Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Dog Attack - - - Advice Needed, Please.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5233 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Dog attack

 

Date – Spring 08

 

I was bitten on a finger of my right hand by a dog. I later went to my police station to report this and also visited hospital for treatment.

 

On the date in question I was delivering leaflets. I pushed a leaflet into the letterbox and the tip of my finger was instantly savaged by an unseen dog that refused to let go. I heard no warning noise before the attack and only heard a dog after the event. After several seconds I managed to pull my finger free from the dog and I was bleeding badly and in great pain. Clutching the wound I staggered out of the pathway and made my way towards my car.

 

As I reached my vehicle I sat down for a while to gather my thoughts. I had also wrapped a towel from my car around the wound in an attempt to halt the bleeding. I was angry, dizzy and in a lot of pain. I noticed what I thought was a piece of blooded wood or glass in my wound; I pulled it out and left it on the floor of the passenger foot well. I later discovered that it was a severed piece of the flesh off my finger.

 

I then got out of my car with the towel wrapped around my hand and went back to the owner’s house. I knocked on the door and the man opened it. I said to him “Just look what your dog has done to my hand”. He responded by saying “Oh they are b*****ds aren’t they” and garbled that he was “sorry” about it. He then closed the door on me. I went back to my car and drove as best I could. On reaching my area I stopped at the Police Station and reported the attack. The officer on the desk told me that it was not really a police matter and that the Council would be the ones to contact. He was however sympathetic to my injury, which was still bleeding badly.

 

I went home and my wife was shocked see the state I was in with blood on my hand, arm and clothing. I was then driven by her to hospital where I was treated by the staff. The dog owner also unexpectedly arrived at the hospital to see my injury and he enquired if I had reported him for this attack. I told him that I had to the police. He was obviously now worried about ramifications.

 

Since this event I have had to visit the hospital several times for treatment and X-ray and I also informed the Dog Warden – who has since spoken to the owner and I believe warned him to keep his dog under proper control. I still have some discomfort/numbness and my finger is a little misshaped and scared due to the attack.

 

The attack has left me most anxious about posting leaflets and entering driveways also. There were no warning signs in place to say that a dangerous animal was at this address.

 

I have graphic close – up pictures of the injury to my finger.

 

I later contacted a no win no fee company who sent the file to a solicitor. The solicitor finally wrote to say that he could not help me due to the fact the owner had no insurance.

 

He also stated that I could take private action against the owner but it may fail if the owner was skint.

 

I have three years to make a decision about this.

 

I still have odd sensation in my finger.

 

Any advice would be nice.

Edited by Rooster-UK
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Have you checked out your own household insurance policy Questioner to see if you have legal cover included??

 

Personally, I would be inclined to make a claim, regardless of the third party's financial status. What if this had been a child? Do you know if it was a legal breed of dog?

 

I'm surprised at the lack of interest shown by the Police as, at the end of the day, an assault has taken place and the owner is responsible for the dog. You might want to write to your local Chief Constable about this.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

ill jump in on this one, being my job and all that

 

you will find this an uphill strugle

 

the moment you entered the front gate, in law, you are trespassing as you did not get prior consent.

 

now if you had been bitten in the street, thats a different matter.

 

i read a thread a while ago about baliffs climbing over a back fence and getting there butt bitten and needing stitches.

 

nothing came of that either.

 

best route is the owners house insurance, if none, it realy is an uphill struggle

Link to post
Share on other sites

ill jump in on this one, being my job and all that

 

you will find this an uphill strugle

 

the moment you entered the front gate, in law, you are trespassing as you did not get prior consent.

 

now if you had been bitten in the street, thats a different matter.

 

i read a thread a while ago about baliffs climbing over a back fence and getting there butt bitten and needing stitches.

 

nothing came of that either.

 

best route is the owners house insurance, if none, it realy is an uphill struggle

 

Mmm, interesting. But what happens if you are a postman/paper boy? I agree with welshman; the police should investigate, after all the dog may be an illegal breed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am a postman and

 

MY LEFT INDEX FINGER I MISSING

ENOUGH SAID

 

Then you should see my point; in circumstances which the OP describes, the police should investigate the matter. As I said, it may be a breed of dog which is illegal ect.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm, interesting. But what happens if you are a postman/paper boy?

 

These people have at least an implied consent to be on your property.

