The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 outlaws four types of dog, the best known of which is the pit bull terrier. It illegal to own or have possession of a pit bull terrier unless it has been registered on the Index of Exempted Dogs, and the dog and owner abide by a number of restrictions. The dog must be neutered, micro-chipped, insured, tattooed with an exemption number and muzzled and kept on a lead held by a person over 16 years of age whenever it is in a public place.
If, as the owner of a registered dog, you were to die or become unable to look after your dog any longer then your dog would be liable to be destroyed as the Dangerous Dogs Act prohibits selling, giving away or abandoning a pit bull terrier. There are a handful of cases where the courts have allowed a change of keepership (as opposed to ownership) in order to avoid destruction but such cases are few and far between and Defra are likely to oppose any further applications of this nature.
A dog does not have to be an American Pit Bull Terrier to be illegal. Instead the courts are concerned with “type”. Whether a dog is a pit bull type is determined by comparison with a breed standard published in 1977 by the American Dog Breeders Association. If a dog shares a substantial number of characteristics with that breed standard then it will be deemed to be a pit bull type dog, regardless of parentage. Therefore, if you were to cross a pedigree boxer with a pedigree Staffordshire bull terrier, the resulting rangy cross-bred dog would, regardless of temperament, very probably be a pit bull terrier that was liable to seizure and destruction.
If found guilty of owning a banned type you may be able to register a dog on the Index of Exempted Dogs is the courts are satisfied that you are a responsible owner and that your dog does not pose a danger to the public. If you fail to satisfy the courts of the above your dog will be destroyed.
Court proceedings under section one of the Dangerous Dogs Act are lengthy and expensive. Prior to the proceedings being initiated police usually seize the dogs and place them in kennels until the conclusion of the proceedings. In one recently concluded case three dogs were found not to be pit bull types after trial and were released by police. The dogs had been in kennels for eighteen months at a cost to the tax payer in the region of £23,000 in kennelling costs alone.
The police are under pressure to reduce the cost of kennelling seized dogs. In the ten month period between the end of February 2009 and the beginning of January 2010 the Metropolitan Police spent just under £2 million kennelling dogs while their fate was being decided. The bill was picked up by the tax-payer. Lord Harris, former chairman to the Metropolitan Police Authority has recently queried why the seized dogs can’t just be put down. Superintendant Julia Pendry, who has responsibility for the Metropolitan Police Status Dogs Unit, has stated “It would be absolutely fantastic if we could destroy these dogs”. So the police would like to destroy 470 dogs none of which have done anything wrong other than to be unfortunate enough to be a rangy cross-breed dog that shares a substantial number of physical characteristics with a pit bull terrier.
The easiest way to reduce kenneling costs is to stop seizing these dogs and allow them to remain at home until the conclusion of the proceedings. Clearly this would not be an appropriate measure if the dog were to pose a risk to the public but, of the 498 suspected pit bull type dogs seized in the aforementioned ten month period, only 28 of these dogs had caused fear of injury to a person. The police therefore seized 470 cross-bred dogs that had not behaved dangerously at a cost to the tax payer of £2 million.
As more and more people become aware of the unfairness of breed specific legislation there are increasing calls for s1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act to be repealed. Repeal of this section would instantly reduce the amount of money spent on kenneling. In the meantime, if the police want to reduce their kenneling costs they could perhaps consider the approach Merseyside police have taken whereby they assess both dog and owner and, if they are satisfied there is no risk to the public, they allow the dog to remain at home until the day before the court hearing provided the owner signs an agreement to keep the dog on a lead and muzzled whenever it is in a public place and agrees to get the dog neutered and tattooed. A more enlightened approach than the Metropolitan police who would prefer to destroy a dog who’s only crime is to be a mongrel that is unfortunate enough to share some physical characteristics with a pit bull terrier.
Author Resource:-
Daniel Nash is the customer relationship manager of Wheldon Law,leading provider of Dangerous Dogs Law UK.You are welcome to look our guideline and legal right solutions regarding personal injury problems by best personal lawyers in UK.
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://www.freearticlez.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites
