I say lets all march ! with our dogs, on a protest to these one after one money making schemes so these politicians can rob more & more money from joe public to fund there sordid political gains,to be honest Im fed up with it all,I live in the country,I dont come in contact much with the genral public,so on that basis,I refuse to have insurance,I have had dogs all my life,not once have I had to answer to the law for a dog biting someone,cut along story short,I refuse point blank to be part of something like public liability insurance for the public against my dogs biting someone,this is only my view.
insurance plans for dogs
- Thread starter annie
- Start date
To all who see that insurance is the way forward May i ask that they take a step back for a minute and think logical.
Question???
What other steps can you come up with that is not going to cost us an arm and a leg.
AES69 says that the licence was binned, yes it was binned due to the fact that it was unworkable, would cost to much to administer and could not be enforced.
insurance is the way forward is it I thought the DDA requireed those with banned dogs to insured did it work???
Question????
I ask you this how are you going to enforce the Insurancing of dogs in this country.
As I stated in my last reply do you then enforce it by the police who can stop you in the street or come into your home ( remembering they require a search warrant to enter to search your property or dog)they can be invited in. Would that not bring out more red tape and paperwork for them
I'm not being negative but trying to bring common sense to it all. if we bicker amongst ourselves and do not bring constructive thought and work out a plan on how to tackle this issue then we will be heading down the draconian road.
We already live in a country where it has more cameras watching us than any other country in the world, the government has not thought this out and again is acting in a knee jerk reaction.
Possible Answers:
1. The way forward is education and training that will give owners responsibility and would help them in being responsible dog owners, as I said before most people do microchip their dogs so you already have a data base of owners if every-house then registered with their local authority. that is if their is money available to do this and set a DB.
2. The government set up the insurance scheme and charge a set fixed fee, then money received will be put into a fund and if their is a legitimate claim it would pay out. Plus it would run a data base.
Question????
Do you allow the insurance companies to dictate the fees and charge what they like.
Question????
Would the insurance companies run a no claim bonus where if you not had a claim your insurance goes down maybe maybe not. or Would they put up the insurance every time some one has bite and penalise everyone else.
Question?????
Now how would we enforce this and how would it be monitored.
hopefully we may have someone with an answer but must we go down the financial route in this economical climate regards mark950
Question???
What other steps can you come up with that is not going to cost us an arm and a leg.
AES69 says that the licence was binned, yes it was binned due to the fact that it was unworkable, would cost to much to administer and could not be enforced.
insurance is the way forward is it I thought the DDA requireed those with banned dogs to insured did it work???
Question????
I ask you this how are you going to enforce the Insurancing of dogs in this country.
As I stated in my last reply do you then enforce it by the police who can stop you in the street or come into your home ( remembering they require a search warrant to enter to search your property or dog)they can be invited in. Would that not bring out more red tape and paperwork for them
I'm not being negative but trying to bring common sense to it all. if we bicker amongst ourselves and do not bring constructive thought and work out a plan on how to tackle this issue then we will be heading down the draconian road.
We already live in a country where it has more cameras watching us than any other country in the world, the government has not thought this out and again is acting in a knee jerk reaction.
Possible Answers:
1. The way forward is education and training that will give owners responsibility and would help them in being responsible dog owners, as I said before most people do microchip their dogs so you already have a data base of owners if every-house then registered with their local authority. that is if their is money available to do this and set a DB.
2. The government set up the insurance scheme and charge a set fixed fee, then money received will be put into a fund and if their is a legitimate claim it would pay out. Plus it would run a data base.
Question????
Do you allow the insurance companies to dictate the fees and charge what they like.
Question????
Would the insurance companies run a no claim bonus where if you not had a claim your insurance goes down maybe maybe not. or Would they put up the insurance every time some one has bite and penalise everyone else.
Question?????
Now how would we enforce this and how would it be monitored.
hopefully we may have someone with an answer but must we go down the financial route in this economical climate regards mark950
Last edited:
They won't need a warrant if the legislation says ''an Officer can enter premises to check dog licence/insurance details. etc''.
