Pait, aged 44, appeared before magistrates earlier this week and admitted a charge of being the owner of a dog which was dangerously out of control in a public place.
Judge Bennett placed Pait on a one-month curfew order, ordered her to pay £85 costs and £200 to Mr Thompson, and made a contingency destruction order on the dog to keep it under proper control and muzzled.
He also ordered her to erect high fencing all the way round her house and fit a secure gate so the Alsatian cannot get out. If the orders are breached the case will come back to court for the animal to be destroyed.That’ll cost her a pretty penny, right?
St Leger Homes, which owns Pait’s council house, has opted not to evict her but will help her comply with District Judge Jonathan Bennett’s order to erect a high fence all the way around her house in Welfare Road, Woodlands.*sigh*
The court was told Mr Thompson was returning to his home one Saturday morning when he was pounced on by the dog and knocked to the pavement.
When Mrs Brown screamed the owner appeared and called the animal off but Mr Thompson was rendered unconscious and needed hospital treatment for a head injury.Mr Thompson is 87. He’s lucky to be alive.
The ‘attack’ may not have been anything more than a boisterous dog jumping up at him, though. I can’t find any other report of it.
But unless the cost is being borne by Pait and the agency is merely agreeing to the alterations to comply with the court order, it means she’s getting away with the implicit costs of being a responsible dog owner.
And that’s wrong.
It's right that the council should bear some of the financial cost for letting such an unsuitable property to a dog owner in the first place.
The rules governing tenants owning pets shouldn't just be about whether they make a mess of the inside of the property.
If people will not take responsibility for their dogs the council could at least make them think about what they'd rather have...a subsidised home or a pet. If they choose both then there's responsibilities to be upheld on both sides.
...house in Welfare Road
A metaphor for the times in which we live or an actual address?
Why can't the judiciary, when dealing with cases like this, order the animal to be sent to a proper home and the owner be put down? In the long run, it'll save us all a load of problems!
"It's right that the council should bear some of the financial cost for letting such an unsuitable property to a dog owner in the first place."
Maybe she wasn't a dog owner when the property was let?
"A metaphor for the times in which we live or an actual address?"
It does appear to be an actual address. How prophetic.
"Why can't the judiciary, when dealing with cases like this, order the animal to be sent to a proper home and the owner be put down?"
Society is to blame - it is everyone's fault so everyone should share the cost, well those who pay taxes that is, but you get what I am saying.
Post a Comment