Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Charging for picking up a dog

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,464 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Isn’t it the airport rather than the airline you bought the ticket from which charges you for luggage storage and reclaim?

    We are not talking about lost baggage here. Rather items left behind on the means of transport.


  • Options
    #123
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Another poster said all shelters charge a fee, the ones I quickly googled show a wide range of fees, would they advertise this on the interweb if it were illegal?

    I never said it was illegal.


  • Options
    #124
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,164 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    AulWan wrote: »
    From the OP ...



    I presume the "they" referenced is the local county council who would know if a rescue was a legit one or not

    Dogs do get out or run off sometimes, especially around Halloween, with bangers and fireworks going off. I used to volunteer for a charity and regularly on this week every year we would have loads of lost dogs, or dogs that had run off. It happens. Its not the crime of the century, but demanding 50 euro with a threat of not returning the dog is not right either.

    Which Register were you posting about earlier? If you are on it, does not hat make it “legit”?

    What is a “ legit” Rescue, would it be one that takes in stray dogs, boards and feeds them, puts the dog up on their webpage so the owner can find it, tries to identify the dog’s chip etc?, and charges for their service like all the others. If that isn’t legit, what is?


  • Options
    #125
    Always Tired
    Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭Always Tired


    AulWan wrote: »
    Give us €50 or we won't give you back your dog, is quite threatening.

    They only had the dog overnight, so possibly two feeds. Doubt the dog was walked in that time.

    I think some are getting a bit carried away here.

    It's not just about the cost of food, it's the deterrent factor. The poster has said that the dog gets out frequently, why should overstretched shelters have to use their space to house dogs that have owners but the owners just can't be bothered to keep them secured?

    The owner didnt think there was any problem until they came up against this fee. ie: they were happy to just let the dog run, and would have continued with that careless behaviour, until it hit their pocket.

    Unsurprisingly, people like this rarely will look in the mirror and blame themselves, they start accusing the shelter of misbehaviour.

    There's a reason this is the norm in shelters in many countries, it deters people from letting their dogs roam. It's not just this one shelter that does this.


  • Options
    #126
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Which Register were you posting about earlier? If you are on it, does not hat make it “legit”?

    What is a “ legit” Rescue, would it be one that takes in stray dogs, boards and feeds them, puts the dog up on their webpage so the owner can find it, tries to identify the dog’s chip etc?, and charges for their service like all the others. If that isn’t legit, what is?

    I don't thing there is any requirement for a rescue to register with anyone. They might for planning, change of use etc & for charity status, grants etc.

    I think the poster is confusing this with rescues who act as Pounds on behalf of the LA. Without knowing the area/rescue it's impossible to tell.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Always Tired wrote: »
    It's not just about the cost of food, it's the deterrent factor. The poster has said that the dog gets out frequently, why should overstretched shelters have to use their space to house dogs that have owners but the owners just can't be bothered to keep them secured?

    The owner didnt think there was any problem until they came up against this fee. ie: they were happy to just let the dog run, and would have continued with that careless behaviour, until it hit their pocket.

    Unsurprisingly, people like this rarely will look in the mirror and blame themselves, they start accusing the shelter of misbehaviour.

    There's a reason this is the norm in shelters in many countries, it deters people from letting their dogs roam. It's not just this one shelter that does this.

    Then add in all the people who dump their dog at a rescue, when they are tired of it, with no thought about the cost of rehoming it.


  • Options
    #128
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Discodog wrote: »
    I would doubt that most rescues, unless they are Pounds, charge. They ask for a donation & suggest an amount. But they can impose charges for any dog that they "own".

    Any charges here are a direct result of the owner's negligence & failure to comply with the law. If the dog had an id tag it would never of ended up in the rescue.

    My post was not in relation to dogs, however any question of negligence or failure to comply with the law does not give reason to demand payment where no contractual liability arises.

    Finders of chattels do not avert rights over the true owners (with some exceptions) and have no legal right to withhold returning property unless as already stated there is a contractual clause.

    On a separate note I'm surprised in the legal discussion thread that no one has mentioned detinue, conversion, trover etc. Usually pops up for these types of discussions.


  • Options
    #129
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,164 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Always Tired wrote: »
    I

    The owner didnt think there was any problem until they came up against this fee. ie: they were happy to just let the dog run, and would have continued with that careless behaviour, until it hit their pocket.

