Alyosha Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) You can do one of three things in NSW if council suspects your dog to be of a resticted breed.1. Accept what council tells you , which means your doing is subject to NOI and declared after 28 days 2. NOI, followed by the owner seeking a BA and TT during the 28 days 3 Appealing to council within the 7 days prior to the NOI being issued and then going to court if council still goes ahead with the NOI Is this under the Local Government Act or Companion Animals? No right to appeal?? That sounds bizarre to me when you can appeal anything from a parking ticket to a murder conviction... I'm not doubting you PPS, I just think that maybe this needs a decent Court challenge as I don't think it would last long... Edit to add after some reading - Yowch this is a bodgy bit of legislation: COMPANION ANIMALS ACT 1998 - SECT 58C (6) Any written statement provided by an approved breed assessor or approved temperament assessor for the purposes of this section may not be challenged, reviewed, quashed or called into question on any grounds before any court or tribunal in any legal proceedings. Considering that the above section says this: (2) Certification in relation to dog’s breed or temperament may be provided An authorised officer of a council is not to declare the dog to be a restricted dog if, within the period of 28 days following the giving of the notice under section 58A, the owner of the dog: (b) provides the authorised officer with: (ii) a written statement by an approved temperament assessor to the effect that the dog is not a danger to the public and is not likely, without provocation, to attack or bite any person or animal. From the sounds of it the temp test done in this case involved provocation and thus should be worth zilch... But you could only go to court and appeal the appointment of the temp tester - this is the only way I can see to have the test nullified... Edited July 13, 2009 by Nattylou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) You can appeal the NOI and challenge it through council and the courts but basically if you go down the road of BA and TT, there is no appealing that. (6) Any written statement provided by an approved breed assessor or approved temperament assessor for the purposes of this section may not be challenged, reviewed, quashed or called into question on any grounds before any court or tribunal in any legal proceedings. Edited July 13, 2009 by PPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) just thought id add an update of what happened in this particular case..the breed assessment was indeed just visual, it was performed by a well known Registered breeder who took a look at the dog and confirmed the dog was at least part PB so she was then referred on for a TT the following week, which was at a veterinary clinic...another 3 hour drive (6 hour return) so they went to that, walked out to the yard, within 2mins they bring out a huge german shephard being led, who is lunging from his lead barking and carrying on rather confrontationally at the dog being tested. my cousins dog started to growl...the assessor immediantly says "yes, this dogs agressive" its a dangerous dog.. book closed..all within a couple of minutes. they did not perform any other testing, (that the breed assessor happened to mention they would test ie. stranger danger, umbrella opening in dogs face etc) it was all over red rover. they suggested that she desex the dog for starters and erect 60cm barriers along the top of their fencelines to prevent the possibility of them jumping out of yard...and this could lean in their favour of the impending restrictions that will be placed on the dog (I highly doubt it will change anything, but im glad she got him desexed anyways) This is a load of rubbish.........total rubbish. Yes there are 3 Amstaff breeders involved in this shite........ Edited July 14, 2009 by tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyosha Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) And this is going to be where this legislation needs to be challenged - the appointment of these people, and their qualification to undertake these tests. The ridiculous section about the restriction not being appellable needs to be circumvented by questioning the validity of the assessor's appoinment. Edited July 13, 2009 by Nattylou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyLife Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Why is it that Amstaff breeders having anything to do with all this is bad and all the rest of the drama going on here? The dog was classed as part but was then labeled aggressive so what they were advised is quite correct.They have to follow the rules for a dangerous dog now. And no,thats not saying I agree with the way it was done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyLife Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 And another thing,you say that the dogs were well behaved etc etc but that one was escaping the yard.That alone is enough reason to bring council fools knocking and gives them something to go on. And why was the dog not adequetly contained in the first place? If youre going to own these dogs then make sure they cant get out,simple as that.Otherwise,dont own one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Not quite correct, the dog has not been declared as "dangerous" . The dogs is now considered " restricted" . " dangerous" dogs can have the order revoked by council ( from memory ) any time after 6 months from the date of declaration . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) What an outrage This is 3rd world style, backward and without sense, logic, or fairness. Edited July 14, 2009 by Lo Pan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bustam Posted July 13, 2009 Author Share Posted July 13, 2009 (edited) BL, Im presuming your comment was just a generalized one about people containing their dogs and not aimed at me, as you would have seen by my posts that their not my dogs, they actually live 3 doors down from me but as to you asking 'why was the dog not adequetly contained in the first place?' all i can say is that obviously she didnt realise the dog would be able to scale over the fence. (which for the record, is a structurally sound run of the mill timber paling fence) the drama here isnt disputing what they were advised, its the way in which dogs are being identified by persons who are not qualified to do so (amstaff people or not) and the ridiculousw way they are temperment tested... if everyone had to subject their dog in the same situation how many could honestly say their dog would pass? Edited July 13, 2009 by bustam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 They could have opted to go to court, they didn't have to go down the road of BA & TT. I am yet to come across an owner that has the money for a legal team to challenge an NOI in