Community Resolution Order

[bednobs]

Hi, my neighbours came round because they claim my dog got into their garden, jumped up and bit her arm. My dog has undoubtedly been in their garden before, over the summer (at least twice) they informed us and we improved their fence so our dog could no longer get through.
They claim this incident was last week.
I asked them (by text) to tell me where he got through as we can honestly see no gap big enough for even a yorkie to get through, let alone a border collie. I also asked for a bit more info about the incident as i need to make some hard decisions (if for example out dog shoved his way through and attacked her, it's rather different to him putting his face through, her shoving him back and then his tooth grazing her)
They have not come back to me on either count.
This morning a police officer turned up and tried to "persuade" me to sign a community resolution order whereby i agree to improve (their!) fence and pay them an as yet undisclosed in amount recompense. He was a bit wishy washy about what would happen if i refused to sign, but said i could be guilty of an offence under the dangerous dogs act.
I do not believe that IF something happened it happened as reported (i can't say for certain it didn't happen - he was in the garden and i can't see the whole of it from where i am working) and i don't want to sign. I am willing to be proved wrong
I find it extremely hard to believe. We are already not on good terms with these neighbours and i think they are just being trouble makers. However, my job requires me to have DV clearance and i don't want to jeapordise that.
someone give me some advice please!

[Karolina82]

A serious accusation.

[AuntPollyGrey]

People don't ring the Police for nothing. Your dog probably has got through -we have working collies and believe me they can squeeze through holes cats wouldn't go through. Your dog has already bitten the neighbours once before. If you don't sign the paper your dog could be taken away and destroyed and you could be prosecuted.

A couple of years ago someone from the villages dog killed one of our sheep and fatally injured another -they had to sign a CRO and pay us £350 for the vets bills and another £ 300 for the value of the two sheep. So I would suggest you do it and get rid of a dog that bites people.

[bednobs]

ps dog has NEVER bitten anyone before (he has been in their garden before we improved the fence though)
thanks for your response - i probably need someone to slap me up sharp and say JFDI :)

[Chinajan]

It would be interesting to know whether the alleged victim has any evidence that they were a: bitten and if so b: by your dog. Did they, for instance, visit a doctor or hospital to have the wound dressed?

If it did, which I doubt, get to court, then I can't see it going in their favour unless they have such evidence.

[davebro]

Presumably she would go to A&E for a tetanus jab & maybe a wound dressing. I would want to see evidence of that before admitting to anything.

If she was bitten what proof is there that it was your dog - CCTV ?

Having said that I would rather be on good terms with my neighbours than hang on to a (potentially) dangerous dog, but if they are out for trouble anyway you may be in for a rough ride.

[wolf63]

Did you see the bite? Otherwise I don't see how she can prove that the dog bit her.

Can you surreptitiously instal CCTV cameras - if this incident is a total fabrication she may feel overconfident and try something else?

Maybe she will try to 'frame' your cat next - she may certainly have wounds to show then.☺

[barry1010]

It may be their fence but it is your responsibility to ensure your dog stays out of their garden. If I were you I would erect my own fence parallel to theirs then you can be sure this won't happen again.

[bednobs]

Ha wolf you're right
i would of course rather be better terms with my neighbours but sadly that ship has sailed a long time ago

[bednobs]

that's my next move barry - we already (before the police came) have asked a firm to come and quote for a fence this week. I just feel cross that i feel i am being forced to sign this paperwork and admit liability (and pay them) for something i am not sure actually happened. When they first informed us last week they told us they had pictures but i have asked the for them and they wont show them to me

[AuntPollyGrey]

Having had direct experience of this I can assure you that by signing a CRO you are not admitting anything -you are agreeing to try and resolve a problem. In our case there was evidence as my OH saw what happened and the sheep were photographed, and the vet made a report. The owner of the dog was told if she did not sign the paper her dog would be destroyed. Unfortunately, she signed it but did nothing to address the problem and the dog killed her neighbour's kitten two weeks later and the dog was taken off her.

[davebro]

I would invite them round for cheese & wine (lock the dog in a bedroom) & screen 6 hours of "The nightmare neighbour next door".

Enough to persuade anyone to be reasonable!

[New Judge]

Personally unless I was absolutely sure that my dog had been out of control I would have nothing to do with the officer's kind offer. Dogs causing a nuisance do not make the owner liable to conviction under the Dangerous Dogs Act. They either have to bite someone or make someone fearful that they may be bitten. More than that, any prosecution must show that the owner (or person responsible for the dog) contributed to it being out of control by some act or omission. So if you had taken all reasonable steps to ensure your dog was contained within your garden (e.g. by a secure fence) and your dog destroyed or damaged it so as to break out

What happens if you refuse to sign it is that the police can either take no further action, issue you with a caution or prosecute you. A Community Resolution (CR) involves the recipient of it accepting responsibility for a crime. You therefore need far more information about the complaint before even considering whether or not to accept it. If for no other reason, this is because, since it is "an admission of guilt", should something similar occur in future the alleged victims can say "It's happened before, now it's happened again."