    Unsurprisingly, people like this rarely will look in the mirror and blame themselves, they start accusing the shelter of misbehaviour.

    I think it is worth remembering, the owner picked the dog up and paid the charge, probably delighted for the safe return of his dog. The op is the owner’s child, and apparently the one with the problem.


  • Options
    #130
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Which Register were you posting about earlier? If you are on it, does not hat make it “legit”?

    What is a “ legit” Rescue, would it be one that takes in stray dogs, boards and feeds them, puts the dog up on their webpage so the owner can find it, tries to identify the dog’s chip etc?, and charges for their service like all the others. If that isn’t legit, what is?

    An example of a "legit" rescue would be one like Dogs Trust, or Dogs In Distress, that is registered as a charity.

    I know more then one person who does as you describe above and has set themselves up without any official status at all either with a county council or a charity and taken in dogs (though more usually cats), and called themselves a rescue.

    I remember once going into a house in Ballymun where one of these unofficial places existed and there were over 40 cats and dogs being kept in a private hosue. They also posted the animals to facebook and charged big rehoming fees.

    These are not legit rescues, and have no right to charge anything, or threaten to keep someone's dog if they don't pay up.

    I'm out, as I'm only getting annoyed now.


  • Options
    #131
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    GM228 wrote: »
    My post was not in relation to dogs, however any question of negligence or failure to comply with the law does not give reason to demand payment where no contractual liability arises.

    Finders of chattels do not avert rights over the true owners (with some exceptions) and have no legal right to withhold returning property unless as already stated there is a contractual clause.

    On a separate note I'm surprised in the legal discussion thread that no one has mentioned detinue, conversion, trover etc. Usually pops up for these types of discussions.

    Rescues have no desire to increase their problems by permanently depriving an owner of their dog. No rescue would ultimately refuse to hand over the dog. It appears that, at the time, they could find no evidence of a microchip. The dog didn't have the legally required collar id tag so the rescue had no way of proving ownership.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,164 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    GM228 wrote: »
    My post was not in relation to dogs, however any question of negligence or failure to comply with the law does not give reason to demand payment where no contractual liability arises.

    Finders of chattels do not avert rights over the true owners (with some exceptions) and have no legal right to withhold returning property unless as already stated there is a contractual clause.

    On a separate note I'm surprised in the legal discussion thread that no one has mentioned detinue, conversion, trover etc. Usually pops up for these types of discussions.

    I’d say all posters have been waiting for you to join the discussion. No doubt there is a clear, unambiguous law about this which prevents shelters nationwide from charging for their service.

    The floor is yours, tell us about detinue, conversion and of course, trover. The dog wasn’t found by the shelter, it was taken in by a member of the public, maybe the Good Samaritan should be charged, the op should contact him/her to recover the €50.


  • Options
    #133
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    AulWan wrote: »
    An example of a "legit" rescue would be one like Dogs Trust, or Dogs In Distress, that is registered as a charity.

    I know more then one person who does as you describe above and has set themselves up without any official status at all either with a county council or a charity and taken in dogs (though more usually cats), and called themselves a rescue.

    I remember once going into a house in Ballymun where one of these unofficial places existed and there were over 40 cats and dogs being kept in a private hosue. They also posted the animals to facebook and charged big rehoming fees.

    These are not legit rescues, and have no right to charge anything, or threaten to keep someone's dog if they don't pay up.

    I'm out, as I'm only getting annoyed now.

    The OP has used the phrase "This charity".


  • Options
    #134
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,164 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    AulWan wrote: »
    An example of a "legit" rescue would be one like Dogs Trust, or Dogs In Distress, that is registered as a charity.

    I know more then one person who does as you describe above and has set themselves up without any official status at all either with a county council or a charity and taken in dogs (though more usually cats), and called themselves a rescue.

    I remember once going into a house in Ballymun where one of these unofficial places existed and there were over 40 cats and dogs being kept in a private hosue. They also posted the animals to facebook and charged big rehoming fees.

    These are not legit rescues, and have no right to charge anything, or threaten to keep someone's dog if they don't pay up.

    I'm out, as I'm only getting annoyed now.

    Ah here, are you saying that to be a legit shelter, you have to be registered as a Charity? And if the op confirms it is a registered charity, will you then say it is legit without knowing anything whatsoever about it?

