UKC

Scenario: An old friend of man years has a son who went off the rails as a youngster and continued into his 30's, eventually I was told yesterday that he was sectioned under the mental health act and sent to a hospital in Stevenage. My friend is a single mother bringing up 4 alone, 3 of them have done great, one finished university and now works in TV, another finished Uni and is in the process of starting a family, and the youngest on her way to university. And so 3 out of 4 ain't bad.
Anyway, about a year ago she told me that her son had got himself a dog that he couldn't look after and the dog should not be with him. But as he was very alone and couldn't look after himself I guess the dog got overlooked, or not a priority as anything that was helping him was a good thing.

Anyway, over the weekend he was sectioned and the dog just left in the garden, no food or shelter. My friend called, the neighbours called, everyone who could call did call the RSPCA to explain the situation and that the dog needs taken away. When I found out yesterday that the dog was still in the garden, and people were throwing it scraps I even offered to call to get things moving, but it appears everyone has been calling every da and the RSPCA has still not been out to collect the dog.

Now I don't know much about the RSPCA, I've never had any experience with them, but the appear NOT to have the animals welfare at heart in this case. I guess the dog needs to have died before they will intervene ay?

Hopeless!

In reply to Dominicandave:
They aren't the best. Any idea if/when the son is coming home? Will the mum sign the paperwork to hand the dog over?

You could try posting here and see if anyone can help. http://www.dogpages.org.uk/forums/index.php?

In reply to Dominicandave:

My wife manages the local council dog warden and has many similar bad experiences of the RSPCA

Seems their only function is to accept bequests from wealthy old ladies so they can pay their CEO's large salary

In reply to Dominicandave:

I'd give them a call yourself. Might be a case of 'everyone' thinking someone else must have called, when in fact no one has. Try and tie them down to a plan of action and chase them up again if / when it doesn't happen.

In reply to Hat Dude:

That's a good point, will the council be able to help get them out?

In reply to marsbar:

Possibly, it's worth giving them a call
I'm not sure of the situation as the dog isn't actually a stray

In reply to Dominicandave:

If someone has been sectioned, that hinders the RSPCA's MO of escalating the situation to a court case they can use as PR in their tin rattling exercise, so they loose interest?

I would talk to the local council - dog warden and failing that environmental health. Failing that, the local police.

In reply to Dominicandave:

When we rescued my dog, the mother and the rest of the litter we had a similar experience. They were rescued from a farm and the worst part was that they actually tipped off the farmer to have a clean up so they wouldn't need to take any action!

In reply to marsbar:

Yes, my friend has called and has wanted the dog taken from him for a long time. She has called for sure, she is reliable like that. She would sign it over in an instant, although it is not her dog, nothing to do with her in reality, she's just looking out for its interests.
No one can understand why no one will take the dog away. The son will be away a slong as it takes and from what I gather is in no condition to look after himself never mind a dog anyway.

Just seems rather a sad effort at an animal welfare organization, pathetic infact.

In reply to Dominicandave:

Keep calling them, as long as you have some one to sign the paperwork they can take the dog. They will avoid it because looking after dogs isn't cheap.

Alternatively try other rescues locally. Don't bother with dogs trust, unless the dog is perfect, they won't take it.

Fwiw I ended up with my dog in a not dissimilar way when the RCPCA wouldn't take him.

It took several days for them to collect neighbours abandoned rabbits (moved house without them)

In reply to Dominicandave:

Theyr nobs. They strut around in poncy uniforms telling peple that they are inspectors. Somebody told me once they have no power.

In reply to Dominicandave:

Why haven't his family taken responsibility of the dog?

In reply to Dominicandave:

Put the dog on a bit of string, take it out of the garden, take dog to dog warden, tell dog warden you found it on the street.

In reply to Geronimus:


That is correct, they have no power. However they do have a lot of expensive kit and give the perception of power.

On the positive side, I did read an article that the RSPCA had a new CEO who was trying to tone down the prosecutions possibly as they were high profile and very costly for them.

They are a charity and are not obliged to take the dog, I think.

In reply to Dominicandave:




I'm not a.huge fan of the RSPCA, but I find it a little pathetic that everyone seems to be expecting the RSPCA to step in. Can't someone take the dog in until the son is OK to have it back?