Rapier, why would they NEED to enter to do these things. This isnt an FAC and an inspection to see that the Firearms are being housed appropriately. I cant see the Police being given these powers for checking a dogs insurance. I believe Mark is correct it would/should be only with a warrant or with permission.They won't need a warrant if the legislation says ''an Officer can enter premises to check dog licence/insurance details. etc''.
AES69, legislation is in place that states to drive you need car insurance/tax etc. We currently have thousands of vehicles on the road not legal. This is only now being Police with ANPR and other very expensive and time consuming technology and still we catch hundreds daily. This cant be Policed and should not in my opinion be brought in. Is dog bites a real problem? I dont think so.
M
Mali: "Is dog bites a real problem? I dont think so".
Neither do I.
Maybe we are all thinking 'status dogs' and our 'security dogs', and missing the fact that your bona fide, average pet dog will not and probably never be put into a position to bite someone, by their 'responsible' owner(s).
Have two pet dogs and I can say they are never put in that position, as (as we all do to our dogs) know their limitations.
My security dog policy covers me if I am excercising my security dog 'off duty' and a bite incident happens......would I then have to also purchase one of these insurance policies when (and if) it becomes mandatory, or would I be exempt?
Vetting and Licensing the owners is in my opinion the key, with random checks.
Neither do I.
Maybe we are all thinking 'status dogs' and our 'security dogs', and missing the fact that your bona fide, average pet dog will not and probably never be put into a position to bite someone, by their 'responsible' owner(s).
Have two pet dogs and I can say they are never put in that position, as (as we all do to our dogs) know their limitations.
My security dog policy covers me if I am excercising my security dog 'off duty' and a bite incident happens......would I then have to also purchase one of these insurance policies when (and if) it becomes mandatory, or would I be exempt?
Vetting and Licensing the owners is in my opinion the key, with random checks.
Hi all, have just down loaded the consultation paper on this, it is interesting reading also the list of consultees.
1. ACPO
2. ASSOC Parlimentary group for animal welfare
3. Battersea dogs Home
4. Blue cross
5. BVA
6. Communities and Local government
7. Dogs Trust
8. Insurance companies(e.g. AgriaPet)
9. Kennel Club
10. LACORS (local Government)quango
11. Local Authorities
12. People dispensary for Sick Animals
14. Peabody
15. RCVS
16. RSPCA
Interesting group is not, but have never heard of the PEABODY or LACORS and what is the difference between local authority and local government. Lacors is a government quango organisation and Peabody is private housing group. where are individual members of public that are actual owners of dogs, surely we the public have a right to be consultees, and before you go of at the deep end we can consult but only on line or write in but not actually sit on that group.
They generalise on communities but do specify the other groups, if we want a fair decision then we have put our comments down and have a voice, so please look at the consultation paper and do make your voice heard because one of us just might have the right answer.
Napoleon has a point so all security handlers should put their views across.
take care and be safe regards mark950
1. ACPO
2. ASSOC Parlimentary group for animal welfare
3. Battersea dogs Home
4. Blue cross
5. BVA
6. Communities and Local government
7. Dogs Trust
8. Insurance companies(e.g. AgriaPet)
9. Kennel Club
10. LACORS (local Government)quango
11. Local Authorities
12. People dispensary for Sick Animals
14. Peabody
15. RCVS
16. RSPCA
Interesting group is not, but have never heard of the PEABODY or LACORS and what is the difference between local authority and local government. Lacors is a government quango organisation and Peabody is private housing group. where are individual members of public that are actual owners of dogs, surely we the public have a right to be consultees, and before you go of at the deep end we can consult but only on line or write in but not actually sit on that group.
They generalise on communities but do specify the other groups, if we want a fair decision then we have put our comments down and have a voice, so please look at the consultation paper and do make your voice heard because one of us just might have the right answer.
Napoleon has a point so all security handlers should put their views across.
take care and be safe regards mark950
Last edited:
Oh I'm not saying they do/would/ or should. Just that if the bunch of in bred idiots we call the Government, wanted the Police to have the powers it would be simple for them to be given.
And as we all know these suggestions will only affect those that obey the laws and the type that own 'dangerous dogs', as a status symbol, will carry on regardless.
Rapier, fortunately in this case we have the ECHR which i believe would inhibit the legislation. But they are idiots no doubt.
