It also depends on their previous experiences with the county court judges and other cases. >I can arrange for a simply solicitors letter approx £50 which might work, >but it can also start and esculation of letters and ultimately needs backing >up with a more formal approach ( court action) And the more you have spent, the more you feel you ought to spend 'just that little bit more' to see it through, and before you know it your solicitor is instructing counsel and you are issuing proceedings.... > >Or I can erect some form of fence on my side of the wall, and then grow a >hedge ( which will take some time) and there will be no legal action. Bear >in mind that we have considered moving house over this - because we live >next door to someone who is totally irresponsible. OK. If the dog can be kept in its own garden do you want to stay in this house? Bear in mind that each course of action will have its own costs and repercussions. If you want to stay here, you need to try and live in peace with your neighbour. To do that you need to get an effective boundary wall or fence up. Before you can do that you need to do your legal research as outlined above and then talk to your neighbour, the bottom line being that you will pay for the wall to be made dog proof if he cannot/will not. If you decide that you want to move, then do not take any action that you will have to report to potential buyers. Do not think you can fail to answer the relevant questions, or mislead people, as this will make you liable. If you want to move then put the house on the market immediately, don't mention the dogs escapes if there is no official record of them, and go. Let someone else deal with it. Once you start complaining you will lose this option. > >Sorry its so long, if you made it this far - what can the RSPCA do ? if >anything ? The RSPCA have no powers whatsoever. The most likely thing they will do is kill the dog, and if possible prosecute the owner or anyone they can try to make responsible for it. If you chuck the dog out on the streets they could even try to prosecute you for abandonment. Bring them, the council dog warden or any other official into the equation and you can forget peaceful neighbour relations in the future. As you will have to should you start legal proceedings. Actually, I think you could be asking these questions in the wrong newsgroup. Why not try the legal newsgroups, uk.legal, alt.uk.law, england.legal ? You will get a different slant on the matter and perhaps find a solution that you feel happier with. - -- Fenris Wolf --