 

I agree with postggj that you'd have a big problem getting anything from the householder even if he did have money/insurance. As the dogs were inside the house you can't claim he didn't have them under proper control. The solicitor you contacted knows this which is why he wouldn't take your case. He might have tried it with an insurance company in the hope they would pay without a fight. An individual is more likely to defend any claim. Personal injury claims are claims in negligence. You'd have to show that the owner was negligent in allowing his dogs the run of his own house when there was no reasonable expectation of anyone coming to the door and sticking their hand through the letterbox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect...:p

 

I have never had the postman stick his hand through the letter box....the stiffness of the letters seems to allow them to just nudge through the letter box nicely and land on the floor.

 

What I have noticed however is that whenever we get one of these leaflets through the door for say these dodgy eastern european clothes "Charities" or offers for the local booze store or the local council propoganda paper, the leaflet guy has to push and fiddle them through the letter box and inevitably the hand comes through the door too and flaps the leaflet to the floor.

 

I personally am fed up with all this unwanted crap being deposited in my house (and so is the dog).

 

The guy said sorry.

 

Get over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is going to sound a bit harsh, but the reality is that the owner of the dog/property did nothing wrong. His dog was inside his property, it was under control and certainly not causing a nuisance. The OP was negligent (unintentionally yes, but negligent none the less) in putting his hand/finger through the letterbox in the first place, when attempting to deliver something, had they not done that then the dog would not have had the opportunity to bite. The OP is the author of their own misfortune.

 

As has already been stated, it is very unlikely that you will find a solicitor to take this on because they know the chances of winning are almost zero and any payment that an insurer would consider would be because of nuisance value as opposed to strict liability.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Kurva and Mossycat, wafting your hand inside someones letterbox is just asking for trouble!!

 

I would suggest you stop delivering turd that people just shove in the bin or next time be a bit more tactful when you're opening a letterbox!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments guys.

 

I had delivered thousands of leaflets that day and was nearly finished. The letterbox was one of those stiff ones and the leaflet had just got twisted. All I had done was push in the last inch of my finger to get it through and wham - the hound grabbed the very tip of my finger and would not let go. It was horrific as I had heard no sound and figured the house was possibly empty. If I had heard a dog perhaps I would not have been so eager to get in though the flap.

 

I saw no warning signs. The owner said that he had two dogs and that one was a rottie but that it had been another one than nailed me. He was very eager to blame his smaller dog but I never got to find out which one got me. I love dogs myself and told the cops that I

did not blame the dog but that the owner must have known that this animal was dangerous and could have bitten a paperboy etc.. It is ok being critical of people would have to deliver leaflets but this genuinely can happen to anyone and I have since spoken to several postmen who have also been bitten.

 

In light of the above comments it seems best to just write back to the solicitor who took on the case and finalise the issue. I still have trouble with my finger but I wont waste time chasing this if folks on here think its a no win issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My postie opens it with his thumb an pushes the post through, he says they were told years ago NEVER put your hand in first.

 

As most dogs will protect their homes, burglar, intruder, posties fingers, all the same to a dog.

HOW TO...DUMMIES GUIDE TO CAG...Read here

STEP BY STEP GUIDE...Read here

F&Q's... Read here

EVERYTHING YOU NEED THE A~Z GUIDE...Read here

 

Go to our Cag Toolbar Download page here

 

Please don't forget this site is run on DONATIONS If this site has helped in any way, then please give a little back. ;-)

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All I know has come from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Kurva and Mossycat, wafting your hand inside someones letterbox is just asking for trouble!!

 

I would suggest you stop delivering turd that people just shove in the bin or next time be a bit more tactful when you're opening a letterbox!

 

You know nothing about me and I find that comment very offensive. I was NOT wafting my hand inside the letterbox - it was juts an inch of my finger to push the twisted leaflet in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I had done was push in the last inch of my finger to get it through

 

Unfortunately that was one inch too far

 

I saw no warning signs.

 

!!

 

You are not suggesting we plaster our homes in signs a la "Elf 'n' safety" are you.

 

As much as I sympathise with your error, you can't possibly think it was someone else's fault, can you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw no warning signs.

 

If a dog owner puts up a sign saying 'Beware Dangerous Dog' etc on his property then he is admitting to having and keeping a dangerous dog, it matters not if that dog is a poodle, a chihuahua or an attack trained doberman, the fact he displayed a warning sign means that he accepts he has a dangerous animal and should an incident occur it would be harder for him to suggest/prove that he wasn't aware that his dog would attack.

