To think the sign in NDNs window is naff and unnecessary?

[hotstepper4]

New NDNs, moved in about a month ago. Haven't actually spoken to them yet but they've got a dog, I've seen it out in their garden, it's a rottweiler I believe.

Tbh I'm just happy that so far I haven't heard it barking, so so far so good, haven't worried about it.

Today, the ndns have put a sign in their front window. It says : "Warning! A dangerous dog lives here. It bites. You have been warned"

Myself and dh have 4 dc between us, the dc like to have their friends over sometimes and I think the sign is really giving off the wrong vibes, it's not the nicest area but the sign is making me uneasy. We have a cat too.

AIBU?

I wouldn't worry about it. There's a house in a nearby village with a sign saying "Forget the dog. Beware of the children". It amuses people to have all sorts of things outside their house.

This "welcome" mat for example - it isn't mine by the way.

This is quite aggressive and a bit chavy (I know that sounds judgemental) it's just a
Bit of a nasty attitude.

I think legally it doesn't matter if you've been warned, if your dog bites someone you're responsible.

I think legally it doesn't matter if you've been warned, if your dog bites someone you're responsible

It all depends if it’s private property or not.

Are you worried that the dog will read the sign, realise it's dangerous and behave accordingly?

We have a sign saying beware of the dog, it is mostly there because next doors kids had an annoying habit of leaning against our fence chatting to their friends who are very loud and were damaging the fence and no amount of asking them not to stopped it. We put up the sign and introduced them to our huge dog and they've stopped doing it.

I've got a sign on the gate that says 'beware of the attack cat'. All our cats have now died, and every single one of them would have run away from anyone going through the gate. Perhaps your neighbour's dog is a bit nervous and they are giving due warning. I wouldn't think anything of it. If you are worried, just be sure your DC are not bothering the dog.

Sorry if this has already been said but I understood it that if anyone is bitten or harmed by the dog whilst on the owners propery they are not liable for damages if a sign clearly states that you should be aware that a dog lives on the premises and may well bight you

You are always responsible for the safety of anyone on your property if harm is 'reasonably foreseeable'. Its a statutory duty and you can't wriggle out of it by putting up a sign in an attempt to limit your liability.

The wording of the sign is in itself is evidence that the dog is already known to be dangerous and therefore a very stupid thing for the NDN to have up.

with the dogs in the back of her huge estate car, they went batshit at me through the window. They were definitely very aggressive.

If they're anything like mine, they'll be going batshit because they want to say hello to you. Honestly, mine go completely mental and look dangerous but they're really just licky monsters (I realise you probably don't want to be licked either but it's better than being bitten!).

@YeTalkShiteHen

You have a very apt username.

There is an implied right of access in the UK. I suggest you read more and type less.

HTH

I think a sign saying beware of our strangely snobby neighbour might be more appropriate!
Yabu

My sister has a sign that says 'wicked witch lived here'.

Why is it ‘strangely snobby’ to be concerned about this?

I'd be tempted to call the police and advise that the neighbours are advertising that they have a dangerous dog

😂😂😂 there's always one. The MN answer to everything

It’s not that long ago that ‘nobs’ would “release the hounds!” If a low life dared to venture onto their property 😬

A house in my town has a sign in the window saying 'trespassers will be shot'.

That is naff. And in no respect amusing.

Sign saying ‘trespassers will be shot’ should have a ps,
‘Shooters will be prosecuted ‘

So they’re admitting the dog is dangerous? They are therefore liable to be sued if the dog ever does attack, you should never put up those signs.

Re burglar deterrent, my resident copper says that’s rubbish these days, determined burglars will just smash the dog over the head with the crowbar they used to open the door.

If it makes you feel any better op it could be worse on the signage front, the people near me have homemade signs in their garden that read

Say No to murdering the innocent

No to killing babies

Abortion be is MURDER

All written in black but murder and killing have red around them with red blood drips on them. They are there since May, so as far as signs so, it could be worse

www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q524.htm

You're liable for dog attacks in your garden regardless of any sign. However, if you're out, dog is in the house and a burglar gets bitten, you're probably not liable. I can't see how having a sign up would change that.

The law only used to cover dog attacks on public land, but the law was changed a few years back when a teenage girl was attacked and killed by dogs at a friend's house and there was no law to charge the owners under.

Why is it ‘strangely snobby’ to be concerned about this?

Because what people do in their own homes is none of your business?

Sorry if this has already been said but

Signs that warn people of potential bites from dogs on your property are you accepting liability for a known aggressive dog on your property if someone where to get hurt on your property.

Beware of/ aggressive/ dangerous dog lives here are all signs I would never be daft enough to use.

Be Aware of and Dog lives here are fine.

Even if it isn't legally admitting liability I still wouldn't consider those signs as appropriate

YeTalkShiteHen I couldn’t care less what people do in their own homes. Live and let live n all that.
But I fail to see the ‘snobbery’ in being concerned that your new ndn have a Rottweiler and a sign saying “beware of the dog, it bites, you have been warned”
I once lived in a quiet village where our ndn had 2 very large, untrained dogs. The dogs had puppies and before too long there was a pack that would terrorise the neighbourhood.
They would chase postmen, bikes, cars, anyone who dared visit us on foot and even ripped apart a cat 3 doors down.

avocados

From the same link:

Though intruders into your home would generally not be covered by the amendments, all the circumstances will have to be considered and each decision will be judged individually

The Occupiers Liability Act states quite clearly that if you knowingly have a hazard on your land, then any harm caused by that hazard is your responsibility.

The key fact here (this is now the third time I have said it) is the the dog is known to be dangerous and bites - given the wording of the sign, it could probably be argued that the dog is being kept as a deliberate weapon.

If your elderly, known to be placid, golden retriever savages someone out of the blue, you might have a leg to stand on in court. The sign would be the crucial piece of evidence in this case.

Aintnothingbutaheartache the sign isn’t likely to be serious, it’s probably an attempt at a deterrent.

And it’s snobbery because nobody whines or froths about tiny dogs do they? Which are infinitely more likely to bite in temper.

It’s always big dogs or bull types that get the usual suspects frothing away and it’s ridiculous.