If an owner turns up for a stray you've taken in, should you be reimbursed?

tommy21

Posting on another thread and via the experience of a friend, I wondered what your thoughts are on this. My friend recently took in a lovely stray dog, did her best to find the owner but to no avail. So she had grown very attached to the animal over the three weeks, as well as paying for 2 vet visits, vaccinations and ordering fleas drops and worm tablets. Now the owner has turned up and of course she is gutted but gave her back. She has not complained about the money, but I wondered what the set-up is there. Is it cheeky to point out what you've spent and ask for something back?

I encountered a similar scenario a few years back. We took in a stray cat, looked for the owner for a week or two (leaving posters up thereafter), then took the poor thing to vet for shots etc. Same story - owner turned up, thanked us politely and left - I didn't want a reward or anything, but felt like after I told them she'd had vaccinations and the fact that we spent three weeks worth of food should at least be picked up on.

I own a dog and cat by the way, so hope this doesn't come across mean spirited. I would never want to leave an animal hungry or ill, but when the owner turns up and does not appear to be destitute, I feel it should go beyond a thank-you to covering the basic costs. If the situation was reversed, I would be sure to.

Thoughts?

tesslab

I'm a softie for strays and have often took them in. Pretty much got the same outcomes as above.
Would have to say I'd feel obliged to reimburse someone if they took my dog in. Touch wood she never gets lost! More out of manners as people do get put out when they take in a stray. If someone has spent their own money looking after your pet its your responsibility to reimburse them. Just my opinion.;)

ISDW

I guess this is why people have to be careful and abide by the law. The dog won't belong to anyone that finds it for 1 year and 1 day after the day they took it in. Unless its done its 5 days stray time.

Looking at it from the other side, if I lost one of my dogs, I would check the pounds, lost and found sites etc. If I then found the dog in someone's house 3/4 weeks later, and they'd had it vacced etc, I don't know how I'd feel, as all of my dogs are already vacced. I may even be annoyed that the pound weren't notified, as I would have got my dog back straight away. Was the dog microchipped?

portgirl123

ISDW wrote: »

I guess this is why people have to be careful and abide by the law. The dog won't belong to anyone that finds it for 1 year and 1 day after the day they took it in. Unless its done its 5 days stray time.

Looking at it from the other side, if I lost one of my dogs, I would check the pounds, lost and found sites etc. If I then found the dog in someone's house 3/4 weeks later, and they'd had it vacced etc, I don't know how I'd feel, as all of my dogs are already vacced. I may even be annoyed that the pound weren't notified, as I would have got my dog back straight away. Was the dog microchipped?

can see where your coming from, as by law where ever the finder hands the dog to pound or not they legally have to let the local pound/warden know and leave their number so if owners are looking their pet can be found.

tommy21

ISDW wrote: »

I guess this is why people have to be careful and abide by the law. The dog won't belong to anyone that finds it for 1 year and 1 day after the day they took it in. Unless its done its 5 days stray time.

Looking at it from the other side, if I lost one of my dogs, I would check the pounds, lost and found sites etc. If I then found the dog in someone's house 3/4 weeks later, and they'd had it vacced etc, I don't know how I'd feel, as all of my dogs are already vacced. I may even be annoyed that the pound weren't notified, as I would have got my dog back straight away. Was the dog microchipped?

The dog was chipped but registration only went to a former breeder (:rolleyes:) from 4 years back. I'd be the same I think - aren't excess vaccines bad for a dog? In my books if someone makes a decent effort to advertise lost dog (boards.ie, posters, the multiple lost dog websites online plus via Facebook and gets on to the local pound to leave details) and the owner fails to find them for months, then it should be clear-cut that the dog is no longer theirs. Maybe a bit harsh in the case of the more elderly who wouldn't be familiar with those methods, but by and large most people should be clued into this.

ISDW

tommy21 wrote: »

The dog was chipped but registration only went to a former breeder (:rolleyes:) from 4 years back. I'd be the same I think - aren't excess vaccines bad for a dog? In my books if someone makes a decent effort to advertise lost dog (boards.ie, posters, the multiple lost dog websites online plus via Facebook and gets on to the local pound to leave details) and the owner fails to find them for months, then it should be clear-cut that the dog is no longer theirs. Maybe a bit harsh in the case of the more elderly who wouldn't be familiar with those methods, but by and large most people should be clued into this.

Its the local pound thats the crucial one. I think that if the pound is notified, and the local Gards, then that serves as the 5 day stray time. As long as they have a record of it, so that any owner looking for their dog can find it, it would be better for a dog to be in a family home than a pound, definitely.

