Dog bite

[TheWormThatTurned]

I just typed a post that was way too long...

So, can I ask the dog owners out there:
If your dog bit another dog, in an unprovoked attack, and caused an injury, who is responsible to pay for vet fees?

For background:
Our dog is small (20lb, terrier), barks way too much, but generally ok around other dogs.
The dog that bit him is a Siberian husky, handled by 2 kids aged 10 &12. The dogs weren't playing, we were walking by their house as they were returning from a walk.

Owners of husky are taking the attitude of "she's never done it before". We're not paying a penny of the vet bill. Your dog barks and upsets her.
I'm thinking that there were young children around, and it was totally unprovoked.
It wasn't like she just growled / warned him, she went for him and bit him, he's got 5 stitches on his neck, a whole host of medicines over Christmas and we've got decent sized vet bill.

Vet has advised us to go to the police, which we're doing tomorrow. The owners are our neighbours, so I really don't want any hard feelings, but I also think they are in denial about what their dog did and how much worse it could have been.

Just looking for some sane advice from worldly dog owners about how to proceed,
Thanks in advance for any advice!!

I might like that Mustbemad17.

BTW, it did happen on the husky's territory; "The dogs weren't playing, we were walking by their house as they were returning from a walk."

The husky owner is defending their dog saying OP's started it, i.e. scared husky by barking. I do see their point. As in my anthropomorphized version, you'd defend your home and family from attack wouldn't you?

If blame is to be apportioned, then OP knows her dog barks at other dogs and should have avoided the situation by letting them get inside their house before passing, especially if the dog was being controlled by a 10 and 12 year old. It's simple common sense.

Sleep walking past somebody's house isn't the same as being on their land...unless OP was in the husky's garden then it is a non-issue. Walking past somebody's garden doesn't warrant an aggressive dog & in fact it's now law that if a dog attacks somebody in that situation it is deemed aggressive.

If somebody broke into my house i'd fully expect my dog to react. As would anybody (unless you have one of those stupidly friendly, attacks by kissing dogs. Then you're fked). If somebody was in my garden then regardless of how i felt about it, my dog attacking anybody would leave me liable.

I have had barky dogs. I had one who sit next to me without lunging whilst other owners walked past; but he would bark. He was fully under control, no danger to anybody, just a mouthy twat. Does that give another owner the right to let their dog get close enough to potentially attack mine? Nope.

Husky didn't attack OP. It bit her barking dog Mustbemad17. They are two different scenario, not comparible. Your scenario didn't happen.

You anthropomorphized the dog asking could you bite someone you disagreed with? I said it was more complex in that there was territory and pack in the equation, not disagreement. There was perceived threat.

Mustbemad17, did you let your mouthy dog encroach another dog's territory? If you saw a dog handled by children would you avoid approaching them knowing your dog would let rip? I suspect you would avoid both situations and you'd be right doing so. Like I said, simple common sense.

It bit her dog. It was on a lead, OPs dog was not in it's face if OP's description of the Husky being on the extension of its lead. So still not OPs fault. Had OPs dog been in Husky's face barking, fine. Husky had to make a move to get to OPs dog. Thus more of an attack than a reactive bite.

Sleep please highlight to me where OP's dog was on the Husky's territory? Without scrolling back i recall OP stating they were outside the house but on nobody's property...so similar to being outside a garden? Is that okay to you?? My dogs don't get to be territorial about the path outside my house...it is not their territory to defend.

As for kids walking dogs I have come across many & had to deal with it. Again, why is this OPs fault? The Husky should have been under control as OPs was - mouthy does not equate to out of control. The onus is on the Husky owners to control their dogs; the adults did not ensure this. They are at fault

Sleep found it...

It happened on the side of the road, near both our houses, but technically not on either property

So by your logic of the Husky defending its territory, then surely OPs dog should be given leeway for barking & defending his territory??

Dogs bark for lots of reasons.

People like Sleep seem fixated on the possibility that the OPs dog was barking aggressively. It could have been. Or it could have been a defensive “Keep away I’m scared” bark. Or frustration stemming from a thwarted desire to meet the Husky. There are loads of alternatives - none of which would justify being bitten.

Perhaps you've hit on something Mustbemad17. It could be that OP's little dog was defending it's own territory. And as MoKnickers states, dogs do bark for lots of reasons. My dog is fear aggressive, therefore he would bark and growl at dogs who frightened him (never at anything that was tiny and harmless, no matter how yappy and aggressive they may be towards him). So, yes, "I'm scared, stay away" is a bark I'm familiar with.

Regardless of what bark OP's dog was giving, the husky interpreted it as a threat, a big enough threat to attack and defend.

I'm not sure how you managed it Mustbemad17, but how do you make a dog understand which territory needs defending from interlopers? Did you show your dog the title deeds to your house or draw him a diagram explaining the boundaries? Is there a right of way or trespass bark you're keeping secret from us non dog whisperers?

