Dog Damage Liability

Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering a
casual "allright ? " before walking off .

 

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .

Dogs are very unpredictable and best given a wide berth. Did the dog run straight into the road? If
so it will not last long by the sound of it.

 

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>

I believe the owner is liable for any damage caused by his dog. Proving it can be difficult --
especially if you can't identify said owner.

T

 

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>
B*stard, bet he don't clean up after it either!!! Don't know for sure but...... The reason why you
are supposed to stop after knocking a dog over in your car is that it is assumed a dog owner will be
relatively closely attached via a lead. This was from the days before those bloody lazy
extenda-leads that extend out to just short of infinity. The supposition here is that the dog is in
the owner's control, on a lead. The dog is the responsibility of the dog owner. The dog's actions
led to your friend's misfortune. Where there's a blame there's a claim, sue his ass off !!! Then cut
goolies off, etc,etc... Cheers, Dave.

 

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>

Realistically I think your friend will have to accept the loss as one of those misadventures of
life. You can't realistically blame the dog.

FWIW, a while back there was a thread on a similar subject on the yank dominated rec.bicycles.misc.
There the majority view was that you should pull out the handgun that you should always carry when
cycling, and blow the mut's head off. I suppose that is not unexpected, given their love of guns
and killing.

 

Certainly as far as cars go, an accident involving a dog is reportable to the police - why - under
law of England & Wales at least, a dog is the responsiblity of the owner to control and is a species
capable of such control. Basically if a car is damaged by a dog, the car owner can sue the dog owner
for damages as the owner is liable to control their animal. Different to cats, which are seen as a
"free spirit" and not controllable in the same way as dogs, so if there is damage caused by a cat,
the cat owner isn't legally liable. I'd be having a word in a sympathetic properly qualified legal
ear if possible to see what are the possibilities of redress.

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~

 

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:42:36 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] wrote:

>Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
>brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
>damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering a
>casual "allright ? " before walking off .
Thanks to all for the advice - we think that we know how to ascertain the actual owner of the dog
if it is worth proceeding down that path. As it happens my friend was lucky - he rolled several
times - lost skin on shoulder, hips, elbow, practically every part of his body except his head
(lucky again because he wasn't wearing a helmet). On;y damage to bike appears to be smashed front
lamp. Thanks again.

 

Ric <[email protected]> wrote:
>FWIW, a while back there was a thread on a similar subject on the yank dominated rec.bicycles.misc.
>There the majority view was that you should pull out the handgun that you should always carry when
>cycling, and blow the mut's head off.

Don't be silly. Responsible American gun owners carry guns for killing people, not dogs. :-/

[And remember, guns don't kill people... bullets kill people.]
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

 

Ric wrote:
> Realistically I think your friend will have to accept the loss as one of those misadventures of
> life. You can't realistically blame the dog.

I think the OP was wondering more about suing the owner than the dog. And his friend would be quite
justified in blaming the owner, who is responsible for his animal's actions.

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny ) Recumbent cycle page:
http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/ "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." -
Thomas Paine

 

"David Damerell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:X3F*[email protected]...
> Ric <[email protected]> wrote:
> >FWIW, a while back there was a thread on a similar subject on the yank dominated
> >rec.bicycles.misc. There the majority view was that you should pull out the handgun that you
> >should always carry when cycling, and blow
the
> >mut's head off.
>
> Don't be silly. Responsible American gun owners carry guns for killing people, not dogs. :-/
>
> [And remember, guns don't kill people... bullets kill people.]
> --
> David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?

...and dogs running out of control across the paths of cyclists not wearing helmets...probably in
b*sh*rts <ducks so fast a distant boom is heard> Dave

 

In message <[email protected]>, [email protected] writes
>Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ?

AIUI , then the owner of the dog (or maybe the person in control at the time?) is liable if it
causes an accident which damages property or a person.

Hopefully they know who the owner of the dog is.

A lot of home insurance includes a legal helpline which is useful for getting advice on these sorts
of things.
--
Chris French, Leeds

 

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .

If you were in the CTC the legal department would be sueing the dog owner by now.

cheers Rich

 

On 24 Jan 2003 21:41:42 GMT, [email protected] (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:

>Certainly as far as cars go, an accident involving a dog is reportable to the police - why - under
>law of England & Wales at least, a dog is the responsiblity of the owner to control and is a
>species capable of such control. Basically if a car is damaged by a dog, the car owner can sue the
>dog owner for damages as the owner is liable to control their animal. Different to cats, which are
>seen as a "free spirit" and not controllable in the same way as dogs, so if there is damage caused
>by a cat, the cat owner isn't legally liable. I'd be having a word in a sympathetic properly
>qualified legal ear if possible to see what are the possibilities of redress.
>

Hi Helen

OT but see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=dog+kite+James+group:rec.kites&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=U-
TF-8&selm=39195652.158390188%40news.pavilion.co.uk&rnum=3

I never did get a cheque - not too surprisingly.