In reply to Geronimus:

They have the same power as any other charity shop worker, but the uniform is lovely...

In reply to timjones:


This was my first thought.

In reply to toad:
Couple of quid to MRT says it's not a fluffy collie cross ?

In reply to Dominicandave:
Similar experience when we found a a very sick and mangey cat in the village , poor thing was on its last legs , rspca and cats protection not intrested , ( bloke at cats protection was very off hand on the phone ) .woman from a small local charity came and checked him for a chip and then took him off to the vets for the inevitable.

In reply to timjones:

If the son has been sectioned and wasn't looking after it before then that might not be a good idea.

In reply to mike123:

If the cat was on its last legs, why didn't you just take it to the vets? They would have checked it for a chip and provided emergency treatment.
Same for this dog, whilst it is annoying that the RSPCA won't come out, they are a charity with limited needs. It's a shame that no one in the family or friends or neighbours of this man can help out with his dog.
These animals always seem to end up as someone else's problem.

In reply to ceri:
As someone who has taken in a couple of stray dogs, taken them to the vet, had them checked over then looked for a new home for them. Even with a helpful vet it still costs you a fair bit of time and money.

It's something I would do now, as I have a child in the house.

In reply to Dominicandave:

If you're worried about the dog and it's on it's isn't there a chance you could go round and take it in for a while?

In reply to Dominicandave:

Social services might help. We put pets in kennels etc if owners are sectioned. If he was sectioned away from home they may not know, if they took him from home and left a bloody dog in the garden, someone needs to take some flack!

In reply to The New NickB:

Emergency treatment of a stray or wild animal will not cost the finder anything. Only if you decide to become the new owner. Please do not let cost put you off taking an unowned cat to the vet. Of course an unowned stray dog is the council's responsibility, so unless it really needs a vet, they should be the 1st port of call. (Whether your area has an out of hours dog warden or not is a different question).

In reply to flopsicle:

Which budget does that come from?! There are people with disabilities having their care hours cut, personally I don't think that it's appropriate for the state to fund kennels in this situation if it's true that he didn't look after the dog before either.

In reply to marsbar:

Pet care can be included for older adults, physical disability and mh. Adults assessed to contribute may need to do so but if sectioned they become exempt for aftercare charges.

I think the point being missed is that the owner was sectioned. This is not the same as a bit of a holiday. An Approved Mental Health Professional would have acted to remove an animal's carer and food source. It's therefore unreasonable to leave the animal to starve. As noted above RSPCA are useless.

In reply to flopsicle:

I'm not saying the dog should have been left to starve. However the op makes me question if the dog was being fed and cared for before the sectioning. I don't think it's a good use of public money to kennel a dog for an unlimited time to return it to the owner if the owner wasn't looking after it to start with. I'm well aware that sectioning isn't a holiday, but if someone can't look after themselves and can't look after the dog, the dog should be rehomed.

In reply to marsbar:
The dog's care prior may or may not have been adequate but he had not faced any charges for neglect. You can't just rock up, remove an owner, leave a dog alone and then remove it without any formal process or investigation! People can recover from mh issues, and many conditions that are not fully recoverable from can be controlled and helped by treatment.

The idea that mentally ill people have reduced rights to animals than anyone else (lawfully removing against owner's will requires legal process, evidence and importantly opportunity to defend), is objectionable and hails to some if our worst attitudes to mh.

As for how to spend funds, offering often minimal support so that a pet can be kept can provide a vital protective factor from suicide, constant companionship and a source of motivation. It is often money very well spent.

In reply to flopsicle:

With rights come responsibilities. The balancing act is the right of the dog to a safe and happy life, the rights of the owner to own the dog, the rights of other service users who also need the money that could be spent on care. I don't disagree that having a pet may be beneficial, but without an unlimited pot of money I may not make the same decision as you. It sounds like the owner wasn't getting enough care never mind the dog. As for him not having been charged with neglect, you said it yourself, the RCPCA are useless. Just because he wasn't charged doesn't mean the dog wasn't neglected.