court. There are also very few solicitors that are up to speed when it comes to "restricted" or " dangerous" dogs. I've suggested to quite a few people that they seek legal representation and the have pretty much come back to me and said the same thing. For those that can't afford a solicitor at least they still have an option available to them and they can try and work the system to their advantage. Yes, the law is an ass, but there's not much point in jumping up and down about it and screaming it on a forum, practical help is what owners who have been issued an NOI need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 the drama here isnt disputing what they were advised, its the way in which dogs are being identified by persons who are not qualified to do so (amstaff people or not) and the ridiculous way they are temperment tested... if everyone had to subject their dog in the same situation how many could honestly say their dog would pass? No my dog would not pass....breeders are not qualified no one is in Aus thats been proven in a court of law. l would be seeking civil action against the B.A & T.T its just rubbish. tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyLife Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Can I ask Tybrax,why you seem so adament that there is no-one qualified to ID a dog here ? Bustam,apologies mate,yes I was just generaly speaking,not aimed at you. And PPS, states many things that are plain and simple truth. But why was the dog declared restricted? Wasnt it assesed as only part ? Which means after failing the temp part it should of just got slapped with a dangerous dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 De Frey V Logan Council Read the 22 point checklist truth............. Self proclaimed experts that taught themselves of the internet. parts of the transcripts. http://victimsofbsl.com/ tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Stating that no one is "qualified" to breed ID is all well and good, however it doesn't translate to practical help for those who find themselves in trouble and without the thousands of disposable dollars to engage a solicitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Alright well you continue to provide your practical help and dont worry about what everyone else does. What is your practical help ? Oh yeh get your dog tempermant tested and "if you have a friendly doggy" you have nothing to worry about. I remember you saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 What you would suggest an owner to do when they already have their NOI and no money for a solicitor ? Citing a case in another state is of very little relevance or help to an owner with an NOI in their hand. My suggestion is to work the current system as best you can, because if you can't afford a court challenge, you are on borrowed time as the clock is already ticking. You would think that after so many years of BSL, the networking would be up to speed and people would know who to choose from the lists and who has the best numbers when it comes to passing dog for BA & TT. They could move state, but again how many people can seriously entertain that idea? You could look to hide your dog, but council already has your chip details and the declaration will go ahead regardless, this just puts an owner in the position of facing massive fines if they fail to comply with the requirements. There's no chance that BSL is going to be overturned within the next 28 days , after an owner has an NOI. For people looking to purchase a new puppy or dog, they really should look at buying from an ethical ANKC registered breeder and avoid being caught up in BSL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyosha Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 So excuse a nub question - is there an organised NSW anti BSL movement? I gather that there is...? Cases like this should be forming part of a submission to Parliament to review the legislation and particularly the appointment of testers and conduction of tests. These tests need to be recorded - visual and audio - as well. The inability to appeal Restricted Breed decisions needs to be reviewed in line with the Constitution. But unless a group is really organised, they aren't going to be obtaining Constitutional Law advice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 But why was the dog declared restricted? Wasnt it assesed as only part ? Which means after failing the temp part it should of just got slapped with a dangerous dog. If this particular dog didn't fail the TT, even though It Is only part, It would have been able to live a "normal" life, but because It failed the TT It gets the same restrictions as a restricted breed, that being because It was assessed as being "part of" a restricted breed. My suggestion is to work the current system as best you can, because if you can't afford a court challenge, you are on borrowed time as the clock is already ticking. You would think that after so many years of BSL, the networking would be up to speed and people would know who to choose from the lists and who has the best numbers when it comes to passing dog for BA & TT. That may be the case, but I don't think It Is for the average joe blow whom as I understand It Is not in receipt of this list until the NOI Is issued, and then It's like playing Russian roulette on who they pick! I'm not even going to go into the BA part here , but the TT, well that was utterly disgusting, I'm sure all of my dogs would have failed as well, what kind of dog would have just sat there and smiled?? maybe a stuffed one! And the fact that It can't be challenged after the BA & TT just shows how flawed It all Is, I thought everything In a court of law has the grounds for an appeal Someone really needs to take this further In court, maybe all we need Is a few wins, to get the ball rolling In changing the system, once It's been proven as a total sham, surely there maybe some layers who do pro bono to start of with? Ok I've had my jumpin up n down fit ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shapeshifter Posted July 20, 2009 Share Posted July 20, 2009 the drama here isnt disputing what they were advised, its the way in which dogs are being identified by persons who are not qualified to do so (amstaff people or not) and the ridiculousw way they are temperment tested... if everyone had to subject their dog in the same situation how many could honestly say their dog would pass? I don't tend to post much these day but I wanted to answer your question. There is no way my dog would have passed that assessment, and what dog do I have you ask, a Tenterfield terrier... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butch's dad Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Is there an organised antiBSL movement in Australia? Has anyone got a web address for this group or a website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now