It says Women right in the title
Woman, 41, killed in dog attack in Aberdeen
The incident happened at a flat in the city's Foresterhill Road on Saturday night.www.bbc.co.uk
Another one, breed not revealed.
Does something need to be done about dogs?
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,683
Woman, 41, killed in dog attack in Aberdeen
The incident happened at a flat in the city's Foresterhill Road on Saturday night.www.bbc.co.uk
Another one, breed not revealed.
That makes it ten for 2024, over double the long-term average number.
Second highest year on record (afyer 2023, 16).
Last edited:
Honestly I don't think they realised it had got me quite so bad. I'm a regular there and they were helpful, but they're also just 19-20 year olds working in a pub. I don't blame them for not wanting to intervene and also get bitten.
They don't, I've asked the pub across the road if they do but haven't had a reply yet.
"A bit bitey" was paraphrasing, but she had told them it was a rescue and could be aggressive.
Independent, I'm not going to sue them. I don't blame anyone but the owner.
Go to a solicitor and in addition to the police report/crime see if you can pursue a civil case against both the woman and the brewery/pub - worth going after both in case she's on a low income and comes up with some BS about how she can only afford £1 a week. - Edit - if it's a registered XL Bully (might well be given the muzzle) then she's required to have third-party liability insurance ergo definitely sue her - you're potentially owed a few grand:
Tried a quick google:
If the police are otherwise being lazy then at least there could still be some consequences for her but really they need to both confiscate that dog/put it down and ban her from owning a dangerous breed + criminal punishment and a payout in civil court too - ditto to the pub, staff were negligent and helped cause that after being told about the danger - pub (hopefully brewery chain as a whole) might be prompted to update their guidelines/staff training.
I have given the owners details to the police and proceeded with an interview/statement. I believe they intend to prosecute if it can't be resolved via less formal means.
I've also contacted a solicitor and they seem keen to make a claim on a no win, no fee basis.
Update on the bite after 3 days, again ignore the fatness.
Holy-moly that's a bruise and a half.
Also totally agree with @dowie and his advice, - also not surprised a solicitor will give you a no-win no fee on that, the owner of the dog was clearly in the wrong.
Totally push ahead with this, that dog needs to be seized and you're certainly due some compensation, - imagine if you'd have had a child with you.. (or somebody else's child next week)
Also totally agree with @dowie and his advice, - also not surprised a solicitor will give you a no-win no fee on that, the owner of the dog was clearly in the wrong.
Totally push ahead with this, that dog needs to be seized and you're certainly due some compensation, - imagine if you'd have had a child with you.. (or somebody else's child next week)
Last edited:
That sounds like lazy BS on the part of the police, I wouldn't drop this - there isn't a less formal way of dealing with this really - she needs to be prosecuted and that needs to go on her record so she's not given an exemption for a dangerous breed in future.
Also, the dog needs to be confiscated and destroyed.
Yeah, that's a nasty bit of bruising - not surprised they're happy to go after her, potentially a few grand from her insurance.
Also, importantly, if the insurance has had to pay out because she's owned a banned breed + let it attack someone then getting insurance again is going to be more difficult.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,426
We don't know if the dog was a dangerous or prohibited breed, whether she had an exemption, or anything else about it.
What we do know is that she knew the dog had problems and/or her handling wasn't up to scratch, yet she deliberately removed all restraints and let it free in a public place. Her ignorance of the results here suggest she's ignorant of many other negligences.
Forget exemptions - At the very least her sentencing should include permanent prohibition from ever owning or having charge over a dog.
Not necessarily.
Depending on age and general behaviour, it may be possible to rehome with a competent owner. Admitedly not especially likely, but that option should be explored first.
She herself claimed it's an XL bully and is registered in a FB post earlier this year. I agree with the rest of your post though, especially re-homing/training the dog with someone competent.
Despite what you'd like to believe XL Bullies are both dangerous and prohibited under the DDA - whether she had an exemption or not doesn't negate that. Given she had a muzzle for it and that has been a legal requirement since earlier this year along with registration then it seems pretty likely she does have an exemption.
Yes necessarily - it's a dangerous breed and has attacked - you can't rehome it, you need to destroy it.
As much as I love dogs, and it hurts me to see them get put down or destroyed - I also wouldn't blame the dog for this, it's likely more the owner being a ****.
But in the final analysis, if a dog like that can just 'go off' unprovoked at the drop of a hat and do that much damage to an adult, only an insane person would allow the owner to keep it.
I'd say, that if there was a specialist home it could go to, to live out it's days I'd support that, but those places are already overflowing with similar problem breeds.
I find the whole situation heartbreaking, but these things are just too dangerous.
But in the final analysis, if a dog like that can just 'go off' unprovoked at the drop of a hat and do that much damage to an adult, only an insane person would allow the owner to keep it.
I'd say, that if there was a specialist home it could go to, to live out it's days I'd support that, but those places are already overflowing with similar problem breeds.
I find the whole situation heartbreaking, but these things are just too dangerous.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,426
I must have missed that in a previous post somewhere.
With that in mind, the law and the situation is different. Law will almost certainly require the dog to be destroyed then, and while the situation is that it could theoretically still be rehomed, there ain't a snowball's chance in hell anyone would take on that task.
A wonderful put-down and utter destruction of my argument. Yes, sir, you win again. Good for you.... except that it hinges on assuming I was aware of something, which you can tell from my post I clearly wasn't.
Besides which, Rai already addressed the point several hours ahead of you, and in a far more productive manner.
Rai also did not ASSume to know my beliefs, even though they're already explained in detail, so again your response is unnecessary, unfounded and unhelpful.
Regardless of your waffle, my point still stands - Permanently ban her from ownership entirely, along with any additional punishments and penalties.
I honestly don't know with you tbh.. I can only go on what you've written and I'm not a mind reader - you've argued plenty of times in favour of XL bullies.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,426
And what I wrote, which you quoted, quite clearly shows that I had not seen any confirmation of breed (beyond Rai's guess based on appearance).
It's clear, as Rai actually understood, so any failure to comprehend is on you.
I have argued in favour of those dogs not being twisted to fit the status mould. Where they have been, as is the case with so many of those the UK has imported, it is a different story. You know this.