Should Cat's/Dogs have damage insurance

[medusa]

I don't have separate liability insurance for the dog because she's covered under my home insurance because in the eyes of the law she's a possession and all of my possessions are covered for liability.

[Andy1976]

What's interesting is that 99% of claims against dogs that bite are rejected by the Courts no matter how serious the injuries.

 

Unless you can prove that the dog has a history of biting, the insurers will inevitably defend the claim and the Court will dismiss.

 

Good old S2 Animals Act - child gets savaged by an aggressive dog and unless child's parents can get witnesses to say the dog has bitten before, the child has no recompense.

[vwkittie]

Each council area can have different rules in regard to dogs; but I believe all dogs must be on a lead, if it is near a road.

 

The road traffic act is pretty clear:

 

'A person who causes or permits a dog to be on a designated road without the dog being held on a lead is guilty of an offence.'

 

Basically you should not have your dog off lead on a road and dogs should obviously be kept under control near roads.

[samssong]

I don't have separate liability insurance for the dog because she's covered under my home insurance because in the eyes of the law she's a possession and all of my possessions are covered for liability.

Will check that as it will save paying out for extra cover. Cheers.(

[Berberis]

A dog ran out in front of us once and we hit it . It survived thank goodness and ran off down the road . Cost £300 to put the damage right . Did I think about tracking down the owner to sue them . NO, it was an accident, who knows if the postman let it out or a kid . Acicidents happen .

 

Very ture, an accident is just that, but if someone is woefully negligent, this is a different situation. What if when you swerved you had hit a pedestrian and either seriously injured or even killed them?

[Jeffrey Shaw]

There's a legal concept under which a landowner is liable for anything that avoidably escapes that land and damages someone or something outside it. Maybe that should be extended to one's animals and children, as a type of Public Liability Insurance?

[Cyclone]

If a cat or dog runs into the path of a car/cyclist etc and causes damage to the vehicle /bike should the owners be responsible to cover the cost. So should Cats/dogs have appropriate insurance in the event of an accident?.

 

The owners of a dog DO have responsibility for any damage caused. A cat is considered differently though.

 

---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 21:08 ----------

 

A dog ran out in front of us once and we hit it . It survived thank goodness and ran off down the road . Cost £300 to put the damage right . Did I think about tracking down the owner to sue them . NO, it was an accident, who knows if the postman let it out or a kid . Acicidents happen .

 

My friends dog ran out in front of a car and died, his Dad (my friends, not the dogs) paid for the damage to the car. Which is absolutely correct.

 

---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 21:09 ----------

 

Could a dog owner not sue a driver that hit the owner's dog ?

 

Yes, for criminal damage to property, if the car were being driven through the park. No, if the dog was running into the highway.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Cyclone

[RiffRaff]

I don't have separate liability insurance for the dog because she's covered under my home insurance because in the eyes of the law she's a possession and all of my possessions are covered for liability.

 

Interesting.

Didn't know that...

[Andy1976]

There's a legal concept under which a landowner is liable for anything that avoidably escapes that land and damages someone or something outside it. Maybe that should be extended to one's animals and children, as a type of Public Liability Insurance?

 

Rylands v Fletcher and the concept of dangerous escapes. Us legal types are full of useful info!

 

That requires bringing something onto land that's inherently dangerous if not controlled and wouldn't usually be there, if I remember my degree from 20 years ago!

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Rylands v Fletcher and the concept of dangerous escapes. Us legal types are full of useful info!

 

That requires bringing something onto land that's inherently dangerous if not controlled and wouldn't usually be there, if I remember my degree from 20 years ago!

Yes, but maybe the concept could/should be extended to create a statutory liability for a householder's "extended arm" (= members of household, animals kept, etc.)