The dog next door

Top_Girl

elsien wrote: »

The DDA has changed to cover attacks on private property as well as on public land, but it's attacks on people not on other dogs.



While it's something the OP might want to point out to their neighbours, it's of no consolation to her if the dog gets through the fence and hurts her dog on the meantime.
Would attaching wire mesh to the fence slow it down if it makes a gap? - I put some on my fence when my bull terrier bit its way through to go say hello to the new neighbours. The sturdy stuff, not chicken wire.

Is it something the dog warden would get involved with, with regards to the consequences if the dog did get through the fence and bit you while you were trying to get your dog to safety ? I'm guessing not, but it can't hurt to ask the question.

My neighbour and I ended up with time slots when one dog would come in so the other could go out. Worked for us!

Thank you. I've put my black bins over the loose board in the meantime. Their garden is set back so only covers the last third of ours. If they mention bluebottles in their garden due to my bins, I might well have to shout.

I might speak to them too.

They just bring theirs in when I notice/raise the loose fence panels, this doesn't fix the fence or stop the issue though

Detroit

OP I can see this situation is concerning, and I don't think it impossible that the dog could break the fence.

In your position I would put up another fence on your side ideally a mental link type.

Top_Girl

Detroit wrote: »

OP I can see this situation is concerning, and I don't think it impossible that the dog could break the fence.

In your position I would put up another fence on your side ideally a mental link type.

Thank you. I was beginning to worry that I was overreacting with some of the early replies. To me, when you get a pet, you are responsible for controlling it!

I'll look into my options when I get paid next, hopefully I can make it safe.

baby_lemonade

melanzana wrote: »

Ban dogs and cats from urban gardens.

Simple isn't it.

I am just pointing out the trouble caused by urban pets. They can also kill, as we have seen.

There is no guarantee that any owner will properly look after them or control them.

That's why everyone should get a ban now.

Think of the poor little kiddies mauled and murdered by dogs. Awful.

I must admit, reading threads like this, I can see why my HA have a blanket ban on pets. It's hard enough trying to manage the tenants, let alone their dogs. Anyone found to be keeping a pet will be asked to re-home it elsewhere or leave.

melanzana

baby_lemonade wrote: »

I must admit, reading threads like this, I can see why my HA have a blanket ban on pets. It's hard enough trying to manage the tenants, let alone their dogs. Anyone found to be keeping a pet will be asked to re-home it elsewhere or leave.

At last someone with a common sense post regarding the reality of pets in an urban environment.

I was sure someone would call me a cruel witch or something. But that did not happen thankfully, but I was wary just the same.

Sometimes the tenants can be worse than the pets, but then again the troublesome tenants often have troublesome pets too!

Quiet life for all is what I say!

Ban pets in an urban environment. Everyone is happy, except the dog breeders who get loadsa dough from the pet purchasers I suppose.

Guest101

Person_one wrote: »

It can apply in the OP's situation, as the dog only has to 'make someone worried it might injure them' for it to be classed as dangerous.

Its a terrible piece of legislation, but this might be a rare case where its actually useful.

I'm sorry but no. The reasonable person test must be applied

elsien

So if all us urban dwellers have to get rid of our pets, even though the majority are responsible and have done nothing wrong, are you suggesting a mass pet cull given the impossibility of all owners moving en masses to rural areas?

Guest101

Person_one wrote: »

If you read the link, it also applies to animals that are in their owner's home.

Yes but not when the 'victim' isn't in the home!

baby_lemonade

melanzana wrote: »

At last someone with a common sense post regarding the reality of pets in an urban environment.

I was sure someone would call me a cruel witch or something. But that did not happen thankfully, but I was wary just the same.

Sometimes the tenants can be worse than the pets, but then again the troublesome tenants often have troublesome pets too!

Quiet life for all is what I say!

Ban pets in an urban environment. Everyone is happy, except the dog breeders who get loadsa dough from the pet purchasers I suppose.

On the odd occasion where they've had to let tenants have a dog (disability discrimination act) it's almost always caused world war 3 amongst the people living here!

Stick to goldfish or a budgie, I say.

melanzana

elsien wrote: »

So if all us urban dwellers have to get rid of our pets, even though the majority are responsible and have done nothing wrong, are you suggesting a mass pet cull given the impossibility of all owners moving en masses to rural areas?

If the life of one dear child is saved from being mauled to death, it is worth it TBH. It could be your dog too. No breed is saintlike except the doggies in the handbag maybe.

Dogs are not suited to a house or little garden, so they can go a bit mad sometimes.

I know there are responsible owners/masters, but still, dogs are dangerous, otherwise they would not need to be trained and controlled would they?