police ignoring dog attack

[goodatresearch]

Sorry this is in the wrong section, but its the only one that appears to allow my to start a thread.

 

What are peoples views on this.

 

Grandson was attacked by a dog in a public place In the presence of his teacher and the dog owner. his teacher reported it to the police who said it was nothing to do with them. Of course this offence covered by section 3 of the dangerous dog act 1991 and section 2 of the dog act 1871 and is indeed something the police should deal with.

 

Daughter complained and was first said told that the incident hadn't been reported but she had the PCSOs collar number.

 

She's just had another call and had been told by another PC that there was nothing wrong with what the teacher was told but refused to divulge full details of the phone call because of data protection.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Can you supply a bit more detail?

Was she physically attacked, or felt at risk of attack or just scared of dogs and got upset? There are different rules regarding different scenarios. What type of dog was it? Was it on the lead or off the lead? Was the park a designated off lead dog area?

 

Regardless of which of the above it was though, I hope she is ok and recovering well.

[goodatresearch]

He was with his class mates, a teacher and another adult. I believe they were practising their bike riding in the run up to their cycling proficiency.

 

A German Shepherd on a lead ran up to him, grabbed on to his high visibility jacket tearing it. The teacher chased it of and the owner ran into his home with the dog. My grandson wasn't hurt but was shaken. It is obvious to me that the owner couldn't control his dog and if it wasn't for the jacket, he would have been bitten.

 

Clearly this is covered by S3 of the Dangerous Dog Act and according to Defra guidelines (for the police and public authorities) the owner could also be prosecuted under S.2 of the Dog Act 1871.

 

His teacher told my daughter that the police told him that it was nothing to do with them and he should call the dog warden. The dog warden told the teacher that the police were fobbing him off.

 

My daughter has complained and they are now coming round to interview her son, but not the witnesses. As to her complaint about their first refusal to investigate, she received another phone call today during which a police officer basically said she didn't have a complaint as their was nothing wrong with the phone call between her colleague and the teacher.

 

What worries me is that there is a dog in the area that is potentially dangerous with an owner that can't control it and runs and hides in his house when something happens AND no one seems to care.

[citizenB]

I have moved you to General Legal issues forum - you need do nothing - it is purely administrative.

 

Which other forums did you try - it could be you were attempting to post in a forum that is for admin only !

[goodatresearch]

Thanks. I posted on the only forum with a post a new thread sign. However I am on a tablet that has a mind of its own.

 

 

I have moved you to General Legal issues forum - you need do nothing - it is purely administrative.

 

Which other forums did you try - it could be you were attempting to post in a forum that is for admin only !

[citizenB]

Thanks. I posted on the only forum with a post a new thread sign. However I am on a tablet that has a mind of its own.

 

 

Ah righto.. no problem at least you have a home now.

[citizenB]

I think you might need to go up the chain in the police station!

[goodatresearch]

I intend to make a written complaint (with my daughters authority) to my local police authorities professional standards department but I'm not holding my breath. I just cannot understand why wont just apologise and confirm that the PCSO concerned will receive relevant further training. No wonder the public have no confidence with the police.

 

Their interview with my grandson us on Sunday, let's see what they do, or don't do, next.

 

I'm really not sure who else we can report this dangerous dog and irresponsible owner to.

[citizenB]

Perhaps try your Local Authority !

[goodatresearch]

I've just emailed my local council and point out that they have certain statutory powers with regards anti social dogs and their owners and adkedbyhrm to comment. We will see.

 

 

 

Perhaps try your Local Authority !

[Conniff]

Well it's definitely not a motoring problem so have moved you into the Legal Forums General Legal Issues section

[Ford]

s3 DDAct may not be applicable if deemed not 'dangerously out of control'.

s2 Dogs act maybe, by virtue of s5 DDAct.

[goodatresearch]

s3 DDAct may not be applicable if deemed no injury.

s2 Dogs act maybe, by virtue of s5 DDAct re no injury.

 

S3 DDA is applicable if an out of control dog causes a reasonable apprehension that someone will be bitten.

[goodatresearch]

Well it's definitely not a motoring problem so have moved you into the Legal Forums General Legal Issues section

 

I thought citizenb had already done so. See post 5.

[Ford]

S3 DDA is applicable if an out of control dog causes a reasonable apprehension that someone will be bitten.

 

apprehension is re s3 (3) a private place only. but, you say it was a public place. therefore is n/a.

s3 (3) apprehension re if not a public place..

for ref:

'(3)If the owner or, if different, the person for the time being in charge of a dog allows it to enter a place which is not a public place but where it is not permitted to be and while it is there—

(a)it injures any person; or

(b)there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so,'

legislation.gov.uk

therefore, is re s3 (1)

 

 

s5 though may apply re the dogs act.

[Ford]

have amended my posts to clarify

[goodatresearch]

Thanks for that.

 

However the actual text of the legislation has been amended and has been in force since May 2014. If you Google this you won't actually find its exact wording but advice from reliable sources states that its an offence for a dog to be out of control and only the fear of being bitten is needed evan in a public place.

 

 

Evan if you look at the unamended version S3 (1) and (2) makes it clear that it is an offence for a dog to be out of control in a public place and S5 makes it clear that it is an offence even if no one is injured.

 

The thing is, its not really what sections to apply, its the fact the police don't give a toss and have said its nothing to do with them. What if next time it jumps into a pram, for example, and instead of grabbing a jacket, grabs a babies face? No doubt they will argue "lessons have been learned" as usual.

 

 

apprehension is re s3 (3) a private place only. but, you say it was a public place. therefore is n/a.

s3 (3) apprehension re if not a public place..

for ref:

'(3)If the owner or, if different, the person for the time being in charge of a dog allows it to enter a place which is not a public place but where it is not permitted to be and while it is there—

(a)it injures any person; or

(b)there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so,'

 

therefore, is re s3 (1) (injury required)

 

 

s5 though may apply re the dogs act.

[Ford]

Thanks for that.

 

However the actual text of the legislation has been amended and has been in force since May 2014. If you Google this you won't actually find its exact wording but advice from reliable sources states that its an offence for a dog to be out of control and only the fear of being bitten is needed evan in a public place.

 

 

Evan if you look at the unamended version S3 (1) and (2) makes it clear that it is an offence for a dog to be out of control in a public place and S5 makes it clear that it is an offence even if no one is injured.

 

The thing is, its not really what sections to apply, its the fact the police don't give a toss and have said its nothing to do with them. What if next time it jumps into a pram, for example, and instead of grabbing a jacket, grabs a babies face? No doubt they will argue "lessons have been learned" as usual.

 

 

as you mentioned the acts in yr first post, had a quick look on legislation.gov.uk. if the gov't hasnt updated their site after 12 mths!

yes, 'dangerously out of control' an offence generally. the injury being re an aggravating factor. i misread that bit

 

https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/overview

 

etc

[citizenB]

Well it's definitely not a motoring problem so have moved you into the Legal Forums General Legal Issues section

 

I thought citizenb had already done so. See post 5.

 

Yes, I thought so too.. ! How very odd, it must not have happened, Ford.. because conniff very definitely made the move

[goodatresearch]

That's the problem with legislation on line that anyone can check without a subscription, its not up to date. You also have to take into account how its interpreted. All the major reputable advise sites advise that a dog is out of control if it attacks someone and the definition of an attack under the statute is aggressive and threatening behaviour that makes someone in fear of their safety, or words to that effect.

 

Anyway its little point having these sort of laws that are supposed to protect people, if the Police arent interested.

 

Yes, I thought so too.. ! How very odd, it must not have happened, Ford.. because conniff very definitely made the move