"Collection Fee" for stray dog

pulliptears

I do agree with Spadoosh's sentiments, had this been one of my boys I'd have paid the earth to have them returned safely regardless how they got out. Had the dog been left to roam it could have been run over but they picked him up off the street and you got him back in one piece minus a collar.
For me thats a small price to pay.

spadoosh

Raksha wrote: »

We don't even know that the dog escaped through the open gate - she may have got out before the gate was opened..

Lol, enough with the conspiracies!!

fluffnutter

arcon5 wrote: »

I'm referring to his wife he dealt with it.

I fail to see how this practice can be considered fair and actually surprised everybody is telling op to pay.

If you had your car stolen and paid £100 for recovery, I wouldn't expect them to put it in storage at £5/day until I had paid the recovery fee.

No I agree. There's certainly something going on which sounds dodgy. But it's been difficult to get to the crux of the matter because of all the guff about councils behaving badly about all sorts of things, and conspiracies about dog wardens, and people stealing dogs, and not having to pay because a criminal left the gate open etc.

The bit about the missing collar and the £31 charge simply because someone randomly decided the dog had to stay in kennels is bizarre and should be pursued.

wealdroam

PeteJC21 wrote: »

Agreeing that a council is within its right to hold animals to ransom and steal property is presenting an opposing viewpoint is it?

Just out of interest, have you any proof that the council stole the missing collar?

PeteJC21

wealdroam wrote: »

Just out of interest, have you any proof that the council stole the missing collar?

The vet confirmed the dog was wearing the collar and id tag when they sent her off with the warden to go to the kennel. When my wife picked the dog up from the kennel there was no collar. No "solid proof" as such, only the vets word. The vet described the collar accurately so we know they saw it, but it disappeared sometime after she left the vets.

PeteJC21

fluffnutter wrote: »

No I agree. There's certainly something going on which sounds dodgy. But it's been difficult to get to the crux of the matter because of all the guff about councils behaving badly about all sorts of things, and conspiracies about dog wardens, and people stealing dogs, and not having to pay because a criminal left the gate open etc.

The bit about the missing collar and the £31 charge simply because someone randomly decided the dog had to stay in kennels is bizarre and should be pursued.

This is exactly what !!!!es us off about the whole thing. Yes ok, im sorry my initial post wasnt clear... The £60 fair enough.. thanks for bringing our dog back i would have happily paid this... But insisting the dog stay in the kennels when it didnt need to go to the kennels to start with then charging us? Stealing... sorry.. "mis-placing".. her collar, leaving us without a collar until we could go and buy a new one at our own expense? THIS is why im refusing to pay the £60, theyve caused us enough expensive as it is, so why should we be forced pay more?

PeteJC21

pulliptears wrote: »

I do agree with Spadoosh's sentiments, had this been one of my boys I'd have paid the earth to have them returned safely regardless how they got out. Had the dog been left to roam it could have been run over but they picked him up off the street and you got him back in one piece minus a collar.
For me thats a small price to pay.

As are we, which is why my wife paid the £31 for the unnecessary overnight stay in the kennel to get her back.

You say "minus a collar" like its no big deal... But WHY did they keep it? What right have they got to do this? Its a legal require for a dog to wear an id tag, the warden took her collar with her tag on it leaving her without one? :mad:

pulliptears

PeteJC21 wrote: »

As are we, which is why my wife paid the £31 for the unnecessary overnight stay in the kennel to get her back.

You say "minus a collar" like its no big deal... But WHY did they keep it? What right have they got to do this? Its a legal require for a dog to wear an id tag, the warden took her collar with her tag on it leaving her without one? :mad:

As I say, to me it wouldn't be a big deal. I got back my most precious friend and constant companion, a £30 collar to me is neither here nor there. A collar is what, £3? A barrel tag a pound, for me it's just not worth it. As to why? Who knows? Could they have grabbed her by the collar and it broke? Worked loose? Got caught on something?

System

I have no idea what the recruitment criteria is when the council employ a dog warden but I am guessing the bar is set pretty low. I am guessing the dog warden has a list of rules which anyone with an ounce of commonsense would have ignored in your situation. However this warden decided not to use his commonsense and release the the dog to your wife. The man is basically an idiot.
You probably want to ensure the dog can't get out again as people often go into other peoples gardens for perfectly harmless activities e.g. a kid going retrieve a ball back, a window cleaner etc. You don't want the dog getting out again as this could be expensive.
On a completely unrelated matter well done on getting a rescue dog, too many people are obsessed with getting pedegree puppies from breeders and neglect rescue dogs

PeteJC21

pulliptears wrote: »

As I say, to me it wouldn't be a big deal. I got back my most precious friend and constant companion, a £30 collar to me is neither here nor there. A collar is what, £3? A barrel tag a pound, for me it's just not worth it. As to why? Who knows? Could they have grabbed her by the collar and it broke? Worked loose? Got caught on something?

No, it was a good quality collar and id tag. There would have been no need to grab her hard. Like I say she had it on when she was at the vets and when she left the vets. There were no problems reported, she didnt act up or anything.