Cyclist hits dog, sues.

Tazz T

ted1 wrote: »

I narrowly avoided a similar incident with a grey squirrel coming down long hill from roundwood.
Animals are a nuisance

I'd say the squirrel would say that humans are the nuisance as animals tend not to drive mechanical equipment.

ford2600

ted1 wrote: »

I narrowly avoided a similar incident with a grey squirrel coming down long hill from roundwood.
Animals are a nuisance

https://nargc.ie/mink-and-grey-squirrel-bounties-important-notice/

That's €3 you missed out on

check_six

Roca wrote: »

Don't no what happened the dog after to be honest .. but I knew they owned the dog as far as it was always there. I lost it based in no licence linking the owner to the dog.

In my mind's eye I'm seeing the hound sitting the the dock in the court wearing a bow-tie and sad (hangdog?) expression.

You'd like to think that an uncontrolled 'feral' dog that was attacking people might be picked up rather than just left to wander the roads seeing that the authorities knew about its existence. Maybe the 'owners' decided to have an instant change of heart after the court case and give the mutt a home by getting a licence immediately after their liability was no longer in question.

tomasrojo

Lumen wrote: »

Magic number strikes again.



Tip: when jumping the compo train, you must pick a speed of at most 29kph.

I saw this irresponsible speed mentioned somewhere else in the media this morning.

Those roadside dynamic speed signs should have a frownie face for when cyclists pass at 30km/h. As you said, Lumen, it is simultaneously the speed at which cyclists are going way too fast, and drivers are going impossibly slowly.

Kav0777

ronoc wrote: »

He has fallen on ruff times

You'd be barking up the wrong tree trying to get money from there...

Grassey

homer911 wrote: »

Dog ran off without providing his name and address or insurance details! Ignorant sod!

Sounds like we immediately need all dogs to have a licence, do a test to be allowed on the roads, mandatory muzzles and high vis too.

Eamonnator

Grassey wrote: »

Sounds like we immediately need all dogs to have a licence, do a test to be allowed on the roads, mandatory muzzles and high vis too.

And pay road tax.
Don't forget the Road Tax, Joe

magicbastarder

ford2600 wrote: »

https://nargc.ie/mink-and-grey-squirrel-bounties-important-notice/

That's €3 you missed out on

or a small meal.

Alek

magicbastarder wrote: »

or a small meal.

Bon appetite

https://video.vice.com/en_us/video/meet-the-man-who-eats-roadkill/56255d49404c8b7e5f76f906

terrydel

Greybottle wrote: »

Seems he was hurt in another accident a few months later.

Either way the dog was not under control, so it should be a warning to other dog owners. FWIW a nephew of my neighbour sued for damage done to his car when he hit and killed a dog that ran out in front of him. The insurance company paid out, think it was around €2,000.

In fairness, to sue after someone loses their pet is a ***** trick imho.

terrydel

ford2600 wrote: »

I've been on both sides of this.

About 12 years ago, my dog attacked a pedestrian (whom I knew well, along with her extended family) immediately outside farm gate. Dog was a pure bred lab, that I had rehomed after some clown had bought him at Xmas as a cute chocolate lab pup and proceeded to ignore him when he grew. He was beyond my skillset to retrain and in hindsight should have got rid of him beforehand. He didn't do any real physical damage, but lady got a fright. I immediately brought her for medical attention, got her a small gift and had dog put down by vet within about 3 hours. I'd imagine a lot of conflict after, in the absence of serious injury, could be resolved by similar actions.

A Jack Russell, walking with it's very elderly owner bit me on calf in Waterford city about 10 years ago, I hadn't the heart to say it to owner, but I probably should as it might have been a habit he had.

I generally ride a lot in areas where there are quite a few sheep farmers, and therefore sheepdogs and it is the only way I do any kind of hard riding these days; sheepdog intervals to break up the wandering around the byroads. The really good (i.e. sneaky) sheepdog you won't hear coming; those fcukers can do stealth mode

When route checking an audax ride last year myself an organiser were chased for a couple of hundred metres by one determined lab, it meant that rather nice section of road was removed from route

I personally find it incredibly sad and wrong that for doing that the dog paid with his life. If it was your dog and your property, you should have been fined, the poor dog was only doing what it felt was right, protecting its area.

magicbastarder

terrydel wrote: »

In fairness, to sue after someone loses their pet is a ***** trick imho.

so he should have paid the €2000 damage out of his own pocket?

magicbastarder

terrydel wrote: »

the poor dog was only doing what it felt was right, protecting its area.

also, what do you propose should have been done with a dog with a known history of attacking people?
IIRC, we kill approx. 7 million animals a year in this country, the vast majority simply to eat them. a dog with a known issue of attacking people 'deserves' it more than 99.999% of all other animals we deem fit to kill.

ford2600

terrydel wrote: »

I personally find it incredibly sad

For a dog dead 12 years you never met....