In reply to ceri:

I

Hmm, a few years back I rescued a cat that had been living in a building on site.
I took it to the vet and it cost me £60 for a checkup and some treatment (flea stuff, worming and an injection)
After I had paid the vet scanned it and found it was chipped and contacted the owner who had lost it 10 years previously and came to the vets the next day to collect it.
I ended up £60 down but the cat was okay and that's the main thing.

In reply to flopsicle:

Thought social services have a duty to act via police and local authority, the guys clearly too scrambled to tell anyone he has a dog at home.

D

In reply to ceri:

On the first occasion I rang around, but no joy. Took it to my own vets, who charged me a reduced amount, but still charged me.

In reply to Dominicandave:

I can't e mail you, so maybe you can post on here if the dog is being cared for now?

In reply to Dominicandave:

Why bother with the RSPCA? If the dog must go to a rehoming centre, try a local dog shelter. They are more likely to respond. The other issue you have, is that the owner of the dog is not in a fit state to allow the dog to go to a rehoming shelter, so it may only be allowed to go to a kennels until this is allowed and someone will have to pay the costs of kennels. A similar situation has been in the media. A lady was suddenly struck down by meningitis and rushed to hospital unconscious. Sister gave her pets to the RSPCA because they couldn't be bothered to look after them temporarily. The RSPCA was taken to court because the sister didn't have the authorisation from the sister (and the sister was in no fit state to allow it) to give someone else's pets away. The RSPCA has had to return the pets, apart from the dog they put to sleep because it was old.

In reply to Dominicandave:

National Assistance Act 1948 ->

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/11-12/29

When someone is taken to hospital or other residential care, it is the duty of social services to ensure that their property is secured and safe. Property includes animals that the person may be responsible for.

People in these circumstances are vulnerable, and often distressed and confused. They should not be taken advantage of. There is absolutely no reason for animals in these circumstances to be handed to the RSPCA. Remember that the RSPCAkill 50% of al animals txt come into they 'care'.

S. 48 of the National Assistance Act 1948:

48. Duty of councils to provide temporary protection for property of persons admitted to hospitals etc. E+W

(1)Where a person—

(a)is admitted as a patient to any hospital, or

(b)is admitted to accommodation provided under Part III of this Act, or

(c)is removed to any other place under an order made under subsection (3) of the last foregoing section,
and it appears to the council that there is danger of loss of, or damage to, any movable property of his by reason of his temporary or permanent inability to protect or deal with the property, and that no other suitable arrangements have been or are being made for the purposes of this subsection, it shall be the duty of the council to take reasonable steps to prevent or mitigate the loss or damage.

(2)For the purpose of discharging the said duty, the council shall have power at all reasonable times to enter any premises which immediately before the person was admitted or removed as aforesaid were his place of residence or usual place of residence, and to deal with any movable property of his in any way which is reasonably necessary to prevent or mitigate loss thereof or damage thereto.

(3)A council may recover from a person admitted or removed as aforesaid, or from any person who for the purposes of this Act is liable to maintain him, any reasonable expenses incurred by the council in relation to him under the foregoing provisions of this section.

(4)In this section the expression “council” means in relation to any property or [F112the council which is the local authority for the purposes of the M7Local Authority Social Services Act 1970 and] in the area of which the property is for the time being situated.

In reply to Dauphin:

That's what I was saying. Refer through council as they have the duty of care given the circumstances.

In reply to marsbar:

No. He has the same rights as anyone else, to remove his dog requires evidence and for him to have opportunity to defend himself.

The Council via social services section and have a duty not to leave animals alone in the garden.

Thankfully you're not making these decisions as to just take someone's dog without any trial because they're ill is plain wrong. People with mh issues have the same rights as you or I.

In reply to Dax H:

A check up and some flea stuff for a cat living on a building site is not emergency treatment. Emergency treatment is dealing with sick or injured animals which can then be returned to their original environment or handed to a rescue organisation or rehomed by the vets if they can find someone. It's basic stuff: pain relief, antibiotics, euthanasia.
To NickB with the dogs, again, a vet will not usually deal with unowned dogs as they are the council's responsibility. If you decide to take one on rather than hand it over to the council, then you will be responsible for costs that entails. If you found a dog who was e.g. hit by a car, a vet should give initial emergency treatment for free if the responsible owner or dog warden cannot be contacted.