Dog professional here...

The dog on the extending lead is not 'under control' and you could reasonably suggest he was out of control in a public place.~

All of this stuff about whose territory they were near or whether the other dog barking was the cause is completely irrelevant.

The OP's property has been damaged, and this has occurred because the other party were not in control of their dog.

Unless the OP can also state she/they were in reasonable apprehension of injury to themselves/their children, it is unlikely that the police would be interested (in the same way that they probably wouldn't be interested in the neighbours kids putting a dent in the car but they would be if the same neighbour kid was threatening to use the brick he was denting the car with, to smash your face in)..

I would still contact the police however, and make an official complaint because it doesn't sound as if the husky owners are taking this seriously - a flexi lead is NOT a safe piece of equipment on the streets, and the dog was in the charge of children, not adults - both factors that any reasonable person can see would easily lead to an incident like this.

I would let the neighbours know that you are doing this and that if they do not pay the bill you will take them to small claims court for the costs.

As a dog professional WiddlinDiddlin, how would you address a "mouthy" dog? Or are you another 'professional' who thinks dogs barking at other dogs (for whatever reason, excitement, aggression, fear etc) doesn't need addressing?

Get a grip, Sleep. Putting professional in inverted commas (well actually, you've used apostrophes, but I'll make allowances judging on previous posts) doesn't make us any less professional. Neither I, nor Widdlin suggested that OP shouldn't address her barking dog.

You seem very invested in the fact that the OP's dog barked. You do realise that dogs bark sometimes, surely?

More grammar. What a shame.

I do, thank you Valerrie!

Back on the grammar Valerrie? Don't like my apostrophes? You do love your commas though, don't you? Just for the record, here's your post with the grammar corrected, pay attention....

"Get a grip (no comma required) Sleep. Putting professional in inverted commas (well (comma here) actually (no comma required) you've used apostrophes (no comma as followed by connective) but I'll make allowances judging on previous posts) doesn't make us any less professional. Neither I, nor Widdlin (comma here) suggested that OP shouldn't address her barking dog.

You seem very invested in the fact that the OP's dog barked (rhetorical question, add question mark here). You do realise that dogs bark sometimes, surely? (Hurray, correct use of rhetorical question mark, however, sloppy composition, would recommend using 'surely' as precursor.)"

Please tell me you don't teach English Valerrie?

What's your school's anti-bullying policy? Wondered how you'd deal with a student debate that involved one party calling another student with an opposing opinion a "dick", "stupid" or beginning the debate by telling them they are "talking bollocks"?

Now that the pleasantries are out of the way, am I to suppose that you do believe that dogs barking at other dogs is a problem that needs addressing? You've yet to give a straight answer.

Though I expect you to demonstrate that it's pedantry (and nitpicking) rather than grammar correction.

Either way, it's childish.

Gosh, you are completely off with your corrections Sleep. How precious of you to try, though. If you were in my class, you might get a sticker. Although you're a horrible sow, so I doubt it

I need to find some toddlers to referee

Sow? More insults Valerrie? Comma's are such useful things. They denote a pause, a break for a subtext. So, unless you actually meant to say....

""Get a grip (long pause) Sleep. Putting professional in inverted commas (well (no breath required here, rush straight to..) actually (long pause) you've used apostrophes (pause for breath even though next word is connective) but I'll make allowances judging on previous posts) doesn't make us any less professional. Neither I, nor Widdlin (no contextual break in text required here, no, no, no, straight to) suggested that OP shouldn't address her barking dog.

You seem very invested in the fact that the OP's dog barked (rhetorical question, you got it right in next line, what's different about this one?). You do realise that dogs bark sometimes, surely? (Hurray, correct use of rhetorical question mark, however, sloppy composition, would recommend using 'surely' as precursor, it would read better, much neater.)"

Seriously, do you teach English?

sorry, not RTFT. but my elderly lab, on a lead, was attacked by a rottie which came out of its own front garden onto the pavement and bit him. £130 at the vet. I called the local PCSO who was very interested, visited the owners, suggested they pay our vets bill and take rottie to vet. rottie was pts with brain tumour that day.

I bet they are Valerrie, a teacher that doesn't understand the very, very basic use of commas and question marks is hilarious.

Valerrie, do you believe that dogs barking at other dogs is a problem that needs addressing?

Yes or No?

Valerrie, read your own posts and give your head a wobble

I presume you wouldn't condone that type of behaviour from your pupils? Or do you think name-calling, picking people up on grammar, c&p'ing so others can point and laugh is ok?

At this stage, your opinions on the op are irrelevant; you are showing yourself up to be quite nasty.

A statement doesn't need a question mark, Sleep.

I'm not going to respond to you any more, much to the disappointment of friends.

OP, I hope you get your issue sorted. You and your dog are in no way to blame and I wish you all the best