Here is a photo for you

irishrover99

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, what do you propose should have been done with a dog with a known history of attacking people?
IIRC, we kill approx. 7 million animals a year in this country, the vast majority simply to eat them. a dog with a known issue of attacking people 'deserves' it more than 99.999% of all other animals we deem fit to kill.

From what I read, it didn't really attack anyone as the was no physical damage so sound like the dog barked and snarled at the woman and if their was no previous then maybe it was an overreaction to have the dog put down for that.

By the sounds of it, a good dog like that would have many takers, perhaps someone who could of trained it properly would have took it.

I've had lots of experience with dogs when I was younger but I went about 10 years without one.

Last year I got a beautiful staff Russel pup from some dodgy bloke who had them, mainly because I feared he would kill them if nobody took them. After a few weeks I could see this pup was mentally scarred. It wouldn't stop biting and it tore my garden to shreds daily.it actually ate flowers.

Then my dads dementia/seizures got worse and I was up to my eyes with him, work and the kids and I had to pass the dog onto a new family who had the time to take care of him.

I told them the truth and over 80 people contacted me for this dog.
I believe he is doing well now and much better behaved.

average_runner

terrydel wrote: »

In fairness, to sue after someone loses their pet is a ***** trick imho.

In fairness if the owner cared about the dog, the incident wouldn't of happened.

Why should someone be out of pocket for a careless owner?

magicbastarder

irishrover99 wrote: »

From what I read, it didn't really attack anyone as the was no physical damage so sound like the dog barked and snarled at the woman

The phrase used was 'no real physical damage' and ford2600 took the woman for a medical examination. I'm sure he can clarify, but that sounds like an attempted attack rather than a fit of barking.

Mercian Pro

terrydel wrote: »

I personally find it incredibly sad and wrong that for doing that the dog paid with his life. If it was your dog and your property, you should have been fined, the poor dog was only doing what it felt was right, protecting its area.

Check out this post https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057781291 and it might just change your mind.

ford2600

magicbastarder wrote: »

The phrase used was 'no real physical damage' and ford2600 took the woman for a medical examination. I'm sure he can clarify, but that sounds like an attempted attack rather than a fit of barking.

There was no attempt about it, he jumped on her, knocked her and bit her on thigh, I wasnt present for the physical examination but my mother stated there was slightly broken skin and a lot of bruising. I had to kick dog off the lady

I know we live a in New Age where animals and humans are equal; but in my view a dog/bull etc attacks there is only one course of actions.

I was very fond of dog, but any lingering doubts vanished when two primary school age girls walked down the road the following day.

As an aside vets very firm advice was to put dog down; this is the most gifted and kind man with animals I've ever met.

secman

Got chased today by one of the collies at Lisheen , thankfully he was struggling running through a field full of snow and I managed to get ahead of him before he got on to the road. Great camouflage for border collies all around roads in blessington as black and white snow stacked up high on both sides of road. I too had a dog put down, it did upset me but he bit a kid on the arm and stitches were required, a lovely Kerry blue, couldn't take the risk of it happening again.

terrydel

ford2600 wrote: »

For a dog dead 12 years you never met....

Here is a photo for you

Don't need to meet it smart arse, I think any creature dying because it did what it thought was the correct thing to do is sad.

terrydel

average_runner wrote: »

In fairness if the owner cared about the dog, the incident wouldn't of happened.

Why should someone be out of pocket for a careless owner?

Firstly, the world isnt black and white and to suggest that simply because the dog got loose means the owner doesnt care is rubbish, it can happen to anyone, nobody is perfect.

Secondly, I agree that the car owner should not be out of pocket, but suing to me suggests that the person was looking for more, maybe Im cynical towards it having worked in insurance for many years. Im not aware of the exacts details and if the dogs owner agreed to pay for the repairs. If they didnt and said f off then yes the car owner had a right to chase up the damages.

terrydel

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, what do you propose should have been done with a dog with a known history of attacking people?
IIRC, we kill approx. 7 million animals a year in this country, the vast majority simply to eat them. a dog with a known issue of attacking people 'deserves' it more than 99.999% of all other animals we deem fit to kill.

Do we put humans down who assault people once or multiple times? And theyve the brains and conscience to know not to be doing it?
Perhaps give the dog to someone, an old person who needs a companion or whatever. I just dont agree with having its life ended when it essentially thinks it is doing what it is meant to.
As for animals that are killed for food, I think thats an entirely different issue, I personally dont have a problem with using animals for food.

Chiparus

It really is not that funny.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cat-caused-death-of-experienced-cyclist-in-freak-accident-86038.html

irishrover99

terrydel wrote: »

Do we put humans down who assault people once or multiple times? And theyve the brains and conscience to know not to be doing it?
Perhaps give the dog to someone, an old person who needs a companion or whatever. I just dont agree with having its life ended when it essentially thinks it is doing what it is meant to.
As for animals that are killed for food, I think thats an entirely different issue, I personally dont have a problem with using animals for food.

Totally agree. Trying to compare a domesticated animal to a farm animal is way beyond apples and oranges and just ignorant.

When you go to a dog shelter, they usually encourage people to take an older rescued dog over the pups.
This shows that old dogs can be retrained with the proper attention.

ford2600

terrydel wrote: »

Do we put humans down who assault people once or multiple times? And theyve the brains and conscience to know not to be doing it?
Perhaps give the dog to someone, an old person who needs a companion or whatever. I just dont agree with having its life ended when it essentially thinks it is doing what it is meant to.
As for animals that are killed for food, I think thats an entirely different issue, I personally dont have a problem with using animals for food.

Have you a full manifesto you can link to anywhere of all your writing on this topic?

Your desire for a burger supersedes valid public safety concerns?

It's ok to eat animals, so it's ok to eat dog, or does their cute personality save them? This is on topic I think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61g2-EVJ-mo

If an animal or specifically dog thinks it's ok to attack people because
"it essentially thinks it is doing what it is meant to" how many attacks do we allow? A 3 strikes rule or do you aggregate the stitches in all attacks? Maybe withdraw treats at 3 stitches up to being put down at 20?

I look forward to your full thoughts on the topic

Lumen

irishrover99 wrote: »

Totally agree. Trying to compare a domesticated animal to a farm animal is way beyond apples and oranges and just ignorant.

Ignorant of what?

Why shouldn't we compare them? A life is a life.

If you want to compartmentalize animals in order to feel better about slaughtering some of them for your food, that's your own lookout.

The only people with a right to be self righteous on this issue are vegans.

I've eaten dog. It didn't taste great. If it did I would eat it more often.

ford2600

Lumen wrote: »

The only people with a right to be self righteous on this issue are vegans.

Maybe but what do I do if vegan and have a rat infestation?

Where do you draw the line on what living creatures matter? insects killing for spraying food is ok but don't kill the pig or cow?

The Bishop Basher

terrydel wrote: »

In fairness, to sue after someone loses their pet is a ***** trick imho.

Couldn't agree more..

We had a dog killed on the road a good few years ago. The young lad in the civic who hit him came back to check that he was ok but he was dead before he hit the ground.

I pointed to my house and told the guy to get in touch regarding a claim for the damage to his car which was easily €500's worth. I was happy to accept liability.

I never heard from him again.

I've zero time for this suing nonsense. The greed is sickening and we all have to pay for it. Provisions should be made to cover people's medical expenses where appropriate and get rid of all this other "emotional trauma" bolloxology. Of course there will always be exceptional circumstances but as it stands it's become the norm and people are walking away with very significant sums for very minor injuries.

We ourselves have passed on a number of opportunities to claim easy money from others and thankfully that favour has been repaid back to us in equal measure.

What goes around comes around.

rollingscone

Swanner wrote: »

Couldn't agree more..

We had a dog killed on the road a good few years ago. The young lad in the civic who hit him came back to check that he was ok but he was dead before he hit the ground.

I pointed to my house and told the guy to get in touch regarding a claim for the damage to his car which was easily €500's worth. I was happy to accept liability.

I never heard from him again.

I've zero time for this suing nonsense. The greed is sickening and we all have to pay for it. Provisions should be made to cover people's medical expenses where appropriate and get rid of all this other "emotional trauma" bolloxology. Of course there will always be exceptional circumstances but as it stands it's become the norm and people are walking away with very significant sums for very minor injuries.

We ourselves have passed on a number of opportunities to claim easy money from others and thankfully that favour has been repaid back to us in equal measure.

What goes around comes around.

New Zealand have a system that takes 3rd party liability out of the motor insurance. Not sure how well it works but certain elements of the legal profession would burn Leinster House to the ground before they'd let that particular gravy train be derailed