 

It sounds perverse, but by putting up a warning sign it makes it harder for the owner of the dog to defend the actions of the animal at a later date.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced solely by the tresspass argument to be honest as it's not that uncommon for even burglars to sue homeowners for personal injury.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are confusing tresspass (tort) with assault (criminal act)

 

Mossy

 

I do know the difference thanks having a GDL.

 

I'm sure there have been cases where injuries have been sustained such as falling from windows and the homeowners sued but I can't find any UK examples on the net only Californian.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had many kinds of large dogs and this includes Rotties and Dobbies . I have found that these allegedly dangerous breeds are wonderful with kids and the best when it comes to conduct.

I am not even convinced that it was a rottie that took a piece of my finger off. The letter box was one of those very low ones that was very stiff. I happened suddenly, savagely and without any warning. Yes, with hindsight one can say “oh, I should have left the leaflet stuck halfway out.” Life aint always that straightforward though at times (regardless of what some perfect letterbox experts claim) when you are tired, hungry, and just want to get the job finished.

If you find it amusing or comical entertainment that a person gets badly injured and requires several weeks of hospital attention by such an event then ok, fair enough. That is no bother to me. I simply wanted a little bit of constructive legal advice and nothing more.

I also was concerned that some other person such as a child would be attacked and possibly end up bleeding to death after such an incident.

Would you also find that so humorous?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well like I said in my earlier posts; the police should of at least investigated to check the dog concerned isn't an illegal breed. Remember the sad news about the little boy in Liverpool recently? The police well and truly screwed up on that one.

 

And I agree with the OP, he came on here for advice about an injury... hardly the thing to make fun of!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A dog has to do what a dog has to do??

 

99% wolf and a pack animal seemingly defending it`s leader`s territory?

 

Much as I have sympathy with the original post dogs don`t think-they respond.

 

Had the dog been outside and any clear lack of control was missing I would support a case-but this is an example of both parties just making a mistake---don`t shove your fingers through a letter box--you never know what`s on the other side

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, have found a 2007 Guardian article which may be of interest.

 

Contrary to what most people think, homeowners actually owe a duty of care to trespassers to ensure they do not come to any harm, which means if there is a hazard on your property you might reasonably be expected to offer some protection.

 

In this case, I think it probably would have been prudent for the homewoner to erect a sign warning of the danger and/or place a box guard over the letter box to catch the mail. Of course, this depends also on the forseeability of the injury and whether or not the dog had a habit of "snapping" when mail was pushed through.

 

Full article here...

 

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you find it amusing or comical entertainment that a person gets badly injured and requires several weeks of hospital attention by such an event then ok, fair enough. That is no bother to me. I simply wanted a little bit of constructive legal advice and nothing more.

 

What is the world coming to when innocent people are accused and held responsible for the errors (And I use the word "errors" generously here because idiocy is the word I would rather use) of others.

 

I find it difficult to believe many here would support your intention of interfering in someone else's life just because they have a pet (And probably a very small one at that)

 

What next...Signs on doors saying "May Contain Nuts"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had many kinds of large dogs and this includes Rotties and Dobbies . I have found that these allegedly dangerous breeds are wonderful with kids and the best when it comes to conduct.

 

And they are-they just need to know who is the boss -but what you may have done is to invade their territory without warning.

 

Of course I have sympathy for your injury but I just don`t think you have a case worth folowing up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, have found a 2007 Guardian article which may be of interest.

 

 

 

In this case, I think it probably would have been prudent for the homewoner to erect a sign warning of the danger and/or place a box guard over the letter box to catch the mail. Of course, this depends also on the forseeability of the injury and whether or not the dog had a habit of "snapping" when mail was pushed through.

 

Full article here...

 

In this case it most certainly would not have been prudent for the dog owner to erect a sign warning of the danger, that sign would no nothing except strengthen any case against them should the dog cause an injury.

 

The dog owner has no duty to place either a box or a guard over the letterbox, unless of course they want to protect or safeguard the mail that is delivered. The reason for that is obvious, a person delivering mail or leaflets does not have to put any part of their body through the letterbox and it would therefore be unreasonable to be expected to have to provide a box, had the OP delivered the leaflet in a safe and reasonable way then the injury would not have occurred.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...