Thinking about it again though, if a dog was in a pound, the owner would have to pay them to reclaim it, so yes, maybe no different if a member of the public finds it.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

I guess this is why people have to be careful and abide by the law. The dog won't belong to anyone that finds it for 1 year and 1 day after the day they took it in. Unless its done its 5 days stray time.

True but it depends on the ability of the original owner to prove that it is their dog. Irish Law places a lot of emphasis on the Dog License therefore the original owner should be able to present a license valid for the period when the dog went missing.

When I found my Greyhound the local SPCA had suspicions that she may of "belonged" to a certain local group. As she is very distinctive I decided to consult the Guards, who explained that as far as they were concerned, the owner was the person with a valid license.

The owner in the OP was clearly negligent in that the dog did not have a mandatory tag & they hadn't bothered to update the chip info. I suspect that they may not have had a license either. So I would not of given the dog back until they paid all my reasonable costs including board & food at kennel rates as well as the Vet costs. I would also want to see evidence that the owner had been trying to find their dog. Now you know why I don't run a rescue . Any caring owner would be only too pleased to pay up.

I know of one dog that has been returned to it's owner several times by well meaning people. On each occasion the owner has blamed the dog & shown no gratitude for it's return.

Just to clarify that if you find & decide to keep a stray you only have to notify the Guards or the Dog Warden not both. I was advised to "choose" the Guards as the "owners" would be unlikely to walk into a Garda station .

SophieSakura

I don't think people should have to be reimbursed, because you took in the stray out of charity, you didn't have to. But it would be nice of the owner, and the right thing to do, to reimburse you, or give you a thank you gift or something.

My kitten went missing the year before last and I put posters up. After about 3 days someone called and my dad went to pick up the kitten. She was in their garage and I guess they probably fed her cos she wasn't that hungry, for being missing 3 days. Whenever I walk by the house I think I should have sent them a box of chocolates or something, to say thanks . . . but that was only 3 days, and they seemed glad to be rid of the kitten! So I didn't feel like I owed them anyway, but was very grateful

magentas

I have to say that if it was me, I wouldn't ask for any kind of reward, financial or otherwise...and I wouldn't expect anything for doing it...

however, shoe on the other foot, I couldn't just collect my pet and expect a simple thank you to suffice. I would absolutely reimburse them for the cost of food etc. not vaccinations or anything though as I'd be pretty p!ssed off if anyone did that! and unless in exceptional circumstances, any responsible dog owner would have made enough effort to have their pet located within a few days so all anyone would have to do would be to give them shelter and food and keep them safe.

OK I'm starting to ramble now but basically I'd cover all their costs and throw in a nice bit extra as a token of appreciation

touch wood I'm never in that situation though

Discodog

SophieSakura wrote: »

I don't think people should have to be reimbursed, because you took in the stray out of charity, you didn't have to.

And the dog could of been picked up by a warden & be dead by now.

magentas wrote: »

touch wood I'm never in that situation though

You won't be because you have taken the simple step of microchipping your dog & fitting it with a collar tag.
It is so easy & inexpensive to ensure that a dog can always be returned.

One has to question whether someone who cannot be bothered to tag & chip should be allowed to own a dog if it means so little to them.

TooManyDogs

Discodog wrote: »

True but it depends on the ability of the original owner to prove that it is their dog. Irish Law places a lot of emphasis on the Dog License therefore the original owner should be able to present a license valid for the period when the dog went missing. .

The year and a day thing though is very valid as dogs are considered property under Irish law and would not be 100% legally belonging to another family until a year and a day has passed. I'd say you could try and prove you'd be a better owner if the previous owner didn't have a valid licence but if they can prove at all the dog is theirs they get it back.

Discodog

TooManyDogs wrote: »

The year and a day thing though is very valid as dogs are considered property under Irish law and would not be 100% legally belonging to another family until a year and a day has passed. I'd say you could try and prove you'd be a better owner if the previous owner didn't have a valid licence but if they can prove at all the dog is theirs they get it back.

Well the Guards were adamant that unless someone had a license valid for the period when I found my dog, they would not own it. Now if you refused to hand over a dog would the Guards get involved as there is no element of theft ?. All there would be is a civil matter of ownership so it would be up to the original owner to issue proceedings in the District Court.

Then it would be up to the Judge to weigh up the evidence. The original owner would need to produce proof, for example Vet bills or witness evidence. I think that the license is seen as providing proof of ownership & is therefore a legal requirement. I can't see a Judge treating a dog like a child in a divorce & deciding who is the better carer. In making a Judgement the Court could well take into account the negligence of the original owner in allowing their dog to stray, failing to have a collar tag & maybe not notifying the Guards or Dog Warden.

As the original owner was negligent & their loss was entirely their fault, they could also face a bill for costs - whether they got the dog back or not

golden8

.

