Liability For Vets Bill?

[Tilly2]

My dog has just had a fight with another dog. Both dogs were on the lead. The other dog ended up with a bloody nose. The other owner is saying that we are liable for the vets bill. My husband gave the other bloke our address. Does anyone know where we stand in relation to this?

[woofgang]

legally no liability. Did your dog attack the other dog?

[sunny-dave]

Unless there is an independent witness, it boils down to your word against theirs as to who started the scuffle and whether Mr Tilly was in any way negligent in how he controlled your dog.

[Tilly2]

The two dogs were walking towards each other both on leads. They obviously got too close , and Tilly bit the other dog on on the nose. It was a puppy springer and apparently it yelped and yelped.

[KristalK]

your dog bit a puppy, yes you should offer to pay the vets bill and perhaps walk your dog in a muzzle in future? next time it could be a child.

[Baldric]

I wouldn't say that ^^^ too loudly Tilly,
looks like an admission of guilt to me

[RATTER15]

If your dog bit the other dog without provocation, I think legally you could be sued for costs incurred.

[Canary42]

I agree with KristalK

[FredPuli43]

They won't get home on this if they sue you, is my guess, so you needn't pay; you had no prior knowledge that your dog would bite, in the circumstances you were entitled to walk the dog as you did, the other owner could have kept some distance until sure of any other dog's attitude, in short they have no case on negligence or your having a dangerous dog.

If you feel morally obliged, pay the bill and mark the fact by letter saying it is paid ex gratia and without any admission of liability and the payment is to be accepted as such. If you pay it without that, they may take the payment as an admission , which you definitely don't want to happen

[Tilly2]

The owner of the other dog let his dog get too close to mine. The owner has just rang and apologised to us. We have offered too make a contribution towards the vet's bill.

[Tilly2]

Thanks Fred, I will draft that letter now.

[FredPuli43]

Good, well do it ex gratia i.e as a kind act without liability to pay.

[RATTER15]

Well done Tilly, I think you made the right decision.

I must say that when I walk my dogs I really dont consider about the distance I am from other dogs, I assume they are going to be safe as they are on a lead in public without a muzzle, there are certain breeds I would avoid being too close to, one of those would be a staffy, not because I dislike the breed but because they can be aggressive to other dogs.

[woofgang]

I do give thought to how close my dogs get to other dogs because I have no faith in the good sense of other dogs owners (none intended)

[Tilly2]

Fred, shall I do a copy of the letter and ask them to sign and date it?

[Tilly2]

Woofgang so do I but they weren't with me.

[Canary42]

I'm no expert, but I think the phrase should be "without prejudice" rather than ex gratia.

No need for their endorsement, and to ask for a signature may sour the issue.

[Tilly2]

Now, I am confused.

[KristalK]

You seem very relaxed about the fact your dog will bite another if it comes too close. You have done the right thing in contributing towards the vets bill but what will you do to address your dogs behaviour? What if a child approaches too close? When in public it is your responsibility to have your dog under control at all times, regardless of others behaviour.

[woofgang]

Tilly "without prejudice" is only used when negotiating an out of court settlement. Fred (of course) has it right when he calls it an "ex gratia" payment.

[Tilly2]

Kristalk, do you have a dog?