News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


BROMLEY: Dog owners may be forced to pay insurance


DOG OWNERS could soon be forced to insure their dogs against their pet attacking someone under new government proposals.

The proposals have been put forward to tackle dangerous breeds and could mean police and local authorities could also force owners to muzzle the animals and even have them neutered.

Last year the Met Police received 1,070 calls about dangerous dogs and in the last six weeks Bromley police has received 22 calls about dangerous dogs.

Walter Colaluca has strong views on the subject after his Jack Russell, Teddy, was mauled last month by a pit ball type dog.

The 83-year-old from South Hill, Chislehurst, said: “I don’t think there is any such thing as a dangerous dog.

“They are like children and it is up to the owners how they are brought up.

“What about the people who can’t afford this extra insurance, would the dogs be taken away?”

If the proposals goes ahead it will amend the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act, which bans four breeds; the pit bull terrier, the fila brasileiro, the Japanese tosa and the dogo argentino.

Under the act police have the power to deal with any dog, no matter what their breed, which is out of control in a public place - with the ultimate decision of destroying the animal.

However, if a dog not on the banned list causes injury on private property it is not covered by the act, but under the proposals this would change.

The legislation also includes compulsory micro-chipping and third-party insurance for dog owners to ensure attack victims are compensated.

The proposals were revealed by Environment Secretary Hilary Benn and Home Secretary Alan Johnson, who say the consultation is a response to concerns about the way some people use animals to intimidate or threaten people.

A spokesman for Bromley police said: “Dogs are not born dangerous, they become dangerous because they are neglected, abused or through bad management.

"Bromley police are working to tackle the issue of dangerous dogs in the borough with our partners and targeting and arresting people using dogs in an anti social manner.

"We will not hesitate to prosecute the owners of dangerous dogs."

For more information or to give you opinion on the consultation, visit defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/dangerous-dogs/index.htm

Comments(12)

It's Me again ! says...
6:40pm Sat 13 Mar 10

Can't see how this well work.

Are owners going to get a producer and 7 days to show their documents? lol

Let's Agree To Differ says...
10:40pm Sat 13 Mar 10

I can't see how insurance will work either. It's almost as if the idea is to say it's OK if your dog attacks someone there's insurance to cover it. Crazy!

Anyway we all know that insurance is only meant to be collected in and not paid out so there will be copious amounts of small print to let the insurance company wriggle out of paying up.

Micro-chipping sounds like a good idea though.

How about actually enforcing existing laws though? That might be a good starting point before thinking about new legislation.

Greenwich borough for example has introduced 'new' rules:
No more than 4 dogs.
All dogs on leads.
Pick up after your dog.

Lovely new signs all over the place which must have cost quite a bit. What difference has it made? None! Absolutely no point if there isn't anyone to enforce it. Despite what Greenwich Time may be claiming about the success of the initiative the rules are broken continuously in my un-patrolled area of Greenwich.

Many dubious looking dogs off the lead and just as much dog's mess on the pavement.

Local lady says...
11:36pm Sat 13 Mar 10

Get your facts right News Shopper and stop frightening people. The insurance on all dogs is something that the Labour party intend to bring in IF they are re elected. They say it will cost £15 per dog per month.
The dog owning fraternity are already saying they will not pay it and will not vote for a party who are so anti dogs. Insteadf why nopt get their dog police (the rspca) to go get the bad boys who fight with dogs and breed or steal them for fighting.
Incidentally anyone who has pet insurance will already have 3rd party cover.

Excalibur says...
8:23am Mon 15 Mar 10

A stupid initiative from a stupid government, perpetrated by the downmarket tabloids stoking up an all consuming fear of dogs. Much like car tax, honest people would comply, the criminals with the dangerous dogs wouldn't.
Thank heavens this government's on its way out.

SeeSomeSense says...
8:40am Mon 15 Mar 10

I've got a simple solution to all this: ban dogs! They stink, they bite, they foul public places and their owners think that people who don't like dogs should just grin and bear it. Okay, I'll just grin when I step in a load of dog poop, I'll laugh when a dog pees up my car wheel, I'll split my sides when a nasty dog attacks me, I will roll on the floor laughing when a muddy dog bounds towards me in the park and leaps up leaving mud all over my best suit and I will absolutely KILL MYSEF LAUGHING when my children go blind after playing on grass which has been infected by the filth that dogs leave in their wake. What a big joke the whole thing is! Insurance for dogs? They should put them all down!!!