M
Guys & Gals, regardless of what legislation is place, people will flout it. Guns, refugees, alcohol and drugs are all (of have been) banned under law. Does that stop the situation, no.
There is no perfect answer. Yes cars are still driven without insurance, but it costs hundreds of thousands to police with specialist units. I'm not expecting specialist coppers to walk the streets checking dogs micro-chips. Insurance covers a multitude of sins, liability insurance is only part of it. How many animals are destroyed because owners can't afford the fees, how many dogs caused incident without biting someone, and how many have destroyed some part of a house that the average joe blogs can't afford to replace? Insurance costs very little but offers an awful lot!
We can all pick holes in everyones ideas; Marks idea of education and training - costs money, is time consuming and requires civilian professional bodies to offer this service. Ask the dog owning population & authorities which they're prefer, a tenner a month or one night a week training!
There is no perfect answer. Yes cars are still driven without insurance, but it costs hundreds of thousands to police with specialist units. I'm not expecting specialist coppers to walk the streets checking dogs micro-chips. Insurance covers a multitude of sins, liability insurance is only part of it. How many animals are destroyed because owners can't afford the fees, how many dogs caused incident without biting someone, and how many have destroyed some part of a house that the average joe blogs can't afford to replace? Insurance costs very little but offers an awful lot!
We can all pick holes in everyones ideas; Marks idea of education and training - costs money, is time consuming and requires civilian professional bodies to offer this service. Ask the dog owning population & authorities which they're prefer, a tenner a month or one night a week training!
I agree aes, it is an utterly futile idea. One the people who are good law abiding folks will pay it, they will pay it because they have to and its expected. Those who flout every other law will do so with this and so the decent folks will be paying for everyone else, just as we always do. Decent dog owners have insurance for vet care, have up to date vaccines have decent everything else, because we care about our animals. In truth this is aimed at the general pet owner, who will comply and do so without complaint, i know working dogs are pets too aswell as working animals but you guys have insurances to pay yourselves already. This is simple pet owners who have foo foo the chihuaha as a pet in a handbag.
I think one of the only way to contain the problem with these so called STATUS DOGS is down to the micro chipping include the breeder as well as the owner registered with the vets also on a database at some point the dog is going to need a vet if its found to be suspect then SOMEONE WILL BE RESPONSIBLE and not penalising the majority of responsible dog owners i have nine dogs, STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIERS never a problem if someone is wary then caution is observed commonsense is all thats needed and control of the animals, after all its not their fault they have a bad owner .
.
.
You may not like what i am about to say, but these are my thoughts and views from a person of 56 years old and I was told I was blunt and to the point so dont be offended.
As usual we have some people who po po ideas like training As AES69 say it costs money well everything cost money but this is the cheaper option and by the way there are many dog clubs around the country that run good classes and majority of trainers / Instructors are qualified through various organisations so dont knock it. as you are a trainer inthe military what have you got against training. It was an option that has worked for a long time the Kennel club runs the good canine citzen award.
May i suggest you go and look at the defra web site look up DD and look up enforcement side and have a read on what the police and local authorities should have done especially regarding the last tragic death of the 4 year old in Liverpool and then you might understand that this might never have happened and would the government now be bringing in Legislation like this, it is to gain votes as we near a general election, when they had 13 years to do something positive.
Yes I am getting a bit peed of with people who think that training and education is not the answer As my my motto says working together to learn and understand it the way forward and not dracorian measures that this government keeps bring in that has not work, is unworkable and penalise the majority of law abiding citzens rather than dealing with minority who dont give a S...and who stick their 2 fingers up to the Law.
Their is enough law to deal with these people but it is not been used to full effect.
Sorry for going on, but after having been born and brought up in this country having served this country for 23 years, you who were born in the 70s had less discipline than I did, but I was brought up to be Honest have Integrity have loyalty and be truthful but most important to have common sense.
But today it is about how much money can we screw from the people of this country, to be pc so much that we forget that common sense should preveil. mark950
As usual we have some people who po po ideas like training As AES69 say it costs money well everything cost money but this is the cheaper option and by the way there are many dog clubs around the country that run good classes and majority of trainers / Instructors are qualified through various organisations so dont knock it. as you are a trainer inthe military what have you got against training. It was an option that has worked for a long time the Kennel club runs the good canine citzen award.
