📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Real life MMD:My neighbour's dog ate my wife's best shoes!

2456

Comments

  • I think most of the above are in lala land - are you all suggesting a person should only own cheap footwear because anything else is inpracticle? I personally buy quality over quantity and take APPROPRIATE footwear wherever i go which the lady clearly did. She wore a pair of shoes (that happened to be expensive) and changed into wellingtons to do the gardening. The neighbour obviously did not say at any point that her dog chewed shoes or the shoe owner would have stored them differently. As such, the dog is the owners responsibility and she is responsible for the dogs actions - if you can't train a dog then don't have one.
    I would see absolutely nothing wrong in telling your neighbour how much YOU have found the shoes for now and say you have no problems with her seeing if she can source them any cheaper. The wear and tear idea is ludicrous, QUALITY footwear will last many many years (maybe the poster was thinking of shoes from Priceless or any other budget footwear chain?).
    The true cost of any item is the cost to replace it as anybody knows so it matters not that you bought them half price - why should you be the same amount out of pocket again simply because your neighbour has either no control over her dog or no common sense (if she knows the dog chews things!) to put chewable items out of the dog's reach. Simple.
  • JayD
    JayD Posts: 747 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    I think your neighbour should certainly pay to replace the shoes - and has shown that she is willing to do so. However, I also think that your wife should share some of the responsibility for leaving her shoes accessible to the dog and not noticing sooner just what was going on.

    If she has not responded to the email, then your wife should do so immediately saying that she accepts your neighbours offer. This should be then followed up with a visit to the neighbour, with the new the new shows and the receipt for them - and the suggestion that they each go halves on them.

    I also feel that £89 is a bit steep and would hope that your wife has enough good grace to replace the damaged shoes with a much cheaper pair.
  • bluebird
    bluebird Posts: 378 Forumite
    It might be worth asking your neighbour if they have pet insurance,our pet insurance covers any damage our pet should make...worth asking.
    if not speak nice to your neighbour and come to an agreement by showing them the original footwear bill minus fair wear and tear,then discuss calmly how best to sort this situation,most people i am sure would be only too happy to resolve any issues with neighbours.Perhaps your neighbour is embarrassed to approach you,so go knock on the door and ask to chat,don't forget take along the original shoe bill.
    good luck and be good neighbours.
  • JayD
    JayD Posts: 747 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    why should you be the same amount out of pocket again simply because your neighbour has either no control over her dog or no common sense (if she knows the dog chews things!) to put chewable items out of the dog's reach. Simple.


    I would say in the interest of good neighbourliness - which I personally rate a lot higher than my opinions about the differences in the quality of people's footwear ...
  • Badger_Lady
    Badger_Lady Posts: 6,264 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    If they are good quality shoes, perhaps they're repairable? Find out how much a decent cobbler would charge to restore them or even to rebuild using the old sole. A cheap pair wouldn't be worth the effort, but something worth over £100 could have extensive repairs done for less than £50 and the neighbour could pay for that.

    I find it difficult to believe that the dog can have completely destroyed the shoes, though please correct me if I'm wrong.
    Mortgage | £145,000Unsecured Debt | [strike]£7,000[/strike] £0 Lodgers | |
  • A person is responsible for their dogs actions. I'm responsible for my dog.
    if he had destroyed a pair of shoes that i had let someone leave within his reach i would give them a sum of money towards a replacement pair. if they weren't new i wouldn't put up "new" money.
    If they told me a value i would check, not because i wouldn't trust them but only to see if i could get a cheap deal on a replacement pair as opposed to just a sum of money as a way of being nice about my actions. (letting my dog chew shoes)
  • bluebird wrote: »
    It might be worth asking your neighbour if they have pet insurance,our pet insurance covers any damage our pet should make...worth asking.

    I'm not entirely sure about this, but someone told me that dog-owners don't really need the sort of liability insurance offered by pet insurance, as usually the cover is there anyway if you have Home Contents insurance. It is usual for Contents insurance to include 'Occupiers and personal liabilities' and yes, damage caused by domestic pets is included.
    The neighbour is pretty likely to have Home Contents insurance aren't they? Could they give their insurer a ring to see if the damage caused by the dog is covered?
  • Bangton
    Bangton Posts: 1,053 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    I think you can only expect them to pay what you paid. I'd be looking at whether the shoes were still available at the Outlet and if they are not I'd probably draw a line under it and see it as bad luck. I certainly wouldn't ask someone for £180 if I hadn't paid that myself.
  • I don't really see a dilemma here - the dog did the damage, the owner has offered to pay ... so tell the owner what the replacement cost was - offer to 'go halves' if you feel it appropriate and then get on with life!

    On the insurance issue, i believe that the insurers would only pay out if there was a liability under the Animals Act which (to cut it short) would only apply if the dog is known to chew things - and they might not pay out anyway as arguable chewing things is a doggy trait (especially if the dog is young). My horse once damaged a car by reversing into it ... insurers would not pay as it was the first time he'd ever behaved in this way .....
  • If the shoes were of value to the shoewearer, then they may be able to claim under any "property taken outside of house" premium cover.
    Homes last longer than shoes. May not be worth risking that relationship, as you may need their support in the future : burst pipe while you're on holiday, witness statements for burglary, redirected postal package, your cat goes missing, home selling/repairs experience tips etc.
    If the neighbour is a good one, let them pay for a pub lunch and appreciate their time. The gains will be better in the long run, worth more than £89.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.1K Life & Family
  • 257.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.