Eagles_Man says...
6:15pm Mon 15 Mar 10

"I've got a simple solution to all this: ban dogs! They stink, they bite, they foul public places and their owners think that people who don't like dogs should just grin and bear it."

... or ...

"I've got a simple solution ...: ban children! They shout, they bite, they make a nuisance in public places and their parents think that people who don't like children should just grin and bear it."

The angriest people when it comes to badly behaved dogs is other dog owners - they give us all a bad name. When I step in a pile of dog mess I don't blame the dog and demand that a whole species is banned; I blame the owner. (And if they are parents, they're usually the ones with the badly behaved children!)

SE9,10,18 says...
6:54pm Mon 15 Mar 10

SeeSomeSense believes all dogs should be shot and that the only acceptable dogs are miniature poodles according to another thread..... But also believes that cats are hygienic, and do their "poopy" in neat little holes where no-one will be blinded. The fact is all animals excrement. Every single one including us. We are supposedly intelligent and do it down a toilet. A dog doesnt have the brain capacity to use a toilet. So if people want to own them, they need to be responsible and clear up after them. The government brings in policies but never enforces them, so its a pointless exercise and a waste of tax payers money. I agree with Let's about Greenwich Council. All these signs but still pavements covered in dog muck. I have a dog, I love dogs. But I have kids too. I have a baby in a pushchair some times if Im not at uni and its a minefield dodging it!

SE9,10,18 says...
6:54pm Mon 15 Mar 10

SeeSomeSense believes all dogs should be shot and that the only acceptable dogs are miniature poodles according to another thread..... But also believes that cats are hygienic, and do their "poopy" in neat little holes where no-one will be blinded. The fact is all animals excrement. Every single one including us. We are supposedly intelligent and do it down a toilet. A dog doesnt have the brain capacity to use a toilet. So if people want to own them, they need to be responsible and clear up after them. The government brings in policies but never enforces them, so its a pointless exercise and a waste of tax payers money. I agree with Let's about Greenwich Council. All these signs but still pavements covered in dog muck. I have a dog, I love dogs. But I have kids too. I have a baby in a pushchair some times if Im not at uni and its a minefield dodging it!

Wimwams says...
9:45am Tue 16 Mar 10

When i was younger i was badly attacked by a dog, half my ear come off and i have bad scaring on my leg.

I now have a staffordshire bullterrier and i feel that it is the way a dog is bought up to how they behave... i would still not trust any dog 100%.

SeeSomeSense says...
8:22pm Tue 16 Mar 10

In answer to SE9's ridiculous accusation that I believe 'all dogs should be shot', I simply stated on another thread that country folk have the right idea when it comes to dogs. Dogs should have a purpose, rounding up sheep for example, not making pests of themselves in public places by pooping and peeing on the grass and pavements. Country folk realise that dogs are bred to work, not to lounge on the settee at home and spread their hairs all over the house. Obviously, when working dogs are too old to work and have outlived their usefulness, their country owners do everyone - including the dogs, I might add - a huge favour by despatching the hounds quickly and humanely with a well-aimed shot to the head. Greyhounds are another example; when they are no longer capable of winning races they are done away with HUMANELY. A happy greyhound is one that runs with the pack and should not be made to suffer the tedium of retirement with some old granny who is too frail to take it for a decent run.
Townies must realise that dogs originate from wolves and need the great outdoors, not the centrally heated indoors of suburban bungalows.
Miniature poodles are a totally different matter entirely as they are usually carried by their owners and their bottoms are clipped on a regular basis, which in turn prevents 'clinkers' from dropping onto the carpet and the owner's clothes.
Yorkshire 'terriorists', those snappy little scruffbags that like nothing better than to nip the ankles of every Tom, Dick and Harriet in a high street near you, should be reclassified as vermin and dealt with accordingly. A Yorkie is no better than a rat with a shaggy tail and people who own these creatures are the sort who need something to fuss over, especially when the last of their kids leave home. These sad people are so desperate to smother these yappy child substitutes in love and affection that they actually dress them in little tartan jackets when the wind blows too cold or the sky comes over a bit cloudy. Yorkshire terriorists are the cabbage patch dolls of the dog world and reflect the loneliness of parents whose offspring have flown the parental nest. Actually, Yorkies would be the perfect substitute for the artificial hares that run on rails at greyhound meetings!

SE9,10,18 says...
6:29pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Terriorists hahahaha thats hilarious

Let's Agree To Differ says...
8:33pm Thu 18 Mar 10

SeeSomeSense can I officially adopt you as my new best mate. Loving your work!

I do have a dog though!


Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses