cat killed by escaped dog

[jimzzr]

Following posting proof of attack / puncture wounds I have received a response from the owner detailed be (signed but her name and address left of the letter. The reply is below:

"I am writing this letter to you to express my sincere condolences with regards to the loss of your cat, it has upset me that you have lost your pet as I have a love of all animals and hate to see or hear of a loss of a pet, and I am very sorry for your loss. I am also writing this letter as I have received a veterinary bill for the sum of f2'064.25........ which was hand delivered, I am unsure what the purpose of you hand delivering this to me and taking photographs on my property without my permission was, but I have sought advice regarding the legality of what his happend and where I stand. The offence is allowing a dog to be out of control in a public place, he was not in a public place he was in my mother's garden as was your cat. The other offence to consider is criminal damage as cats are classed as property, sadly this will be hard to prove that it was deliberate or reckless as you cannot question an animal to determine its mindset, the offence is more directed to a human injuring or killing a cat but I am happy to be spoken to by the police if they wish to come to my home and question me. As much as I am sorry that your cat has died I cannot and will not be contributing any monies towards this veterinary bill as although your cat was chased by my dog, my dog was in my mother's garden so on her property, also he did not actually kill your cat. Unfortunately, cats are ferrel and inquisitive they do not recognise property or boundaries so your cat was on my mother's property my dog spotting your cat did what all dogs do he chased your cat but also he has only performed what dogs do, as they are pack animals who see humans as their pack they will always defend them so all he did was to defend his property and pack from what the dog perceived to be a threat. I am so very sorry that you feel that I am liable for the veterinary bill but I am not, I am happy to talk with the police if you feel that you need to inform them but let me inform you that my dog was not out of control in a public place, my dog did not attack any adult or child in a public place. My dog was on private property belonging to my mother and chased what he perceived to be a threat which in this case was your cat which failed to leave my mothers property as he was not attacked in a public place, if he had then I would have certainly made restitution straight away.
I am so sorry that this is probably not what you want to hear, but I do so feel bad for the loss of your pet. "

Some observations:
1) I had handed her the bill personally before, what was in the envelope posted was a picture of a dead cat with wounds and vets case history that did not mention costs.
2) the photos were taken for proof of delivery of letter (also have photos to show contents before sealing)
3) Does it matter if it's her mother front garden, they are all open plan with no boundary of any kind to highway or neighbours gardens? It got there by straying through a public space
4) In any case, whilst it was outside (to the side) of her mothers house the exact spot where I picked the cat up from was quite likely straying onto another property (the boundary splits a lawn)
5) She seems now to accept that her dog could kill a cat, but I know the dog warden spoke to her earlier.
6) As I asked in post above is the vets case notes I posted a link to above likely enough to show that the cat was killed by her dog?

BTW is it preferred to post attachments in the forum or externally and post a link?

Thanks

Jim

[atticus]

If what is said about the dog being on the mother's property is correct, you appear to be in some difficulty as regards any court claim.

How did your cat get there?

Do you insure your pets?

[islandgirl]

I agree. If my dog killed a cat in my garden I would not contribute to the vets bills either. I think we need some confirmation of the actual location in which this event took place.

[echat11]

CCTV, car cam, something.

A long time ago, people were more civil (some people still are), they would knock on your door and tell you this is what happened, offer to help, 'the times they are changing'.

[jimzzr]

If what is said about the dog being on the mother's property is correct, you appear to be in some difficulty as regards any court claim.

How did your cat get there?

Do you insure your pets?

For clarity a google streetview link of location.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4674...8192?entry=ttu

When I pulled the dog off, he was on the grass to left of second manhole cover, the gate you can see is not hers. Some sort of shared access but I think path is technically hers.

To me it looks more likely not hers

Don't know how cat got there. He may walked down the pavement and up the path if he came from the right. Or he might have been outside the house to the left already (used to go visiting) although they happened to be both out. Or he might he wandered across the mother front garden, but I can't see how he would have ended up where he did if dog had already been there.

[atticus]

Are you saying that your cat was not fully under your control at all times?

I see that my question about insurance has been ignored.

[jimzzr]

I'm not sure I understand the negligence aspect in this case in relation to a civil claim. If the dog owner is negligent in allowing the dog to escape - the dog had to walk down the public highway for a 100m or so, to get to where the attack took place. Then cat was attacked as a consequence of the dog escaping so why is the owner not liable. I can see that if the owner had deliberately placed the dog in her mothers garden there would be negligence , at least not until, being unfenced, it strayed off her mother patch. .