May i suggest you go and look at the defra web site look up DD and look up enforcement side and have a read on what the police and local authorities should have done especially regarding the last tragic death of the 4 year old in Liverpool and then you might understand that this might never have happened and would the government now be bringing in Legislation like this, it is to gain votes as we near a general election, when they had 13 years to do something positive.
Yes I am getting a bit peed of with people who think that training and education is not the answer As my my motto says working together to learn and understand it the way forward and not dracorian measures that this government keeps bring in that has not work, is unworkable and penalise the majority of law abiding citzens rather than dealing with minority who dont give a S...and who stick their 2 fingers up to the Law.
Their is enough law to deal with these people but it is not been used to full effect.
Sorry for going on, but after having been born and brought up in this country having served this country for 23 years, you who were born in the 70s had less discipline than I did, but I was brought up to be Honest have Integrity have loyalty and be truthful but most important to have common sense.
But today it is about how much money can we screw from the people of this country, to be pc so much that we forget that common sense should preveil. mark950
Last edited:
Mark, be very careful mate, you're pushing the boundaries of being personally offensive. I do not agree with some of your ideas, but that doesn't mean I don't understand them. So it's ok for you to dismiss some of our ideas, but if we disagree with yours that's not ok? You will not be the one who brings legislation to bear, so this is pure discussion and hopefully bringing some awareness to the forum members.
In an ideal world, all breeders will be registered, all breeders will start socialisation & environmental training from the pups birth, all pups will be inoculated & chipped at 8 weeks, and all new owners will be responsible people who will love their animals and never do them harm, always abiding by the 5 freedoms, keeing their dogs healthy and trained all of their lives. Alas this is not the case! Some pet owners may insure their dogs, but how many attend training classes, very very few! It's not a bad idea, just extremely difficult to legislate.
At what point have I knocked/taken the mickey/abused any civilian dog trainers? Once again, you're letting your own narrow opinion overshadow what is actually being written.
The tragic incident in Liverpool may still have happened if the dog was chipped, insured and attended training classes. As the breed was never released to the media (speculation on pit bull type or mastiff) we can't even make comment on what may have prevented the terrible tragedy.
From DEFRA
" Section 3 creates a criminal offence of allowing any dog (i.e. of any breed or type) to be
dangerously out of control in a public place or a place to where it is not allowed"
Is this law aimed at big strong dogs who were bred to fight, no! It's aimed at any dog that isn't properly owned. We could destroy all fighting breeds, but Joe Thug (sorry if there's any Joes in the forum) will only switch back to another breed. What dog was the dog of choice for council estates 30 years ago? GSD's!
We always look at the tragic end of the DDA, but most incidents don't result in death, they result in severe injury and/or trauma. Training needs to go hand in hand with other control measures, but that won't happen over night. Making it law to be insured & chipped could be! How is making people insure their animals penalising them? Surely it's common sense and good practice.
That's just a slap in the face to those who are not as old as you. So because I was born in the 60's, or those born even later, we haven't the same standards as you? Absolutely appalling! How dare you Sir, I have 22 years impecable service, and even those who don't, unless you can point the fingers at individuals, don't ever imply that we weren't brought up with good standards!
To finish, we all have our own ideas, ideas differ to fact! By all means get frustrated with those who argue against tangible evidence. But let's keep our views directed at the discussion, not at each other! If people who are much better educated then most of us, the elected, can't come up with a good plan, we can only hope to scratch the surface with our limited knowledge!
As i was working nights last nights, I said please dont be offended it what are my thoughts and views.
With reference to those born in late 60s 70s what i meant was that corporal punishment was still in, we respected the law, if you did wrong and were caught by police it was a clip round the ear taken home another clip round the ear, apologies to the police officer and that was that, the Police knew all the villians they walked the streets knew who had bad dogs and would often give them a warning to control their dogs or they be up in front of the magistrate. that what I meant, when corporal punishment was was banned and pc came in discipline seemed to take a backward step.
