Odin

[jaysteph]

Law and ‘Beware of the Dog’ Signs
The law takes a peculiar stance when it comes to the use of ‘beware of the dog’ signs.

If such a sign is on display when the dog attacks a trespasser, then its owner is liable for prosecution, because it could be argued that by displaying the sign they knew the dog was dangerous. However, if the dog attacks an intruder when no sign is visible then the court would decree that the owner was unaware of the threat of the animal, and is therefore not liable for court action.

So for those considering a sign, according to the law if you have a harmless pet dog then by all means display a ‘beware of the dog’ sign as a deterrent, but if you have a dog that would be liable to attack an intruder then don’t, as you might get into trouble.

[ianhurley]

where do these feckers come from, i bet she's a veggie, living in her wishy, washy world, well wakey feckin wakey.pmsl ;D ;D

[ianhurley]

Apr 15, 2009 20:52:39 GMT Jessica said:

We had a sign up and have now taken it down for that reason it dont cover us for insurance - its a grey area because of it being private property.
Ivana and Butch gaurd our property and are roaming - they both do the job very differently but im preety sure no one would try getting around nearly 200lb of meaty dogs!?
Odin is a cool fella - got huge feet!!! lol

you would think that with a polar bear, but theirs always some feckin nutter out there.

[jaysteph]

lol this is the mad world we live in

[ianhurley]

you got that right buddy.

[ash]

so dont put a sign up even tho the dog could bite and u know this it b ok and if u dog isnt dangerous but you put up a sign just incase you could get done is tha wa its sayin if it is tha madness

[Griffa]

this country is mad aint it. my drivin instructor was sayin that wen he was in the u.s he had a break in and he said he shot him in the leg and he reckons the cops took the piss out of him for not killin him said he was a coward dunno how true it was but u wouldnt do that here. they have more rights then us

[jaysteph]

Apr 15, 2009 21:00:07 GMT ash said:

so dont put a sign up even tho the dog could bite and u know this it b ok and if u dog isnt dangerous but you put up a sign just incase you could get done is tha wa its sayin if it is tha madness

aint to sure mate im as stumped as u but this is the info i found so thought i would share it.(just to make sure every 1 was as confused as me lol)

[Griffa]

i have an ali way down the back off our house were any one can walk you get kids and that drinkin ans smashing bottles its a quite ruff area but because i walk my dog around most of the time the all no wat will be waitin for them so i think thats a nuff to make them change there minds lol i would like to see some chav drop over my fence i bet they would bounce back up the 7ft drop quick as

[jaysteph]

lol my mate made that mistake tried coming through the back gate good job i was in always nocks on front door now lol

[muze]

There are laws governing the use of guard dogs, really they need to be under the control of a handler at all times (although this is rarely enforced).

The DDA does not apply to private property but the Dogs Act 1871 does and if the dog is considered to be dangerous, or has attacked, they it can be seized and destroyed, whatever its breed.

The RSPCA also has something to say about dogs kept chained, it is frowned upon under the AWA.
The sign thing is daft, another symptom of our compensation culture, best to have sign that says 'dogs running free' as this warns people with implying that the dog is danger.

The law is quite simple really, if you keep a dangerous dog then it must be under control at all times. It is the responsible thing to do, especially with bullbreeds, the circumstances of attacks rarely make the papers, but the breed of dog will.

[mbb]

great looking dog

and good point muze