EGAR Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I am posting this here in contro as I am not sure about this: Labrador Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melp Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Hmm would like to hear Lab Lifelines side of the story. Seems a bit odd they'd take a dog back for no reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EGAR Posted August 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I would like to know as well but I presume a case like this will have legal implications for ALL rescues should they decide to remove a rehomed dog from the adoptee which makes this very interesting for all of us, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobleronie Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 It may well be a very worrying case that will have repercussions on a lot of rescues as to their right of ownership of an animal and a rescues right to reclaim a dog in their care should they feel the animal is not being cared for appropriately and could mean that any paperwork that is generated by any rescue is not worth the paper it is written on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacobean Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 The report isn't very coherent is it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EGAR Posted August 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I found this from November 2006: Labrador Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I think it'll be interesting to see what happens when this reaches court - if the adoption agreement stated the dog remained the "property" of the trust or had a clause in it prohibiting the dog being taken out of the country then I can only see that being over turned if the judge rules the contract "unreasonable" and that being the case it will have repurcussions for rescues who have similar clauses. One to watch methinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Was looking for more info on this myself (comments elsewhere don't appear to be on the above alone) & found this http://www.thisishampshire.net/display.var...ng_labrador.php Whether the welfare concerns will be proven or not I don't know but in my opinion this rescue is on extremely dodgy ground here. I don't think that even IF it's in their adoption contract any court will agree to any rescue forcing entry or even seizing a dog against the owner / householders will when invited in at their sole discretion and I do think that all such contracts will be found unreasonable in law. Although they are seperate issues I also wonder what's going to happen should that not be the case and a dog then bites. The rescue is going to have to be found responsible if it's agreed they do own the dog and will the insurers have an opinion (I believe they currently consider the dog yours not the rescues). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/information/fa...newlawandbills/ says The RSPCA (or SSPCA in Scotland) is the only organisation that is able to prosecute owners and remove animals if they are being mistreated. Please call the RSPCA on 0870 5555999 or the Scottish SPCA on 0870 73 77722. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merledogs Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 (edited) I'd be interested to see the outcome of this as well. I recently emailed my solicitor about the same thing to see whether I had the right (in my Will) to leave the dogs to people I had chosen rather than them go back to rescue, as per the paperwork (although I only have valid paperwork for one of them anyway). My solicitor basically said that they are my dogs and I could do as I pleased with them. I don't know if there has been a test case or what she based that on. This case does sound on the face of it like the Trust made an error of judgement. If the dog was overweight/had long claws, why not just talk to the woman about it? And so what if she was planning to take the dog to Canada with her - doesn't that show that she loved the dog? I'd much rather do that than let the dog end up in rescue again (depends on the rescue's policies of course). Having said that, there could be other issues here which haven't yet been made public but no doubt they will come out in court. Be interesting to hear what happens. Edited August 22, 2007 by madmerle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kats inc Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 Surely if this kind of case becomes more publically known and the rescue win it's going to put people off having rescue animals The thought of not having the legal right to chose for animals you care for and think you 'own' so to speak is not good.If you decide to emigrate so be it.You can't be told you can't go because you have a rescue animal or if you do go you can't take the animal with you.You agree when you take an animal on that it's for life and that agreement should be for both sides.Unless there is proven cruelty,neglect issues etc which of course would take precedence but in this case unless something more comes out it seems doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/information/fa...newlawandbills/ says The RSPCA (or SSPCA in Scotland) is the only organisation that is able to prosecute owners and remove animals if they are being mistreated. Please call the RSPCA on 0870 5555999 or the Scottish SPCA on 0870 73 77722. It seems to me that any rescue with a reclaim clause in its adoption agreement has a duty to behave reasonably. If there are concerns about a dog's welfare:- a) Try to resolve them with the adopter. b) If that fails, issue a written request for the return of the dog. c) If that fails, apply for a court order for the return of the dog and both sides will have an opportunity to put their case. d) If the dog's condition or general treatment is apparently so serious that it would be dangerous to wait for court procedings, liaise with the RSPCA for the seizure of the dog, then wait for a court decision. Bullying tactics and forcible removal must not be an option. Pam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeadyP Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 Whether a rescue can legally remove a dog from a home, I dont know.However having read the articles,we only have the owners reasons for the dogs removal. "As honorary legal adviser to Labrador Lifeline Trust I am instructed to say that the dog Lunar was removed from the care of Miss Hughes on welfare grounds by local and area representatives, a decision confirmed by the trust's trustees following reports received."That is all the rescue have said on the incident. I would imagine that its not a decision they take lightly,or others would be saying that they've had their dog removed too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merledogs Posted October 6, 2007 Report Share Posted October 6, 2007 The judge found in favour of the rescue. I don't know whether this sets a precedent or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted October 6, 2007 Report Share Posted October 6, 2007 There's a press release from the TLLT on their site too: http://www.labrador-lifeline.co.uk/store/v...php?view_doc=12 I'm really not sure what to make of it all at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts