It's announced by the BBC today that the Government have decided to punish every dog owner in Britain because a small number of idiots are using their dogs to intimidate people.  Every dog owner will have to insure their dogs against attacking people under new plans!

The insurance companies will be able to charge what they like as it will be compulsory, but the same will happen as happens with "compulsory" car insurance, the law abiding ones will insure and the dangerous idiots will not. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

typical of this government's sledge hammer approach, punish everyone for the deeds of a few

I feel a bad attack of civil disobedience coming on

Getting off my soapbox now and trying not to trip :(

My current pet insurance already covers if my dog should bite someone or cause a car crash by running out and I suspect most do.
As you say though those of us who care already have insurance or would take it but the bad element will ignore.
As I already have my dogs chipped and have insurance there is no change for me

This is only a proposal - not law (yet).

Daisy

I haven't a problem with it as long as it is enforced on EVERYONE not just those who look like will not beat up the enforcer.  unfortunatly I think it will be that the law abiding pay up, the scutters will not and their will be no enforcement or punishment for those who do not as it would cost ridiculous amounts to enforce.

Just like the original dog licence - responsible owners did and irresponsible owners didn't.  Nothing changes with human nature. 

I haven't a problem with it as long as it is enforced on EVERYONE not just those who look like will not beat up the enforcer.  unfortunatly I think it will be that the law abiding pay up, the scutters will not and their will be no enforcement or punishment for those who do not as it would cost ridiculous amounts to enforce

Yes, lets be honest, there should not be a Pit Bull in existence now if the letter of the law was followed by everyone, but it is obvious the law doesn't hold much sway with some and there is no proper enforcement.

Those owners who abide by the rules and regulations will get their dogs microchipped (as many responsible dog owners do already) and that will mean the authorities will be able to automatically check up on whether you've paid your annual insurance or not.  As with car tax, if you aren't on the database to begin with you fly under the radar until something goes wrong and the 'illegal' dog comes to light. Therefore, I can't see the proposed changes making an iota of difference to how things are now.

My big concern is that dogs that are not microchipped are less likely to be taken the vets if they are sick and most importantly for vaccinations because I'm guessing the vets will have to comply with proposed regs and check to see if dogs are microchipped.  Surely this could encourage an increase of infectious diseases?

I imagine more dumped dogs on the horizon if these proposals go ahead.

Westcoast and ClairyS

Quite!

My main objection to this is that there are already laws in force to sort these idiots out - but they aren't used or enforced!

So this becomes yet another attack on law abiding citizens of this country while the scumbags do as they please!

This isn't about sorting out scumbags whose dogs attack and maim/kill, this is just another opportunity for the government to wrap ordinary people in red tape and rules.  They'll be microchipping us next!

    
     "My big concern is that dogs that are not microchipped are less likely to be taken the vets if they are sick and most importantly for vaccinations because I'm guessing the vets will have to comply with proposed regs and check to see if dogs are microchipped.  Surely this could encourage an increase of infectious diseases?"

CherylS, I also see this as a possible outcome of this proposal. I do microchip my dogs, for the price and the peace of mind it gives me I see it as a bargain! But I don't insure my dogs, I choose to put money away every month for them instead also I don't like to booster them every year so if I had to insure them I'd have to do some serious hunting around :(

If somebody's dog currently causes an accident or damage surely the owner would still be able to be prosecuted, sued or whatever for the money anyway and if they can't/won't pay then aren't there measures that can be taken against people who disobey court orders?
I think compulsory third party insurance for dogs will only end up with the responsible following the rules, the fringe element ignoring it completely and another element who take out the insurance but then become even more slack and irresponsible in their duties to train their dog or keep it under control because they are 'insured'.

Also it is very hard to find Insurance for third party only liability, and there's no way I can afford to Insure all mine.

> I think compulsory third party insurance for dogs will only end up with the responsible following the rules, the fringe element ignoring it completely and another element who take out the insurance but then become even more slack and irresponsible in their duties to train their dog or keep it under control because they are 'insured'.

Completely agree.

Here is a snippet from the article
"There has also been a reported rise in levels of dog fighting and illegal ownership, particularly by gangs who are using dangerous dogs as status symbols."

Hmm, I can really see all those people rushing out to get liability insurance!!!!

Is this also a Tax on dog owners????

Its will only be enforced when some is attacked by a dog because thats the only time the authorities will find out!
And will the little old lady be exempt, as i've found these can be just as bad as the status dogs.

I dont think we will find Dog Police on every street in the country.

Its another proposed law that will never be enforced.

ASBO'S for MP's

> Its will only be enforced when some is attacked by a dog because thats the only time the authorities will find out!
>

Those of us that have large/powefull/intimidating looking dogs could well be singled out.

I've had a person run away sceaming when they saw me walking down the road with Buster. Buster was behaving perfectly, infact he was stood looking at me swishing his tail, waiting for a treat while I locked my door. If it was known that all dogs must be insuredagainst 3rd party liabilty, that person could have decided they could get a bit of money for 'traumatic stress', even if they couldn't actually claim anything for it it would bring me into the limelight.

There is a lso the worry of people antagonising dogs in order to get bitten so they can claim - bit like the numpties that slam on thier brakes so the car beihind hits them & they can claim for whip-lash :(

Here, here, Brainless I agreee!!!

The Law could say all Dogs should have a  miccrochip or tatoo!

If you join the Dogs Trust for £20 a year, you automatically get third
party insurance for up to 10 dogs in the same household. Not sure what
those of us with more than 10 would do (nor would I want to be a DT
member again after their Crufts attitude), but it shows you CAN get it
very cheaply. Surely everyone can afford £20 a year.

"What does the insurance cover me for?

Membership provides third party insurance of up to £1,000,000 per claim
if your dog causes damage or injury to another person, their property,
or pets.

Do I have to register the dogs I want covered?

No, as a member, all your dogs are automatically covered up to a maximum
of 10 dogs per household."

http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/giving/membership/faq/#faq269593

Also it is very hard to find Insurance for third party only liability, and there's no way I can afford to Insure all mine.

Hopefully if it becomes law there would have to be adequate 3rd party liability in place, otherwise it will not work.

How is this going to be policed ? good idea in theory but as has been said dog licences were abolished as they were not really doing anything. We cant get everyone to tax and insure their cars let alone their dogs. !
Mine are all insured and micro chipped  adn the insurance covers third party but then hopefully I am not the type of dog owner this is aimed at and will insure stop so called "weapon dogs" or those being used for dog fighting etc.
Hopefully before this law is brought in more aspects will be considered

Do you think I could claim stress for peoples reations to my dog as he is considered a dangerous breed  german shepherd ? I get so upset when they look at him and decide he is dangerous have had people in the park spreading unfounded rumours just because he is a gsd

My union membership at work and also my household insurance covers me for 3rd part liability - I will have to check the small print to see if it covers claiming against my dogs.

I think I am in favour of the insurance/ permanent identification - but can't help wondering if premiums will differ for different breeds, owner's age, etc. If it does become law, I hope there are severe penalties on those who do not take out cover - as the majority of people who will ignore the law are likely to be those who are causing the anti dog feeling at the moment, and who own cetain breeds to look "macho" .

The matter is being debated on Jeremy Vine BBC Radio 2 now

Surely the public liability is a set fee, not dependent on breed - although I see on one website that dogs named under the Dangerous Dogs act won't be covered.

>Surely the public liability is a set fee, not dependent on breed

it should depend on breed and owner ....... the same as car insurance.  A staff x owned by a teenager living in central london is probably equivilant to a 17 year old driving a pimped up escort XR3i, where as a labrador owned by a family in Surrey would be equivilant to a middle aged man driving a passat estate ;)

They should also take into account what training the dog has had, good citizens for instance could be equivilant to pass plus :)

My insurance covers bites as well so Im not too fussed, what no one has said is how they are going to "police" people to ensure they insure!

I heard this on lbc this morning and i thought the same thing, insurers are now very happy bunnys indeed,

your right claire, i just rang direct line to ask them and it turns out i am in a VERY high risk area and would be looking at £200 a month to insure my 3 ,

i am affraid i just cant afford this so what am i ment to do, put them in battersea, i cant think of doing that its not fair to them , my family or the rescue center,

so saddly i will be someone who will have to be braking this law should it get though,
not what i want to do but i would not have a choice,
i am a decent dog owner my dogs are well behaved and properly socalized they love people kids and even cats,

the only one's earning out of this is the insurance company , also in my area none of the yobs with dogs would give a toss,

but now this goverment is going to force me into a situation where i will be seen no better than those yobs, while i have good dogs and am on a low income i feel like i am being stuffed in a box with the low lifes i live around,

if people cant be bothered getting car insurance what on earth makes the governement think that dog owners who dont abide by the law will take out a pet  insurance ...once again we who do will pay the price.
Notice they announced this during crufts week!

If it does become law, I hope there are severe penalties on those who do not take out cover - as the majority of people who will ignore the law are likely to be those who are causing the anti dog feeling at the moment, and who own cetain breeds to look

Sorry but your so wrong on this and i feel insulted,

I cant afford insurance , this would be the reason i would have to ignore it,

i just cant see why Anyone should pay it ,

i think they should be focusing on the real problem of the youths of today who are hanging around the street intimadating people with their dogs,
and not persucuting the everyday joe blogs out their who are decent pet owners,

but of course how could you expect anything different from a goverment that gives a brand new life to a child murderer all at the tax payers expense , who then turns around and brakes his bail,

In complete agreement with posters like Brainless and co, who have a pack of dogs, my mother for instance with her 7 insures hers once they are over 8yrs and just uses a credit card up until then, if she were forced to insure all, well my brothers and I would have to help her out that is all we could do. For others it could be a very expensive monthly bill.

Then again is this just going to be a 'special' insurance for protection against a dog bite at perhaps £3-£5 a month per dog, or as it is now, included in a normal dog insurance ranging from £12 - £25 per dog per month? (Depending on company used)

Maybe it will be like car insurance and companies will be very competitive. Otherwise it could have dire consequences on multi dog households. Puppy farmers I don't care too much about, but the responsible dog owner is once again going to be caught up in it.

I agree with everyone that the responsible dog owners will once again be penalized as always. There needs to be another way.

They can surely round up and prosecute dangerous dogs and owners without it including the rest of us. :-(

I was listening to the Jeremy Vine show. They all seemed to assume that it would also cover for Dog v Dog attacks. Surely this would be hugely different? Has anyone seen the proposal, is it just for people attacks or what?
I think it's a bad idea generally as I can;t see it doing anything to make things safer and as the owner if 5 dogs the cost would be significant.
They played a clip of the the postman that had his face bitten several times. Whilst that sounds like a teribble attack how would having insurance have prevented it? I guess he could have had compensation but wouldn't he have been entiltled to claim for anything as the law stands?

I get so upset when they look at him and decide he is dangerous have had people in the park spreading unfounded rumours just because he is a gsd

I hear you furriefriends , i have Rottie and 2 Ebt's  and im sick to death of being labeled as having dangours dogs, media hype has alot to answer for,

i cant even afford house insurance around here , and YES i do have car insurance but having the car insured in this area costs me 300 a year more than it would if i lived where my mums is,

They can surely round up and prosecute dangerous dogs and owners without it including the rest of us.

That what im saying , Why cant they deal with the youths with dogs?,

its the bad boys out their they should be sorting out instead of pussing footing around them and pampering to their every whime ,

this goverment have no guts , all they want to do is make everyone pay more money instead of sorting out the real issues,

Just spotted your post Marianne, that is brilliant. I give to the dogstrust, never even read about the benefits of it. Must have overlooked it as I have full cover anyway. So if I get my mum to sign up she could cover all her dogs too for 3rd party probs. For just £20 a year? :-) Wow!

I sponsor a dog at Dogs Trust but am not a member (I don't think)
Do I have to join seperately if I want this cover?
Just re checking my normal pet insurance now.
It's never ending!!!

Ahhhh Wow is that right Carrington? , thanks for posting this Marianne , and hear i was getting all panic striken, £20,00 a year sounds ok i'd be proud to walk the streets with my pooches for that :-) , least i wouldnt be breaking any laws then ,

ok so if it were that cheap i wouldnt complain :-)

that is really good MarianneB Just looked it over and i'd join up solely for this bit  Peace of mind with our Canine Care Card. The guarantee that Dogs Trust will take care of your dog should anything happen to you.

I think thats a great idea,

Yep! Chelzeagirl you could cover your dogs on that one no trouble.  My mum being over 60 would only pay £10 a year. :-)

ANN172 hopefully your insurance will have 3rd party liability anyway, if not give dogstrust a call and ask them.

If this does become law at least the cloud has a silver lining it will not be as expensive as we thought if people do not have insurance in place already. Still don't see the point to it, if a dog bites someone we can still prosecute today as the law stands and the DDA act on the dog an owner.

Really, what is the point of it?????????

this is just another opportunity for the government to wrap ordinary people in red tape and rules.  They'll be microchipping us next!

Here Here!!,
only i had a vishion of a Logans run kind of future in mind we'll all be waiting for the crystals in our palms to change coulor then the G,MENT will swoop down and vap us all away, while we'r walking single file around the earths main frame , lol,

Yep i called direct line see so was bound to get a high price and they say they dont do just 3rd party anyhow so i'd have had to go for the min in vets cover,

so that really cheered me up think i'll join up now before they put the price up lol,

Hi Chelzeagirl, it's not a dog's personal health insurance they are talking about, it is the third party liability - as someone else has said already, Dogs Trust charge £20 a year (£10 for over 60's) - which covers you for up to 10 dogs - for any damage to property, a person or another dog.  The cover is up to £1 million, and excess is £200.