    Lord knows, in this country being a Charity does not necessarily bestow legitimacy on it.


  • Options
    #135
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Dav010 wrote: »
    I’d say all posters have been waiting for you to join the discussion. No doubt there is a clear, unambiguous law about this which prevents shelters nationwide from charging for their service.

    The floor is yours, tell us about detinue, conversion and of course, trover. The dog wasn’t found by the shelter, it was taken in by a member of the public, maybe the Good Samaritan should be charged, the op should contact him/her to recover the €50.

    I think you are missing the point, you are not liable for a service unless you are contractually (or statute) required to be, there is no statute allowing a charity or other institution charge for the return of your dog.

    Someone who finds or takes possession of others property holds such property as will enable them to keep it against all but the rightful owner, that is well settled in law since 1722.

    Detinue and conversion are civil remedies where there is wrongful failure or refusal to return property or wrongful dealings in property. Demanding €50 for return raises the issue of detinue.


  • Options
    #136
    begbysback
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭begbysback


    Always Tired wrote: »
    You said you accept responsibility for the dog getting out, but you won't pay the fee, so how exactly are you taking responsibility? You're not. You literally don't care about keeping the dog in until it hits your wallet, and that's why the owner claim fee is there, it's the only thing careless owners understand.

    You're not one bit grateful for them keeping your dog safe. And if they just collect him, feed him, keep him safe for free, what is going to inspire irresponsible owners to stop letting their dog out, endangering the dog, drivers, etc.?

    Owner claim fees are the norm in shelters around the world. Pay it and secure your dog and maybe thank the shelter for keeping him safe instead of crying foul for something that is your own fault. The dog doesn't 'keep getting out', you're letting him out to roam.

    This isn’t the animal welfare forum though, is it?


  • Options
    #137
    John_Rambo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,544 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    chandlerbing2 wrote: »
    Nope, it’s not a civil matter. Someone has my dog and there not giving it back. There trying to extortion me for money.

    Answer this question, if I found your dog and asked for say 150 euro or your not getting it back. Would you give me the 150 euro and walk away without reporting it to the guards?

    Ah sure that’s only a civil matter like your saying, no it’s not

    Stop moving the goalposts and muddy the water. Its €50, not €150.


  • Options
    #138
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    If it's a fine it's illegal.

    If it's to pay for medical assistance and/or food then maybe there is a case.


  • Options
    #139
    Diceicle
    Registered Users Posts: 1,799 ✭✭✭Diceicle


    adam88 wrote: »
    Mods- not sure if this is the right forum. Feel free to move.

    Basically, my father has a dog, the dog keeps getting out and we accept full responsibility for this. Yesterday the dog went missing and a local rang a local dog charity to pick up the dog, this morning they posted it on Facebook and we knew it was our dog. My father went over to collect the dog and the dog would not be released until a fee of 50 euros was handed over. The person who runs this charity said the dog did not have a chip despite we having proof it was chipped.

    This charity is in no way connect to the county council and as far as they are concerned have no right to collect dogs and charge for the service. I rang this man and asked him to give the money back to my father and the abuse I received was uncalled for. When asked what would happen if he didn’t pay the money he said he’d have kept the dog. Surely this isn’t right, the guards say it’s a civil matter.

    I’d be more than willing to pay a donation but when the local pound only charge 15 euros a night I think his charge of 50 euro is very wrong.

    Any advice on how to approach this

    Did you give them €50?


  • Options
    #140
    scamalert
    Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭scamalert


    begbysback wrote: »
    This isn’t the animal welfare forum though, is it?
    it aint but OP sounds like a total toll, over 50e - when these things could run people literally into ground if things went other way.


  • Options
    #141
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,415 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Always Tired wrote: »
    Every shelter has owner claim fees. I think if it was illegal it would have been sorted out by now. It's basically treated the same as cars being towed or clamped.

    Yeah, name and shame a shelter that took a lost dog in and kept it safe vs an owner who keeps letting their dog stray. See how that will go.

    Those barstewards in that shelter fed, watered and minded my dog, name and shame.

    As for the person who said it was like a phone or wallet and being asked to pay to return.

    How much does your wallet eat?
    Did someone have to go out in a van with a cage to get it.

    Did someone have to clean up after your wallet shi7 everywhere?

    Is there an insurance cost, energy costs,to minding your wallet.