James

--
A credit limit is NOT a target.

 

On 25 Jan 2003 22:33:07 GMT, [email protected] (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:

>I tend to agree with your quote
>
>"Doggies are pretty much OK in my book but it annoys me that their owners always think that their
>dear little pet is oh-so-sweet and wouldn't harm anything."
>
>Whereas I know my cat Waffles will take a chunk out of you if you happen to be a TED (vet - all
>vets are known as TED - The Evil Doctor) - she has quite *excellent* accuracy of fangs ;-)
>

Waffles sould kow that I do a VERY good impersonation of a hissing, spitting cat.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/c.butty/Olympus_small.jpg A pic of the late Olympus the day my (also
late) mother picked her up from the cattery. The pic was taken about 12 years ago.

James

--
A credit limit is NOT a target.

 

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 21:14:51 +0100, Ric <[email protected]> was popularly supposed to
have said:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
>> brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
>> damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from offering
>> a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>
>Realistically I think your friend will have to accept the loss as one of those misadventures of
>life. You can't realistically blame the dog.
>
>FWIW, a while back there was a thread on a similar subject on the yank dominated rec.bicycles.misc.
>There the majority view was that you should pull out the handgun that you should always carry when
>cycling, and blow the mut's head off. I suppose that is not unexpected, given their love of guns
>and killing.

That did used to be common practice, I hear. There is a sub-type of small handgun, produced around
the start of the twentiesh century when there seems to have been something of an explosion (hehe) of
new types of handgun.

On was a "Velo-dog" gun; small calibre (about .25 inch), rimfire, holding only three or four shots
and which had a folding trigger.

The idea seems to have been to shoot and injure (but not immediately kill) an attacking dog, and
thus allow the cyclist to make good his escape.

To put this in context, at the time it was apparently relatively common practice to shoot nuicance
dogs outright, without bothering about trying to catch/restrain them. All rather harsh, and these
days could only legally happen if the dog were attacking people or livestock, and could not
otherwise be contained.

Anyway, the velo-dog guns were produced only over a fairly timespan, for maybe 20 years or so, were
never very common and are now collectors' pieces, and the ammo for them has long since ceased to be
made, and a good thing too.

--
Dan Holdsworth PhD [email protected] By caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, By the
beans of Java do thoughts acquire speed, hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning, By
caffeine alone do I set my mind in motion

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> > brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> > damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from
> > offering a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>
> If you were in the CTC the legal department would be sueing the dog owner by now.

Problem is that you need identification and hopefully witnesses. My other half was bitten while
jogging last week. The owner had the dog on one of those extending leads and it was essentially
out of control even though it was complying with the bylaws. Anyway, after being bitten (she had
to go to hospital to have treatment) the owner denied that the dog had bitten her, refused to give
any details and strode of quickly. The police said there was nothing they could do without a name
and address.

Colin

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Anyone know what the legal situation is regarding accidents caused by dogs ? A friend was today
> > brought off his bike by a dog which ran into him following a call from his 'master'. Result was
> > damage to both bike and rider. Apparently the dog owner was not too concerned apart from
> > offering a casual "allright ? " before walking off .
>
> If you were in the CTC the legal department would be sueing the dog owner by now.

Problem is that you need identification and hopefully witnesses. My other half was bitten while
jogging last week. The owner had the dog on one of those extending leads and it was essentially
out of control even though it was complying with the bylaws. Anyway, after being bitten (she had
to go to hospital to have treatment) the owner denied that the dog had bitten her, refused to give
any details and strode of quickly. The police said there was nothing they could do without a name
and address.

Colin

 

On 26 Jan 2003 06:48:59 GMT, [email protected] (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:

>That is a seriously gorgeous tabby - much like my own Psycho Cat From Hell, otherwise known as
>Marble. Marble is a real tabby tyrant - was Olympus?
>

Psycho Cat From Hell applied to Olympus, too.

She did get a bit larger (but not unhealthily so) in the years following the pic due to both my
mother and I feeding her M&S chicken breasts. Following my mum's death, I, myself, made do with the
cheaper (and possibly less healthy) Somerfield's grub.

Before her (cat's) demise (due to me), she lost a great deal of weight and bodily tone.

So, I had her killed a year or so ago because of her health. She had either FIP or a cancer. She was
about 20 at that time, according to the killer ... sorry, vet.

James

--
A credit limit is NOT a target.