In reply to flopsicle:

Meanwhile the dog has been in the garden for the best part of a week if the OP is correct. All well and good that the guy has rights, but realistically the council are doing f all, the owner can't look after the dog and the mum is willing to take responsibility for signing the dog over.

In reply to marsbar:

Which was why I responded. It's the Council, social services that need to be pushed as they have a duty of care.

That you object to the dog being kennelled as opposed to disposed of is irrelevant. That it has not already been kennelled is the council's fault, if they knew it was there.

In reply to The New NickB:



I was going to reply the previous post to yours in quiet a negative way because it kind of annoyed me , but really your post covers it.
like most people I suspect I have a long list of reasons for doing nothing at all to help a stray or distressed animal and thinking it's not my problem. I never do and as such could trot a list of story's and have probably forgotten many . But just to stick to this one. Despite having all sorts of other things to do I went back to where I'd seen the cat , picked it up , knocked in a few doors then took it home . He was in our kitchen for 24 hours being fed tinned salmon ( all I could find in the cupboards) and cream for 24 hours while we looked for its owners. He appeared to perk up at first and since our vet neighbour was due back off holiday in a couple of days i thought we'd just feed him up and get her to have a look at him . When he started to look very poorly I thought I ring around for a bit of advice which is when I found the small local charity who came out . When the "cat" woman came out initial to check him for chip she said she would take him to the vet but suspected what the outcome would be . I told her that if money was the issue I would pay it . When she called me later she said that the course of treatment would be £250 to £350 pounds but that the vet thought there would be very little chance of success and that the best thing was to put him down . So despite 101 reasons of a busy life for doing nothing and driving by I / we didn't . My post about the rspca was really meant to say that they just wouldn't give me any advice and seemed to say this isn't our problem , end of story.
Anyway next time this happens ( and it will..... A couple of dogs, an owl, countless small birds , several cats , an otter so far and that's not asking the OH for her list (I m assuming that the woman above and her 5 likers are all going to chip in for treatment. I'll pay my share to, so that's £350 / 7 = £50 each . That'll be ok then . Or maybe not ay .
Sorry if this appears to me polishing my halo but it I was irked by being accused of just picking the phone up and passing the problem on and I would like to assure Ceri that I don't and it would be nice to be assured that she doesn't either or well ,you know , she would help out but ...........( insert any thing from a long list of reasons we could all tick most of) .

In reply to Dominicandave:
I've had similar experiences with the RSPCA. In my case it was a donkey that ran out in front of my car whilst driving through Bradford.

Clearly not great idea to have it running around an A road, for both driver and donkey health, so managed to corner it (difficult), then tried the police (road safety etc) - they weren't interested and suggested RSPCA.

The RSPCA phone maze appeared to have every option available to give them money, but not much in the way of options for actually helping animals. Eventually got through to someone and they weren't interested either and suggested the police.

The donkey then decided he had had enough of confinement and legged it. We gave up.

In the OP's case I would suggest local Dog's Trust or rehoming centre. The RSPCA are not really the place to go in the case of an animal in distress.

In reply to mike123:

It has just been pointed out that " I knocked in a few doors " was perhaps a bit over the top ...well as I said , don't accuse me of doing nothing .

In reply to mike123:

I've come close to breaking in to the (previous) neighbours house when she left the dog. She came back that time, so I didn't have to. I did climb into the garden to let the RCPCA in, and I signed the paperwork, no doubt illegally and against her rights to own rabbits and leave them in the garden when moving out. I have no regrets. I don't seem to have been arrested for stealing her rabbits.

In reply to ceri:

You appear to be ignoring the important parts of my post. I made the phone calls. More than one Council, as the dog was found in a different one to where I live, RSPCA and a couple of smaller local animal charities.

If the dog was going to see a vet within a week, I was having to pay for it. So I did.

In reply to Dominicandave:

Any update?

