Simply Grand Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 41 minutes ago, Diva said: Only if we take his post as gospel. I don't. I don't either. Lawyers don't generally go around doing legal work for people who don't want it done, especially if they don't even believe that person has a case. And of course the actions of one rescue group aren't a reflection on any other group but I have first hand experience of those running a rescue group blantantly lying to try and make themselves look better when they have done something wrong so I take what this group says with a grain of salt. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Two sides to a story... and the actual truth is usually somewhere in the middle... So the owner had to go home to QLD after 5 days... without finding where her dogs had gotten to... maybe she had business/work back home that couldn't be postponed? And most interstate travellers have no idea how the impounding system works in NSW - heck, most NSW folk have no idea about it either. From what I can gather, the owner had no idea that the dogs had even been found by anyone by the time she had to go back home - let alone how to find the local pound to check whether they were there. So the dogs arrived at the Victorian rescue underweight and with skin issues... which could have happened during their stay in a NSW country pound... which aren't always run to a high standard of care (not saying this pound was sub-standard, as I'm not familiar with it). Stress of being away from their family in an unfamiliar place, with other distressed animals barking or howling, could contribute to a dog dropping weight and/or developing stress alopecia. 2 weeks is a long time to be stressed... T. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two Best Dogs! Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 On 3/25/2017 at 5:45 PM, jemappelle said: That's interesting because I have sent quite a few kittens interstate over the many years that microchipping has been law in NSW, and never had any problems transferring the microchip details to the new owners. Also, now, we can do it ourselves online which is even more convenient. Yeah I was shown the system! I registered on it with help so now can update it myself. But prior to that, they just wouldn't change my details over and would only put in the "note" section that she's owned interstate! Had an email to that effect too It's water under the bridge now, got the chip updated, but it was such a stressful venture I don't want to repeat it! I go on road trips a lot, and sometimes to NSW. I'd hate for some ranger to get lazy and only look as far as the phone number on the nsw registry (which wasn't my number!) and hand her right back to the pound my rescue pulled her from. Imagine if I was in the situation these owners were in! I can imagine the made up facts already, "dogs only run away for a reason (or maybe got lost...), this dog is so scared must be abused (surrounded by strangers is scary!), this dog is so skinny must be abused (drops a kilogram each day she stressed!), this dog flinches at sudden movements (she's a timid dog!) must be abused must be from a bad home (or she's shit scared in a strange place with strange people and is just a timid but loved dog)". I've got notes on all my chips and even the physical ID tag stating she's a scared but loved rescue because people are so eager in the lost dog groups to fabricate stories of abuse if the lost dog looks tired or scared or muddy or hungry. I feel for these staffie owners. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asal Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) Yes its only pet owners that are allowed to be pilloried as guilty until or unless PROVEN innocent, no place for innocent until proven otherwise or a grain of doubt, the vilification is sickening and incredibly distressing for those being slandered, and wonder who taught Jo public that eh? Just the sight of a well known brand on a vehicle outside or inside your gate and your reputation is gone. Edited April 1, 2017 by asal 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 I do not for one minute believe at least half of that rescue's post. If they have nothing to apologise for then say nothing. Don't engage if you think you are being treated badly by someone who doesn't matter. Hopefully the truth will come out in court or at least some sense of truth will come out. She may not have been the perfect pet owner but she was still the legal owner. I know from experience how hard it is to find a missing pet within your own local area, let alone somewhere you were on holidays at. That council has a lot to answer for. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Hmmm heard something similar before. Rescue saying they "believe" the dogs weren't looked after by their true owner so they are justified in keeping them... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simply Grand Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, WoofnHoof said: Hmmm heard something similar before. Rescue saying they "believe" the dogs weren't looked after by their true owner so they are justified in keeping them... Me too, many times. And a rescue group (not the one involved in this case) stating that they hope particular (desirable breed) dogs aren't reclaimed from the pound during the legal hold time so they can "save" them 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottsmum Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 I dont buy this "why would much loved pets run away" bullshit. Given a moment. Given half a second, Scottie will take himself on an "adventure". He never leaves the house or yard without a leash any more (and even when he coukd hear it was iffy then too). Not even to bring the bin in. I am under no false pretense that he would come back. He might. Eventually, after his fun was finished. And if he did he'd be more likely to be hit by a car than to make it back safely. Yes, i know its terrible behavior & training on my part, but I deal with what I have. His inability to recall should not reflect the love I have for him or be evidence to show im a terrible pet owner 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 God help me if Harper ever found herself in a pound/rescue. She has bad nerve that she was born with - scared of everything and anything she has never encountered before... a dodgy rescue could very easily decide to say that she was abused or worse, which couldn't be further from the truth. With me, she is a cheeky monster... but she just doesn't cope with strange/new situations well at all. When I've had to board Harper in the past, I always tell the people that she may carry on, but if they give her food/treats, she's gonna be their best friend forever... and she's been just fine after the first night. She has never bitten anyone, despite the carry on that indicates she isn't sure about the situation. As for Pickles - on her chip, the notes say "yes she walks funny - that is normal for her"... in case she is ever picked up and they think she's been hurt or something. God only knows what a dodgy rescue would be able to make up about Pickles... errr! On the upside, she is terribly social with strangers... lol! My experience is that lots of dogs may be happy to have the chance to wander and check out new environments given half a chance... and if that is in completely unfamiliar territory (on holiday interstate for example), then they could easily stray too far and get lost... this is NOT due to bad owners, it's simple dog nature given the chance. T. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boronia Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 3 hours ago, Scottsmum said: I dont buy this "why would much loved pets run away" bullshit. Given a moment. Given half a second, Scottie will take himself on an "adventure". He never leaves the house or yard without a leash any more (and even when he coukd hear it was iffy then too). Not even to bring the bin in. I am under no false pretense that he would come back. He might. Eventually, after his fun was finished. And if he did he'd be more likely to be hit by a car than to make it back safely. Yes, i know its terrible behavior & training on my part, but I deal with what I have. His inability to recall should not reflect the love I have for him or be evidence to show im a terrible pet owner So true SM, Henry and Saffy would be off like rockets following animal trails in the undergrowth, their recall is good if they want to come back but non-existent when there is a ratty/bandicoot/wallaby scent to follow. What a stupid comment that is! The sarcasm is not helping either 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karen15 Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 I think what a lot of people are failing to realise is that, regardless of their weight or skin condition, you can't just take an animal belonging to someone else because you don't like the way they look after it. If that was the test there would be a lot of dogs that would be able to find better homes. That of course is entirely based on my definition of better. Someone else may think the animals are looked after just fine, and another person could have a totally different view of what constitutes better. Abuse is entirely different and that is why there are bodies to report abuse to. I know when my staffy was young, he had terrible foot problems. Lots of vet visits and treatments and finally found something that fixed them. If the rescue involved here had found him while we were still working out treatment they would have been alleging neglect because of the issue, which could not have been further from the truth. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 I've had people dispute what breed my Labrador is because she's not fat... *sigh*... she is lovely, lean, and fit... and at 11, can outrun most 5 year old Labs with ease... *grin* T. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottsmum Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Boronia said: So true SM, Henry and Saffy would be off like rockets following animal trails in the undergrowth, their recall is good if they want to come back but non-existent when there is a ratty/bandicoot/wallaby scent to follow. What a stupid comment that is! The sarcasm is not helping either Oh, yes, on his terms he's great ;) We've only had him 3.5 years - and 1 of them he's been deaf - so as I said, I work with what we've got. But again, as others have said re- weight and medical conditions - if willingness to recall was an offense punishable by having your pet taken from you he'd be long gone AND don't even start me on Timmy the greyhound who we used to go to "obedience" with 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valbitz Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lhok Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 So has this case set the precendant for rescues then? That if a rescue rehomes a dog that the owner is wants back the owner has no claim on the dog at all? --Lhok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted June 3, 2018 Author Share Posted June 3, 2018 I'd be more worried that it's ok for a council to not contact the microchipped owner. When you get a dog out of the pound you expect that everything has been done to find the owner and that it's fine to rehome. This council doesn't even have a website for people to see their dogs on. They go straight onto a rescue specific FB group and get dibs on them there. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loving my Oldies Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) "It is a very important case because had Ms Holborn being successful in getting her dogs back it would have set a very bad precedent for not just all dog rescue organisations but for people adopting dogs from dog rescue organisations." Frankly, I think it is a disgusting result. The dogs should have been returned to their rightful owner. I’ve not read the full story or followed the saga, but went quickly to their website. Everyone is congratulating them so I guess I have missed something ?? Council should have been sued for not doing their job in the first place. Edited June 4, 2018 by Dame Danny's Darling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two Best Dogs! Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Having it stop because the case is discontinued (funds?) doesn’t provide any information at all as to what the hell happened and why newly rehomed dogs were not returned/why they didn’t return them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karen15 Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Having a case discontinued by one party does not create a legal precedent. Legal precedent is only created when judges rule on cases. Same as Thistle my first thought was owner ran out of money. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuralPug Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) In my view the ranger was at fault for not checking the chips - they were aware the dogs were chipped, but not on the NSW register. Basically council failed to check the national registers (which they were required to do) and caused the whole brouhaha. Next it wasn't very nice of the rescue to advise the previous owner (AFTER the dogs had been rehomed) that her dogs had been found and were alive and she couldn't get them back so bad luck. I feel that as soon as the rescue rec'd the chip numbers they should have queried the pound - yes, they had probably paid for transport at that time (unless it was pledged) but I suspect that if they had asked nicely the owner would have reimbursed the transport fees and paid to fly her dogs back. Since she was willing to pay $1,000's in legal fees I think she would have bellied up for transport costs and reimbursed the rescue any costs. So that rescue is no longer one I recommend. The whole thing gives rescue a bad name. No precedents have been sent whatsoever, Edited June 4, 2018 by RuralPug 2 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