If the independent witness agrees that attack was not on the mothers property?

[des8]

If the dog had escaped unbeknown to the keeper because of e.g. the deliberate malicious act of a third party there would be no negligence.
No negligence = no liability.

The important word in your sentence " If the dog owner is negligent in allowing the dog to escape -" is "IF"

There are situations where non negligent liability exists (and there are insurance liability policies available to cover these events) but in the incident under discussion IMO you would need to prove negligence on the part of the dog keeper to obtain a ruling that he/she was liable .for your loss
Solely my opinion!

[jimzzr]

If the dog had escaped unbeknown to the keeper because of e.g. the deliberate malicious act of a third party there would be no negligence.
No negligence = no liability.

The important word in your sentence " If the dog owner is negligent in allowing the dog to escape -" is "IF"

There are situations where non negligent liability exists (and there are insurance liability policies available to cover these events) but in the incident under discussion IMO you would need to prove negligence on the part of the dog keeper to obtain a ruling that he/she was liable .for your loss
Solely my opinion!

And to be clear in that situation it wouldn't matter if the attack occurred on her mothers land or her mothers neighbours land. Would it make any difference whatsoever for a civil claim?

I agree proving negligence is the hard part, there some bit's from the recorded conversation that could help

[jimzzr]

I have a few questions, prior to drafting a letter before claim.

1) It was actually my partner who paid the bill (this time) and who’s name the cat is in. It’s it her that needs to start proceedings? Or can I pay my partner back and start in my name ? Or can we start a claim as joint claimants (which is not allowed for MCOL)?

2) How detailed do arguments need to be at LBC stage. i.e. would it be sufficient to say she failed to take appropriate precautions and actions to prevent the escape of the dog from her property or do the arguments need to be presented in full or somewhere in between?

3) Regarding the recording would it be enough to declare that I had it or would I be expected to supply a copy before claim?

4) Regarding the dog owner saying it was effectively on her own property my extension to her mother property, I don’t think her mother would be prepared to go to court to state this – can I insist on it?

5) Think I know defendants name but I possibility has divorced can I give married and maiden names? She referred to dog has hers but should I have her husband as a joint defendant in case e.g. the dogs registered to him?

6) should I start a new thread in court claims or leave here?

[atticus]

1. It is for the owner of this pet to bring the claim, should she so wish, particularly as she incurred the expense.

4. You may apply to court for a witness summons if you think that bolstering your opponent's evidence is the right thing to do.

2. Sufficient to say what is being claimed and why.

3. I remain at a loss to see what this recording actually proves of the things that the claimant would have to prove.

5. Find the correct name.

6. no.

[jimzzr]

[QUOTE=atticus;n1662740]1. It is for the owner of this pet to bring the claim, should she so wish, particularly as she incurred the expense.

1. The cat belongs to my partner and myself - it moved in when it's previous owner 2 doors down was taken into care. It was not purchased, though is registered at vets under my partners surname.

4. You may apply to court for a witness summons if you think that bolstering your opponent's evidence is the right thing to do.

If the dog owner claims she had her mother permission to put her dog there at the time, but does not have a signed statement from her mother to that effect, would the court still accept it or disregard it ?




3. I remain at a loss to see what this recording actually proves of the things that the claimant would have to prove.


For clarity, is this statement after having read or not read the transcript of the conversation? If you have read it then why doesn't it prove anything? e.g. that she owned the dog in question.

[atticus]

It is having read what you have said about it. Proving ownership is not going to be what determines the outcome of your case, which I guess will be for damages for negligence.

Most judges will accept a person's word that they have their mother's permision for their dog to be in her garden. Do you really think that when you cross examine the mother she will disagree?

[des8]

Just read your transcript, and like Atticus I do not see how it helps your claim.
One party insists the dog caused the cats demise, the other party asks for proof it was their dog and suggests in any case a third party may have let the dog out.

Good luck anyway if you continue with your action.

Not without sympathy for you but:
My wife (as a past breeder of cats) wonders why people allow their feline friends to wander and risk the hazards of roads, kidnap and dogs.
As dog owners we wonder about the responsibility of people who allow their dogs to be in situations where third parties can easily (inadvertently) allow the dog to escape or be stolen. (and I speak as someone who had a dog stolen [the white one in my avatar] from a locked enclosure with an 8' fence)

[echat11]

I 'stray' from the subject matter, but there is actually a Pet Detective Agency, you'll need to Google it, maybe they can give it some thought and forward some free advice. I was going to write 'leads' but thought better of it.