A CR is an easy disposal for the police. They have to provide no evidence to the criminal standard of proof to support the allegation; it shows the matter as "solved" in their statistics; generally no further action for the same incident can


Whilst a CR is not recorded on one's criminal record, it may show up in an enhanced DBS check.

[New Judge]

Sorry, end of para 1 missing:

So if you had taken all reasonable steps to ensure your dog was contained within your garden (e.g. by a secure fence) and your dog destroyed or damaged it so as to break out without having shown propensity to do so previously, you should not be convicted.

[New Judge]

//I can assure you that by signing a CRO you are not admitting anything//

Yes you are. You are accepting responsibility for a crime and effectively admitting your guilt. It is a key plank of the CR process. Here's a couple of paragraphs from the Sentencing Council's guidance on them:

"Community resolution is an informal non-statutory disposal used for dealing with less serious crime and anti-social behaviour where the offender accepts responsibility. The views of the victim (where there is one) are taken into account in reaching an informal agreement between the parties which can involve restorative justice techniques."

"When sentencing an offender who has received a community resolution for an earlier offence a community resolution is not a conviction and is therefore not a statutory aggravating factor, but if recent and relevant to the offence it may be considered to be an aggravating factor."

It is necessary for the person agreeing to be subject to a CR that they accept responsibility for the crime. You are, effectively, admitting your guilt.

[New Judge]

If this matter went to court, bednobs, the prosecution would have to prove that either (a) your dog bit your neighbour or (b) that your neighbour was fearful that it would do so. (a) is not as easy as you might think. Evidence of a bite (if there is any) is not evidence of which animal inflicted it. (b) would involve your neighbour convincing a court, so that they are sure, that they were fearful of being bitten by your dog (and not any other dog). They would also have to show that some act or omission on your part enabled your dog to get into your neighbour's property.

I would ask the officer in the case for far more detail before I considered accepting the CR (and also what "compensation" your neighbours have in mind). My view of CRs is that they are far too easy to administer to a worried (alleged) defendant.

[AuntPollyGrey]

NJ Maybe you should come talk to our local Bobbie because he explained the process to us quite clearly, although in our case it was perfectly clear what had happened, and the perpetrator admitted 'it was possible' her dog had killed two sheep.

[New Judge]

//NJ Maybe you should come talk to our local Bobbie because he explained the process to us quite clearly...//

You should never, ever, take legal advice from a serving police officer, AuntPolly.

I've provided the Sentencing Council's guidance and they clearly state that accepting a CR involves accepting responsibility. It goes on to say that, in certain circumstances, that acceptance can aggravate later offences. It would not be able to do so if the CR did not involve the equivalent to an admission of guilt.

However, in case you're not convinced by that (after all, what does the Sentencing Council know about such things?) here's something less formal:

https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/community-resolution-order/

"Does it [a CR] involve guilt?

Yes – you have to make a clear and reliable admission."

Or perhaps this:

https://informeddissent.info/cautions-and-community-resolution-orders

"Community Resolution Orders Summary

It’s like an apology for what you have done. You have to make a clear admission of guilt."

If, when explaining the process to you, your local Bobbie suggested it was not an admission of guilt he was misleading you because it most certainly is. It doesn't matter how clear cut or otherwise the matter is. The person accepting the CR admits guilt.

Police officers have a vested interest in persuading people to accept CRs if they deem it is appropriate. It satisfies (or should satisfy) the victim and it saves him a lot of time compared to prosecuting the offence through the courts. Officers may therefore, in order to get the recipients to accept the offer, whether by accident or design, provide information that is either misleading or simply incorrect. That's why (among many other reasons) you should never take legal advice from a serving police officer.

[AuntPollyGrey]

The Police officer was not trying to get ME to sign a CRO -he was explaining the procedure before he went over to the owner of the dog that caused the deaths of my sheep. He was asking me if I would accept she signed a CRO and compensate me for loss, or did I want to proceed with a court case. I of course, accepted the CRO and was compensated. The dog went on to kill a neighbour's kitten so I wish now I had insisted on having the dog destroyed.

[New Judge]

No I know that, Aunt Polly. I was just trying to explain (obviously not very well) the reasons why an officer may mislead people. In my view it is a serious matter if people are being told that acceptance of a CR is not an admission of guilt.

[jno]

JF DON'T DI!

They can't just make an accusation and expect you to take their word for it and admit everything. Well, they can, but you shouldn't. Demand to see the evidence, then think about it.