In reply to The New NickB:
That's really the council's problem, not that of the RSPCA or the vet.
Many councils have crap dog warden facilities and as soon as you take a dog out of area it becomes a nightmare (another reason a vet may not want to deal with your stray dog: many dog wardens seem to feel that if a dog is in a safe place or driven out of their area to be scanned for a chip it is no longer their problem)

In reply to ceri:

I'm not blaming the RSPCA or the vet, I'm not particularly blaming the two Councils I phoned, I understand the pressures they are under. All I am doing is saying that people often won't take responsibility for someone else's dog, because they may well get stuck with paying for vets bills, food etc. The fact that this isn't how the system should work, doesn't mean that it often is how it does work.

In reply to aln:

I would but I'm in no position to do this. I wouldn't have a dog I didn't know around my young daughter, they are down south and so not within a distance I could just pop over to collect and we have no room here anyway, it's a small place and can just about squeeze a couple of hamsters in.

I'm still trying to chase this up but have not had anything back yet. Fingers crossed it is all taken care of when I do hear.

Just an update to tell you how hopeless the RSPCA are. They didn't come for the dog and they left him to stay outside in the garden, no shelter or food/water (that was not provided by the neighbours) for over a week, at least. I kept on bugging my friend to push this, which did seem a little inappropriate considering what she has on her mind, but I was as tactful as possible and in the end the police came and took the dog, not the RSPCA.
And so now the dog is locked up at the police station and they are intending to release the dog back to the unstable patient once he gets discharged.
I'm fuming over this as I remember my friend telling me a year or so ago that he kept turning up with this starving dog that needed to be taken away from him, but she daren't confront him as he was such an unpredictable liability at that point which has eventually taken it's toll and found himself in the situation he is in. And so they are going to give this dog a good meal every day and it will be living in safety, all being a prison cell (I presume that is where they keep them, I can't imagine police have dog kennels specifically for this kind of thing?) and then as soon as the owner is ready to start mistreating or not caring (at best) for the dog again they will give it back to continue a life of misery? There is something wrong with this system, there is no logic there, people are not considering an animals rights here at all. That dog deserves the right to go find a new home that will care for it.
Anyway, the mother agrees and has been onto the police and the police say their hands are tied unless the owner signs it over, this is the owner who is so unstable that he was sectioned? No way he will sign it over, it's the only thing he has that wants to be anywhere near him, or has no voice to say otherwise.

So far after being back here 16 months and observing our wonderful NHS system, Police force, Fire service etc and in general really good functionality of society I feel when it comes to an animals rights we are really letting ourselves and them down. The most disappointing experience of British decency yet, animals in this case (and from what you guys are saying many others) are a convenience at our disposal, and we need hold no moral value to them. Such a shame, I expected better than this here, such an open and shut case if ever there was one.

In reply to Dominicandave:

The police will probably have sent it to a local kennels, same as dogs who's owners are on holiday. I'm sure it will be being spoilt as all the kennel staff I have ever met love dogs.

In reply to Dominicandave:

"Anyway, the mother agrees and has been onto the police and the police say their hands are tied unless the owner signs it over, this is the owner who is so unstable that he was sectioned? No way he will sign it over, it's the only thing he has that wants to be anywhere near him, or has no voice to say otherwise."

If he does not have mental capacity to make the decision it can be made for him, capacity is determined decision by decision so sectioning in itself would not mean he's deemed not to have capacity. The fact he has been sectioned does mean that you can formally assess capacity though.

If the dog is in a starved state now then get that in writing as it may inform the above - again though this (Best Interest decision) would either be via social care or the ward.

RSPCA are 'supposed' to follow up neglect and take to court if culpable - but as agreed they are crap. Because he was sectioned (ie missing against his will) abandonment is not the case but those who sectioned had a duty of care if they knew of the dog.

My, very personal, perspective is that the police won't challenge the RSPCA or act to prosecute if they aren't on board. I could add some horrendous stories of the RSPCA being seemingly untouchable. That they 'in reality' are considered the lead on animal cruelty but appear so capricious in what they will or will not follow up and how they do it is hugely dysfunctional.

Have a look at this from 2009 10 GS dogs put down with a bolt gun! If anyone else had done that the RSPCA would have been on them like a rash, milking the media for all it's worth:
http://www.germanshepherdrescue.co.uk/rspca-captive-bolt-i-239.html

In reply to Dominicandave:

Seems they are too busy shouting animal cruelty over a posed picture of a dog a child and an ice cream.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/22/prince-george-photographs-t...