insurance plans for dogs

A

annie

Full Registered User
Just read on news this morning that the government in their mighty wisdom are trying to bring about new plans to make it compulsory for all dog owners to have insurance against their dogs biting someone in a bid to crack down on dangerous dogs.

Not sure what everyone else's thoughts are on this but lets be honest the people who are still illegally owning and breeding dogs that are on the dangerous dogs list are hardly likely to comply when they don't comply with the other regulations so once again it will be the average pet owner who will be footing the bill once more and lining the pockets of the insurance companies. How exactly is this an answer to controlling dangerous dogs?
 
Yep, another hard to enforce option that will cost huge amounts to police and process payments.

Other option could be to add a levy on pet food, like a couple of pence per bag! Dogs have to eat!

I'm sure I've heard there's some countries where you don't pay car insurance for 3rd party cover, as a tax is added to the fuel when you buy it, as every vehicle needs fuel to move!
 
It is ridiculous, in my opinion. Why make the majority of dog owners pay a premium for an event that isn't going to occur?
As far as I am concerned the solution is simple: your dog bites me, you pay. You don't want to pay, then it's a matter for the courts.
I have been bitten (of all things it was an Afghan) and required a tetanus shot. Dog made several punctures arranged in a circle just under my left buttock, through jeans. I made the owner pay for the shot and the consultation and further told him if I saw that dog on the same public thoroughfare as me, unleashed, the likelihood was that the dog would get bopped.
 
Odd said:
It is ridiculous, in my opinion. Why make the majority of dog owners pay a premium for an event that isn't going to occur?
As far as I am concerned the solution is simple: your dog bites me, you pay. You don't want to pay, then it's a matter for the courts.
I have been bitten (of all things it was an Afghan) and required a tetanus shot. Dog made several punctures arranged in a circle just under my left buttock, through jeans. I made the owner pay for the shot and the consultation and further told him if I saw that dog on the same public thoroughfare as me, unleashed, the likelihood was that the dog would get bopped.
Click to expand...
ODD, Fair play to you mate, lots of people would have wanted far more from dog and owner. As said just a joke, some unemployed scumbag who is happy for his dog to run rampage round the place wont give a feck. Whilist the rest of us fork out our hard earned cash. Does house insurance not cover us? Most have i believe a third party liability.
 
I really cannot see the logic to make insurance compulsory.

I could be forking out an extra £30 a month (3x dogs) or whatever on something (like 'Odd' says) will probably never occur.

My two pet dogs have never had or attempted to bite someone so what good would insurance do me? Yes ok it 'could' happen but I dont really put my pets in the position to bite anyone.

What they should be looking at is the owners themselves, get them maybe vetted and have credentials to own a dog etc.

So called 'status' dog owners (most) are two bit 'scally' youth dealers who have a bit of wedge anyway so they can afford it.
 
Insurance is a good idea but impossible to police as was said before, and it is irresponsible owners that would not have insurance anyway, the problem is that some breads have become trophy breads for some members of the community. I think the only way of sorting this out is education for owners, how this could be achieved I don’t know, but it has to be affordable for everyone. You could argue that if you can’t afford insurance or training classes you should not own a dog in the first place. However, a lot of these dogs are being used for fighting, another sign of the times. This past time can be and should be policed so a larger list of dangerous dogs maybe a way forward and real powers for the police and organisations like the RSPCA
 
hi guys again the government come up with ideas but it will be very hard to police as said due the scumbags who would ignore. they said 100 people a week go to hospital but how many are the dog owners whose own dog has bitten them. it has to be education from primary school upwards as they are doing in Canada, in europe you have to have libility insurance, As i do for my job, house insurance im not sure and i do not think they will agree to it. you are going to need a big data base, or you use the vets computer to gather the information. again this is in consultant stage so why not give imput into it. please do not give the power to the Rspca they are charity not the law, you need system like they had in the military the dog inspectors people with experience and knowledge of dogs.regardsmark950
 
They showed a toddler on the One Show last night that had been playing in the park when a 'pit bull type' dog attacked him. Severe wounding to his leg. Dog NOT put down and owner given community service, but still has the dog!

The answer is ARV's should have authority to shoot them on sight. (not the dogs, the owners).
 
again like with the gun laws it's the legitimate law abiding that will suffer. how many scumbags handed in their semi auto's to the police or sold them and made a huge loss on the value none i bet. the dog breeders wont get the insurance either and it'll be the innocent that'll end up paying extra fees to make up for them. to top it off because of the extra expense i think alot of pets will be abandoned which is a shame as i'm a pet owner myself.
 
Tbh if someone is stupid enough to put a part of their body in my dogs mouth then they deserve to be nibbled on! :D

Joking aside, it is a problem with the dogs attacking but how many of them are purely unprovekd attacks. Not unprovoked from a human point of view but unprovoked from a dog point of view?

How many of the children attacked were left unattended? How many of them were climbing, pulling on the dog, shouting, screaming at or around it?

The amount of small children who wonder up unattended and just shove their grubby little hands out to stroke/touch/grab my dogs when out is unbelievable. And the amount of parents who don't understand why you don't want their children doing that............

I'm not going to pay insurance to 'make ammends' for someones stupidity.

If my dogs attacked, unprovoked, then I would not hesitate to have them pts (would break my heart) but if I felt they had been provoked in whatever mannor then I would fight tooth and nail.

Thats what this government should be focusing on, not classing more and more dogs as a dangerous breed, but classing more and more humans as full of stupidity and not having enough intelligence to be let loose near a dog!
 
db1 said:
Tbh if someone is stupid enough to put a part of their body in my dogs mouth then they deserve to be nibbled on! :D

i used to do this a part of my job and i loved it!!!!!! i was a PAT/AT handler and baiter or PTA in the army. so getting bitten by a fat hairy GSD was part of my job lol :D
Click to expand...
 
I'm often surprised at the stupidity of adults where small kids are concerned. The one day I'd popped into a shop to get some milk, and left the windows open and GSD inside. I came out to see an idiot with his toddler in his arms putting her hands inside the window to stroke the GSD and wondered why she barked at them and said how unfriendly she was.....:rolleyes: As you said also the amount of people who let their kids wander up to her without supervision, always amazes me. There again some idiots have come bounding up to her patting their legs enthusiastically as if she was some yappy small dog and wonder why she barks at them. I sit there in amazement so can't blame her for reacting either. Thankfully she is a good natured dog, but if she actually bites someone, they will definitely deserve it.......




db1 said:
Tbh if someone is stupid enough to put a part of their body in my dogs mouth then they deserve to be nibbled on! :D

Joking aside, it is a problem with the dogs attacking but how many of them are purely unprovekd attacks. Not unprovoked from a human point of view but unprovoked from a dog point of view?

How many of the children attacked were left unattended? How many of them were climbing, pulling on the dog, shouting, screaming at or around it?

The amount of small children who wonder up unattended and just shove their grubby little hands out to stroke/touch/grab my dogs when out is unbelievable. And the amount of parents who don't understand why you don't want their children doing that............

I'm not going to pay insurance to 'make ammends' for someones stupidity.

If my dogs attacked, unprovoked, then I would not hesitate to have them pts (would break my heart) but if I felt they had been provoked in whatever mannor then I would fight tooth and nail.

Thats what this government should be focusing on, not classing more and more dogs as a dangerous breed, but classing more and more humans as full of stupidity and not having enough intelligence to be let loose near a dog!
Click to expand...
 
I think enforced insurance is a good thing. The benefits far outweigh the negatives. The cost of vet fees is a nice bonus, but to be honest, the thought that if one of my dogs caused an accident, whether it be biting someone, or running into the road, we're covered. The liklihood of it happening, slim, but there's a chance!

Microchipping and insurance will at least start the ball rolling. Give dog wardens, PCSO's as well as coppers the ability to carry out 'stop checks'. Same as your car, no insurance, spot fine and confiscation of the animal!

It won't catch everyone, but it will help!
 
responsible dog owners have their dogs chipped and insured anyway and those not responsible shan't do it anyhow so its simply enforcement to average owners
 
annie said:
responsible dog owners have their dogs chipped and insured anyway and those not responsible shan't do it anyhow so its simply enforcement to average owners
Click to expand...

Hi All

Annie you're right, responsible owners do have their dogs chipped & insured, those same responsible owners also ensure that their dogs are up to date with their jabs & ensure that they take good care of their dogs.

The problem will start when they draw up their lists in regards to the breeds & the cost of the insurance, those of us that have breeds such as GSD's and the like they will charge us more.

Why? becouse they will gladly inform us that those breeds are used in security by the police, mil etc so by a process of guilt by association they will stack up the premiums against them.

Will i pay it? Yes i will, becouse i'm not going to risk some stupid arse walking into my back garden to deliver a parcel again, (we even have a sign on the back gate warning people) and me not being there to control Alfie.

James Mc
 
Hi all, some agree and some disagree on insurance I have public libility insurance as a professinal security K-9 Handler it cost me £600.00 I own a total of six dogs ttwo live in the house the others have there own kennels I live in the countryside. I was wondering which of you has the cheapest insurance as I cannot get insurance due to the fact most of my dogs are of working security dogs you cannot get pet insurance as you would be committing fraud, if you made a claim. some insurance go on the size of your dog, so if you have GSDs etc it may cost £25.00 per dog per month so around £125.00 times by twelve equals £1500.00 per year plus another couple hundred for other dog. Thats a lot of money for the insurance companies to take in and I firmly believe that if this becomes law it will go up. They will also put the guarding breeds on the banned list and will try and faze them out. If we allow this to happen it will be the start of the end for dogs in this country. The legislation was already in place to deal with dogs that are dangerous and aggressive and it did not require the DDA act to be brought in. can anyone explain to me why we the law abiding people of this country have to put up with this because the government failed in their job, so did the police fail in the last case of the young child being killed because they were warned but did nothing . Handgun were banned there are more handguns now on the street than when it was legal to own. DDA came in and banned certain breeds of dogs and again there are more now than before. So please tell me that this insurance is going to help. As annie says most law abiding citizens have their dogs microchipped and insured. I run dog clubs helped police deal with dogs in my area and been a dog warden. BUt do you know council employ dog wardens during office hours only some are even part time they dont work weekends, police are not allowed to pick dogs up in their vehicles due to insurance, police dog handlers are not keen to pick dogs in their own vans due to infections. most police station dont have dog kennels and why should we burden the police with this anyway they have enough trouble dealing with paperwork and crime, means more paerwork for them to do. do not let the rspca deal with it ???? it was suggested in the early 90s that it was a dog wardens job but council dont like paying for it and will not pay for 24/7 365 cover, you would have to build more kennels as sure as eggs, dogs will be dumped in large numbers because people willnot / cannot pay for the insurance. They need to seriously listen to the people of this country before burdening us all with another TAX when they allow bankers to walk off with big bonuses. WHAT every happened to COMMON SENSE ( I forgot it it died some time ago when some one came to power) mark950
 
Last edited:
mark950 said:
They will also put the guarding breeds on the banned list and will try and faze them out. If we allow this to happen it will be the start of the end for dogs in this country.
Click to expand...
Do you honestly believe it will be the end of dogs in this country? Please, that's nothing more than scare mongering!

mark950 said:
Handgun were banned there are more handguns now on the street than when it was legal to own. DDA came in and banned certain breeds of dogs and again there are more now than before. So please tell me that this insurance is going to help.
Click to expand...