It's just as we thought, here we are the responsible dog owners already looking for insurance, ways to comply etc. I wonder if the scruffy oiks I saw in the park this morning with their long legged dogs who were hanging off tree branches and being encouraged to chase the ducks are going to rush home and do their insurance, microchipping etc etc.

I think I just saw a pig fly past the window!!!!!

it's not a dog's personal health insurance

It's ok Sunbeams i get that, and thats fine with me shamefully im having to rely on the pdsa at moment if my dogs get ill,  since OH lost his overtime and had to take a cut in hours,
and i stupidly didnt apply for any help with housing benefit before  but just tryed to make do , i just really didnt want to go on any benefits , but today got hit with a £314.00 council tax bill AND they want it by end of march then its £122. a month on top of that for this years bill with the rent at at £600 a month and OH only clearing £700 dont leave us nothing,
we been living off child benefit and my carers allowence and last month i had to use my sons DLA to help cover the rent,

i went to the HB office today to try get some help and they assured me i'd get it but i was made to feel like a criminal and have an appointment friday where i have to show them my whole life history cripes the stuff the want is unreal, now i know why iv never bothered before but times are really hard now,

lets not get ahead of ourselves here, this is after all a Labour proposal so will depend on whether they get in or not at the next election ......... they certainly wont be getting my vote, there again they never have.

Both of our dogs have Life Cover so I think we are responsible dog owners and both chipped. What I want to know who are the bodies that are going to "Police" these new laws if they get passed? as in our area we have 1 Dog Warden for 2 local councils and 2 Community Policemen,who have enough work themselves to be chasing around after these status dog owners I pity who ever gets the job.

[Really, what is the point of it?????????

I dont see either what differance it will make as the police already walk past pit bull and pitbull crosses everyday and they do nothing ,
if the insurance thing comes in are they going to be stopping everyone with a dog to see if its insured? (i think not) our police station dont even take strays anymore like they once did so they wont be taking uninsured dogs off the streets, and the dog wardens are usless round hear , they wont come for a stray till days after you'v found one,

I hope it opens up a load of new jobs on our council for more dog wardens i'd love to do it and need a job right now,

The other thing that puts me off apart from the lack of an infrastructure as others have suggested....

Is that people with larger/ bull breeds like our family would I have to pay more than say somebody with say a lab or chi, and with several currently residing in the house hold it could become very expensive. We already have them insured under the Platinum K.C insurance but with the proposed government one it could cripple us.

PUBLICITY that's all it is and you know why.......... its just one word............. (Crufts).  I think there should be an age limit on owning a dog esp big powerful breeds but that is another thread altogether.

Oh and there are many dogs in our area that are way more aggressive/ dangerous than ours, these tend to be toy breeds as the owners reply when one has bitten our dogs on the face "aww look he doesn't know his own size", they see them as handbags or children and not dogs.

I've checked with our home buildings/contents insurance - and yes, we're insured for 3rd party damages incurred by our dogs.   Think most people will find that their insurance cover is the same.

The people that the authorities are trying to target - those breeding "illegal" fighting dogs - are not going to bother registering/micro-chipping their dogs let alone having insurance - and I cannot see any way of policing this problem, unless we go down the American route, whereby all dogs in a certain area have to be licenced on a certain date - with proof of vaccinations etc - and they then receive a licence disc in a specific colour which has to be attached to the collar of any dog outside in public.   Any dog not wearing their licence disc can be collected and taken to the pound :(

> We already have them insured under the Platinum K.C insurance but with the proposed government one it could cripple us.
>

You wouldn't need the proposed one as you will already be covered on your KC policy for 3rd party.
Chris

Well have signed up, as I don't even have house Insurance (other than buildings)  Bet they will be wondering what's hit them with all these memberships ;)

I was told several years ago that NFU mutual would cover dogs for 3rd party insurance only so it might be worth checking with them?

my household insurance covers me for 3rd part liability

Once my husband was coming home from work after dark when 2 staffs ran across the road in front of the car. There was no street lighting so he didn't see them until they were in his headlights. He ran over both of them. One ran off and the other was injured. He took the injured young dog to our vets and rang the police. They had both been reported missing and so we were able to contact the owners that night. The car was damaged and so they said they would pay. Now I was shocked to find out that the household insurance covered the cost of the repair. BTW the young dog made a great recovery and the older dog was just bruised and sore so a happy ending. I think most household insurances cover it.

As Daisy has said it is only an idea just now BUT what % of the country are dog owners? A big percentage so a petition MAY do the trick to push them to come up with a better solution.