ISDW

If a licence proves ownership, why is it that people can go to the pound to collect their missing dog, and buy a licence for it there and then? Obviously they didn't have one, but the dog is still returned to them

A licence is a waste of time as proof of ownership, the description on them could fit any number of dogs. Grey and white husky, male, how does that prove the dog there is that particular grey and white male husky?

Discodog

I agree but in my case I was more concerned about how the Gardai would approach it. I had visions of some big, lads claiming that I had their dog :eek: (It was well over a year ago now). Because a license is required by law I assume that they regard it a bit like a car. You can claim to own a car but it is the name on the registration book that is taken as proof of ownership.

The Pound couldn't give a monkey's who they hand a dog over to. Again I think that the assumption is made that, by allowing your dog to stray & failing to have it tagged or chipped, you have lost some rights as to ownership. Hence you can't sue the Pound if they kill your dog.

The real minefield could be if a chipped dog is killed because they miss the chip, don't bother scanning, or the chip company lose the details. But if everyone obeyed the law & fitted a cheap collar tag then there would be no problem.

ISDW

Discodog wrote: »

I agree but in my case I was more concerned about how the Gardai would approach it. I had visions of some big, lads claiming that I had their dog :eek: (It was well over a year ago now). Because a license is required by law I assume that they regard it a bit like a car. You can claim to own a car but it is the name on the registration book that is taken as proof of ownership.

The Pound couldn't give a monkey's who they hand a dog over to. Again I think that the assumption is made that, by allowing your dog to stray & failing to have it tagged or chipped, you have lost some rights as to ownership. Hence you can't sue the Pound if they kill your dog.

The real minefield could be if a chipped dog is killed because they miss the chip, don't bother scanning, or the chip company lose the details. But if everyone obeyed the law & fitted a cheap collar tag then there would be no problem.

But a car has a registration number and engine number to prove it is the one on the book. A dog licence doesn't even have the dog's name on it, so I still don't see how legally that stands up as proof of ownership. If it does, surely the pound have to use the same law as the Gards?

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

But a car has a registration number and engine number to prove it is the one on the book. A dog licence doesn't even have the dog's name on it, so I still don't see how legally that stands up as proof of ownership. If it does, surely the pound have to use the same law as the Gards?

If you are reclaiming your own dog from the Pound then the warden could not care less if you are the owner. If you are taking an unclaimed dog then you don't have to prove ownership as the Pound own it but you still have to produce a license.

I agree that the system is bonkers but so is most of our animal law. The Yellows could of easily introduced a better system as part of the DBEB. Every dog should be chipped & the chip number should be on the license. Another idea was that the Post Office give out a uniquely numbered collar tag with each license. Now I have no idea how it would affect the law but I actually get my postmistress to write the chip numbers on my licenses.

The other proof of ownership that would be likely to carry weight would be the evidence of a Vet. In reality the Guards won't act unless they have evidence that you stole the dog. Provided you report taking custody of the dog to the Guards then you are unlikely to have stolen it.

ISDW

Discodog wrote: »

If you are reclaiming your own dog from the Pound then the warden could not care less if you are the owner. If you are taking an unclaimed dog then you don't have to prove ownership as the Pound own it but you still have to produce a license.

I agree that the system is bonkers but so is most of our animal law. The Yellows could of easily introduced a better system as part of the DBEB. Every dog should be chipped & the chip number should be on the license. Another idea was that the Post Office give out a uniquely numbered collar tag with each license. Now I have no idea how it would affect the law but I actually get my postmistress to write the chip numbers on my licenses.

The other proof of ownership that would be likely to carry weight would be the evidence of a Vet. In reality the Guards won't act unless they have evidence that you stole the dog. Provided you report taking custody of the dog to the Guards then you are unlikely to have stolen it.

Oh come on, thats a bit ridiculous. I know one pound at least that you have to have some kind of proof of ownership, photo or something similar.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

Oh come on, thats a bit ridiculous. I know one pound at least that you have to have some kind of proof of ownership, photo or something similar.

I do not deal with Pounds very often so my comment was based on what a lot of people have said. It's obviously a good thing if Pound Keepers are showing some responsibility. But if I wanted a particular Pound dog could I not just wait until it is classed as unclaimed ?. Pound Keepers have total control over the Pound so they can basically do as they see fit.

I believe that Louth are asking dog owners to put microchip numbers on their licenses.

Bog Bunny

Question re pound policy.
Are there any unclaimed dogs at all in pounds?
Who pays for the dogs in the pound for the first five days, what is the policy when this period has elapsed?

Discodog

6500 were killed in Pounds last year.

Bog Bunny

Horrific number.
Any further breakdown, like when they were killed (how long in pound), breeds?

Would the local County Councils have to keep a record? I guess this info could be got by way of looking at their itemised spending accounts....