    Not by their choice but because people couldn't be bothered to take care of their own Things.

    Just for starters.

    A Judge or Guard would straighten out the O.p. very quickly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Danzy wrote: »
    Those barstewards in that shelter fed, watered and minded my dog, name and shame.

    As for the person who said it was like a phone or wallet and being asked to pay to return.

    How much does your wallet eat?
    Did someone have to go out in a van with a cage to get it.

    Did someone have to clean up after your wallet shi7 everywhere?

    Is there an insurance cost, energy costs,to minding your wallet.


    Not by their choice but because people couldn't be bothered to take care of their own Things.

    Just for starters.

    A Judge or Guard would straighten out the O.p. very quickly.

    You make good points and agree with you. But this is the legal forum. Unless the dog was picked up in private area with signs stating the outcome the OP posted the shelter cannot essentially fine.


  • Options
    #143
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,464 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Danzy wrote: »

    A Judge or Guard would straighten out the O.p. very quickly.

    The thing is though that AGS and the judiciary tend to apply the law.
    The legal position has been pointed out here in several posts.


  • Options
    #144
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    elperello wrote: »
    The thing is though that AGS and the judiciary tend to apply the law.
    The legal position has been pointed out here in several posts.

    They also apply a very important legal principle.....common sense.

    The rescue didn't break the law even if the OPs version is true.


  • Options
    #145
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Discodog wrote: »
    They also apply a very important legal principle.....common sense.

    The rescue didn't break the law even if the OPs version is true.

    If the OP version is true they did break the law by issuing a fine. We don't operate a finders keepers law in Ireland.


  • Options
    #146
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    joeguevara wrote: »
    If the OP version is true they did break the law by issuing a fine. We don't operate a finders keepers law in Ireland.

    Then the OP should seek a prosecution.

    They didn't issue a fine or attempt to. They asked for a donation to cover their costs.

    Finders Keepers depends on ownership. There was no proof on the dog as the owner failed to comply with the law.

    So the OP's lawbreaking was:

    Failure to have a collar & id tag.
    Failure to keep the dog under effectual control.
    A possible offence of abandonment under the 2013 Animal Welfare Bill.


  • Options
    #147
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Discodog wrote: »
    Then the OP should seek a prosecution.

    They didn't issue a fine or attempt to. They asked for a donation to cover their costs.

    Finders Keepers depends on ownership. There was no proof on the dog as the owner failed to comply with the law.

    So the OP's lawbreaking was:

    Failure to have a collar & id tag.
    Failure to keep the dog under effectual control.
    A possible offence of abandonment under the 2013 Animal Welfare Bill.

    If they asked for a donation then there is no issue. If they refuse to hand dog back once proof of ownership was established unless money paid its theft.


  • Options
    #148
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,849 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    joeguevara wrote: »
    If they asked for a donation then there is no issue. If they refuse to hand dog back once proof of ownership was established unless money paid its theft.

    I simply don't believe that a registered charity, with the onus on good practice that requires, would do this. I can imagine a rescue being miffed that their costs won't be reimbursed but in truth, this happens every day with ungrateful owners.

    The "dispute" wasn't between the owner & the rescue. It was introduced by their son, at a later date & probably hearsay evidence.


  • Options
    #149
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Discodog wrote: »
    I simply don't believe that a registered charity, with the onus on good practice that requires, would do this. I can imagine a rescue being miffed that their costs won't be reimbursed but in truth, this happens every day with ungrateful owners.

    The "dispute" wasn't between the owner & the rescue. It was introduced by their son, at a later date & probably hearsay evidence.

    Fully agree.


  • Options
    #150
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭daheff


    Always Tired wrote: »
    So owner claim fees are illegal, but every shelter in the country and other countries has been doing it for donkeys years, can you please explain that, mr. Barrister?

    Has this practice been challenged in court yet? You find a lot of illegal practices happening until challenge in court happens.

    Other countries practices are irrelevant to this discussion.


    On a practical level, most responsible dog owners are more than happy to pay the releease fee as a thank you to the charity for looking after their pet for them....but that does not make the demand legal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭daheff


    Discodog wrote: »

    They didn't issue a fine or attempt to. They asked for a donation to cover their costs..

    OP said that they refused to release the dog back to the parent unless 50 eur was paid over... not quite the same as asking for a donation.

    OP also states that the dog is chipped.


Advertisement