Jump to content


Dangerous Dogs Act dogs attacked a cat ? did they - discussion posts moved here


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 349 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

On the day of 28th of January my dogs were being exercised off the lead and supervised on a public path which is not illegal and they did not enter your property.

 

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

 

They amended the Dangerous Dogs Act, which includes your own property to protect people such as the postman who deliver

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

An Act to prohibit persons from having in their possession or custody dogs belonging to types bred for fighting; to impose restrictions in respect of such dogs pending the coming into force of the prohibition; to enable...

 

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

i can keep my dog under more than reasonable control

- ive been breeding dogs and caring for dogs for over 40 years.

i have probably a lot more experience than the regular dog owner.


even the best dog owner cannot override a force of nature that is the dogs instinct. ie from bankfodders explanation: "apparently attracted the interest of my dogs".


also ive researched this already...it is not illegal to walk my dog off the lead and I think your assuming my dog is one on the dangerous dog breed list...which is is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, whitelist said:

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

I would certainly take issue with my dog being branded 'out of control' if it followed its natural instinct and chased a cat. The dogs that don't chase cats are in the tiny minority.

 

That's a very different proposition to a dog being allowed off the leash that might otherwise attack and adult or child.

 

EDIT: Apologies @danyboy72, it appears we cross-posted and you'd already made the point I was making.

Edited by theberengersniper
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, whitelist said:

On the day of 28th of January my dogs were being exercised off the lead and supervised on a public path which is not illegal and they did not enter your property.

 

 It is very much illegal if you cannot keep a dog under reasonable control. That means a leash in public.

 

 

They amended the Dangerous Dogs Act, which includes your own property to protect people such as the postman who deliver

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

An Act to prohibit persons from having in their possession or custody dogs belonging to types bred for fighting; to impose restrictions in respect of such dogs pending the coming into force of the prohibition; to enable...

 

 

i also rang the police after the incident and told them the whole incident in detail and they told me ive done nothing illegal with my dogs and nothing illegal afterwards and in the encounter with the angry so called 'policeman'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality, people's experience with keeping dogs means squat.

 

The Law treats everybody with equal contempt

 

Have posted the legislation for reference rather than personal opinions

 

The legislation specically references reasonable control. Being off the lead you have no control

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

WWW.THETELEGRAPHANDARGUS.CO.UK

Royal Mail have warned dog owners to make their letterboxes ‘no-go zones’ for their pets following a High Court ruling in the company’s…

 

The High Court ruling states that dog owners could spend up to five years in prison under the Dangerous Dog Act, if they fail to take preventative measures

Link to post
Share on other sites

That article is referencing a High Court case so sets a legal precedent that is in addition to primary legislation and reasonable control.

 

Will now retire from this debate

 

A dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person or assistance dog, whether or not it actually does so, (section 10(3) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991).

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes...but section 3 states :

If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—

(a)the owner; and

(b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog,

is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.

 

And because you wasnt there whitelist, i'll tell you from the horses mouth (and you can read the cat owners letter for further verification) that my dogs are not a dangerous breed, they was not dangerously out of control (as they came to me when recalled), were not doing anything illegal.


exactely as I was just about to say theberengersniper.... thank you :)

it mentions nothing about cats ...only people...and just to let you know whitelist whether your interested or not....my dog didnt bite anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point being made is that the OP said it was not illegal to exercise your dog in public and not keep the animal under reasonable control

 

The legislation referenced states different if a person was injured.

 

In the OP's case and the Cat, if they proved it on the balance of probability the OP is responsible, he will be liable for Civil Redress with any quantified loss

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, theberengersniper said:

EDIT: Apologies , it appears we cross-posted and you'd already made the point I was making.

no need to apologise to me mate - thanks :)

 

6 minutes ago, whitelist said:

The point being made is that the OP said it was not illegal to exercise your dog in public and not keep the animal under reasonable control

 

 

whitelist please help....well im loosing my marbles then if i said "it was not illegal to keep the animal under reasonable control" as i cant remember saying or typing that...especially when I did keep my dogs under control...or does it mean if i recall them and they come back to me that they are out of control and dangerous ...like in an opposite alternate universe????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you name another way of keeping the dog under reasonable control?

 

Remember you need to think how a Judge will look at this and the reasonable man test.

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

whitelist your opinions dont mean anything to me until you tell me where does it state in law that keeping a dog on a leash is the only way you can reasonably control it?

 

And as you said previously "In reality, people's experience with keeping dogs means squat." so if i did tell you another way of keeping the dog under reasonable control you wouldnt believe me anyway because you think peoples experience in keeping dogs mean squat 😆

tell me whitelist...

what are your thought on unsupervised, uncontrolled cats being allowed to roam freely anywhere outside their home by their irresponsible owners who dont have a second thought when they kill rodents and birds?


And they are irresponsible owners as ive never seen a cat in a bloody long while wearing a bell on their collar to warn birds of their presence so they dont get killed...yes killed let alone injured!

 

whitelist ive just noticed you've edited your comment...so when reading my reply above just remember it was in reply to your original comment..not your edited one!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder im going up the post office in a bit 😀

 

2 hours ago, whitelist said:

In Tort law, they classed a dog as property and you maintain that property so you do not cause an act or omission that causes harm to another.

who? another what?

 

can you reply directly to my other questions and also it would be nice to hear your thoughts on the killer cats roaming my neighbour hood killing innocent mice and canaries.....is their any law for these cat owners that are not even trying to control their killer pets.

 

P.S. my dogs have never killed another pet. animal or human..come to think of it theyve never bit another human...but does that still make them dangerous and are the killer cats classed as dangerous?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your dog causes an accident such as running out in front of a car, then it has to be reported to the police.

 

There is no such legal obligation with a cat

Edited by whitelist
Link to post
Share on other sites

whats that got to do with what i asked above? would the cat be driving the car?

 

2 hours ago, whitelist said:

There is no such legal obligation with a cat

yeah - proves my point about irresponsible cat owners - they allow theyre cat to cause an accident and dont have to answer to anyone.

 

and saying about dogs running out in front of cars is totally off topic and nothing to do with my scenario...pointless and time wasting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is time wasting as im reading your rubbish about a different scenario that doesnt help me.....therefore wasting my time.

 

also you're wasting my time as i reply to your posts but you dont answer the majority of mine....you pick and choose...not helpful at all.

 

i politely request that if you cant help and are not on topic then dont answer at all...like you said you would do but contradicted yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...