Still we are now in the 21st centrury and we cant live in the past so what we have to do is put aside our differences and work together to find a solution that is about whether we should have compulsary insurance or some form or other if you have taken offence to what i said I APOLOGISE but I have seen many things in my time.
But why is that government brings out these laws then find they dont work because they havent ask the people what they want. It was the same in Canada but there a jury decided after a court case involving a child being attacked that a working party be set up from all people who worked with dogs including owners of dogs and they brought a plan based on education training and I believe insurance and microchipping. So would it be of benefit to this country to follow suit and sit down and disguss this. why not have a referendum on it. what are other countries doing because this is wide spread and not just in the UK.
As AES69 points out breeders must take responsibility perhaps go the route of how they do it in germany but I still think someone will get round it. it is not an easy subject and as you can see it can get emotional from all sides.
I feel that if it becomes compulsary to have insurance for dogs, this could be another avenue for those that likely to take advantage of this and start claiming.
We do live in a compensation culture and this is my biggest worry for this whole system.
AES69 you have come up with an idea by the very thing you said it our knowledge of dogs we have all experience of dogs, but how many that sit on the government panels actually own dogs have come into contact with any of these dogs to have knowledge, they rely on experts and as you know when experts get together they cannot agree to disagree,
but why not allow the dog owners of this country to vote on what should happen give them the power to decide how to deal with this I believe that this may be the answer let the people decide, but then thats bringing common sense in.
Still i hope we can continue to debate on matters relating to dogs in what has been perhaps sometimes broaching on bad feeling amongst ourselves as I said before I am blunt and to the point but if I have offended I apologise, but I feel very strong that at the heart of the matter bringing the DDA was perhaps a bad judgement and that the laws that were in place should have been used or strengthened As the DDA is a dangerous piece of legislation that could do a lot more damage then we realise. so I say take care and be safe.mark950
With reference to those born in late 60s 70s what i meant was that corporal punishment was still in, we respected the law, if you did wrong and were caught by police it was a clip round the ear taken home another clip round the ear, apologies to the police officer and that was that, the Police knew all the villians they walked the streets knew who had bad dogs and would often give them a warning to control their dogs or they be up in front of the magistrate. that what I meant, when corporal punishment was was banned and pc came in discipline seemed to take a backward step.
Still we are now in the 21st centrury and we cant live in the past so what we have to do is put aside our differences and work together to find a solution that is about whether we should have compulsary insurance or some form or other if you have taken offence to what i said I APOLOGISE but I have seen many things in my time.
But why is that government brings out these laws then find they dont work because they havent ask the people what they want. It was the same in Canada but there a jury decided after a court case involving a child being attacked that a working party be set up from all people who worked with dogs including owners of dogs and they brought a plan based on education training and I believe insurance and microchipping. So would it be of benefit to this country to follow suit and sit down and disguss this. why not have a referendum on it. what are other countries doing because this is wide spread and not just in the UK.
As AES69 points out breeders must take responsibility perhaps go the route of how they do it in germany but I still think someone will get round it. it is not an easy subject and as you can see it can get emotional from all sides.
I feel that if it becomes compulsary to have insurance for dogs, this could be another avenue for those that likely to take advantage of this and start claiming.
We do live in a compensation culture and this is my biggest worry for this whole system.
AES69 you have come up with an idea by the very thing you said it our knowledge of dogs we have all experience of dogs, but how many that sit on the government panels actually own dogs have come into contact with any of these dogs to have knowledge, they rely on experts and as you know when experts get together they cannot agree to disagree,
but why not allow the dog owners of this country to vote on what should happen give them the power to decide how to deal with this I believe that this may be the answer let the people decide, but then thats bringing common sense in.
Still i hope we can continue to debate on matters relating to dogs in what has been perhaps sometimes broaching on bad feeling amongst ourselves as I said before I am blunt and to the point but if I have offended I apologise, but I feel very strong that at the heart of the matter bringing the DDA was perhaps a bad judgement and that the laws that were in place should have been used or strengthened As the DDA is a dangerous piece of legislation that could do a lot more damage then we realise. so I say take care and be safe.mark950
Last edited:
Because no one knows who owns a dog.