Fortunately hand guns aren't carried on the street in plain view. IF legislation changes, surely you can't be naive enough to believe there will be a change in law but no resources to back it up? Granted there will never be enough resources, but then there's not enough of anything to go round!
Like everything else, you fail to abide by the law, penalties would be imposed. Dogs aren't things you can hide under the floor boards, and there's enough window twitchers around to ensure the authorities are aware of who has what!
Insurance would have 2 immediate benefits, the obvious, legal cover (and financial back up) but the second would be conformation to the law! You want to own one, abide by the law!

mark950 said:
you would have to build more kennels as sure as eggs, dogs will be dumped in large numbers because people willnot / cannot pay for the insurance. They need to seriously listen to the people of this country before burdening us all with another TAX when they allow bankers to walk off with big bonuses. mark950
Click to expand...

Firstly Mark, the authorities will do as they are already doing, using local boarding kennels until the fate of the poor animal is decided. Secondly, this would only be a phase after the initial implimentation. Once the law had been in place for a while, there wouldn't be the initial influx of abandoned dogs (that's if it happened at all)
What tax are you talking about? Insurance is needed, hence the reason we all pay it now! By making it law the authorities have recourse to take action against those who flout the law!
 
Aes69 firstly im not scarmongering, and dont think I was.

secondly hand guns have been carried on the street openly refering to birmingham and other inner city areas, guns were pulled out on a dog handler in birmingham where said dog was shot and injured. Not life theatened but bad for the guys that did it as the dog did bit one and then chased after the others. lots of support was given by police over that matter, so it does go on.

Thirdly the DDA was brought in to ban and eradicate the banned dogs which it has failed in the years of the DDA how many people were proscuted for it the powers that be could not decide on wha t the standard was for the pit bull because the kennel club did not have a breed standard as such the dda required microchipping insurance and all that, but it failed the met Police budget for kennelling was £100,000 to day that stands at over 2.5 million and rising they have a dedicated team of officers just for DDAs more forces are now bringing in Special dog units to deal with DDAs now remember their is not a breed standard these dogs are coming through the noorthern Ireland from sounthern Ireland they are then being cross breed and it goes on. Yes Insurance and Microchipping may be the answer but at what cost to the responsible owner and most responsible owners already do that anyway.

But how do you POLICE this would mean that police will come in and check you microchipping will they have data base which they ring up like they do for cars to check you have valid insurance, Do you think the police have the time or the will to do this or do they raise another army of bureacrats to come into home and demand to see your licence and scan you dogs for microchips, who will pay for this will come out of the insurance premium or will have to foot more money out to employ these people.

I am giving my point of view on this I see it as a tax yes a tax on the responsible owners and their dogs because sure as eggs the scallywags that own these dogs that have caused these problems will find ways around it.

My last point, i may like to say, is that the people who could and should have stopped this sad incident from happening did nothing even though they were informed by neighbours on this case are any of them being punished and dont forget the owners of the dog they are as much responsible for this as well.

When you ban something people will want it because of the status of it media can cause it by showing it that bring more status to those that think it is cool, we need to change their way of thinking remove that status not by banning but some other way which i do not have any thoughts on at present, so in parting AES69 I thank you for views but I to disagree on this matter it wont work and could cost more in the long run to run and police. take care and be safe was at crufts today the new sponsers Are DFS but no sofas to sit on regards Mark950
 
Of course there will be an inherant cost, all policing does! But most incidents of dog bites aren't from banned breeds. Microchipping & insurnace is a step in the right direction. We used to have licences for dogs, but that was binned, could that be the next step? Apply for licence, no associated convictions, licence granted, buy dog that has already been chipped with insurance document in hand. Simple. And to be honest, a system that should ideally be in place now.

As for enforcement, all legislation takes time to perfect (if it ever does), but you have to start somewhere.

Mark, we can all see negatives if we put our minds to it, but that will never get us even one step forward. Don't bring us problems without solutions!
 
Back
Top