# RSPCA @ the door!



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Howdy, first post as I'm asking for some advice and opinions please.


Opening the door this evening I was faced with an RSPCA inspector who immediately intro'd himself and asked me if I had a dog.

Smiling, I said "It wasn't me barking, what's up?"

He said "We've had a report of animal abuse. Can I come in?"

No longer smiling, I said "No. Will there be anything else?"

He cautioned me and said "I can come back with the police if you want to play it like that?"

I said "Yes, I do want to play it like that and make sure you have a search warrant if they want to come in. 'You' won't be coming in if you're not on it either."

I stood on the doorstep staring at him and as he turned to walk away I said "Do you have any evidence other than a malicious phonecall?"

He said "That's all we need."

I said "See you in court then."

My dog's well looked after, there's food in the house (about 12kilos of it). I groom and bath him regularly, he's chipped, inoculated, quite well trained and walked several times a day. I even pick up the dog poo religiously. I don't know who it is I've upset but I'm not entertaining 'charity reps' dressed as plastic policemen trying it on at the door.

Did I do the right thing? :sad:


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Do you think perhaps one of your neighbours may suspect you of filming your grandchild in a crate with a big scary dog or even something so vile (ha ha) as using a shock collar, possibly dirty tree times  O Really?


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you think perhaps one of your neighbours may suspect you of filming your grandchild in a crate with a big scary dog or even something so vile (ha ha) as using a shock collar, possibly dirty tree times  O Really?


My real name's Jeremy Veil (my nickname at work is my forum name here). Other than that you've lost me a bit there mate. I'm sure I'll catch up with things later. Any thoughts on my post please?


----------



## Lyracollie (Mar 20, 2014)

Some people really don't give up. 
Is there no way for mods to IP ban people?


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

I think you acted stupidly.

Someone who had nothing to hide would have let them come in, see that the dog was okay, and that would have been the end of the matter.

I say, you are hiding something. I could be wrong, but then why would an innocent person not comply, is my burning question?

Sorry! You did ask!


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Lyracollie said:


> Some people really don't give up.
> Is there no way for mods to IP ban people?


What makes you think that I'm some other person? Any answers on my question please?


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

JeremyVile said:


> Any thoughts on my post please?


Which ones?

Shall we start with......

*Nera**

Nera Smajic born - 1984. Nera Smajic is a Bosnian born Swedish footballer.

You claimed you were a Serbian living in Sweden.:thumbdown:


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

patsymatsy said:


> I think you acted stupidly.
> 
> Someone who had nothing to hide would have let them come in, see that the dog was okay, and that would have been the end of the matter.
> 
> ...


I Thank you for a serious reply.

I didn't let them in because they are charity workers who have no powers or authority. I am innocent until proven guilty in this country I believe.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Zaros said:


> Which ones?
> 
> Shall we start with......
> 
> ...


Mate, recheck your data. I'm Jeremy. I have one account on this forum. That's it.


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

JeremyVile said:


> I Thank you for a serious reply.
> 
> I didn't let them in because they are charity workers who have no powers or authority. I am innocent until proven guilty in this country I believe.


That is misguided and stubborn.

You have made what could have been a simple matter to resolve, into something that may cause you greater grief later.

You will have raised their suspicions even further by refusing access. As I already said, an innocent person would have complied and been more than happy to prove the caller wrong. A guilty person will avoid and drag out the situation at all costs.

Have you ever heard the saying.... "biting your nose off to spite your face"?

Again, sorry!


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

JeremyVile said:


> Mate, recheck your data. I'm Jeremy. I have one account on this forum. That's it.


Mate, any remote possibility you can get yourself abducted.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

patsymatsy said:


> That is misguided and stubborn.
> 
> You have made what could have been a simple matter to resolve, into something that may cause you greater grief later.
> 
> ...


Yes, I have heard that saying. After the inspector cautioned me I did consider doing what you suggested but then I thought against it.


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

JeremyVile said:


> Yes, I have heard that saying. After the inspector cautioned me I did consider doing what you suggested but then I thought against it.


Call them, get them to come back round soon, and then the matter is then closed.

Dragging it on and messing the RSPCA about is not a clever move. They have far more teeth than you may realise.

Though I suspect you think you have been clever, but really you have not!


----------



## Lyracollie (Mar 20, 2014)

Love how you claim your username is due to a joke at work but you have Jeremy Kyle as your profile picture. 
Just give up already.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Hello Dear.

Maybe you should have offered the Inspector hot chocolate and muffins?

Failing that, I find tears and hysteria often work.

If none of this is good, I suggest you put on an Ecollar and shock the Hell out of yourself.

You're welcome.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

patsymatsy said:


> Call them, get them to come back round soon, and then the matter is then closed.
> 
> Dragging it on and messing the RSPCA about is not a clever move. They have far more teeth than you may realise.
> 
> Though I suspect you think you have been clever, but really you have not!


I have nothing to hide. I'm a private person and I don't think that using my rights is being clever. I also don't think that I'm messing anybody about or see why I should erode my rights by letting any Tom, Dick or Harry through the door.

They came to my door. They've no powers or authority. They're a charity dressed up as plastic police in lookalike uniforms.

What teeth do they have? They have no more rights than you or I is what I'm reading on google.

I wondered if anyone else had any first hand experience of this type of situation?


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Lyracollie said:


> Love how you claim your username is due to a joke at work but you have Jeremy Kyle as your profile picture.
> Just give up already.


Not sure what's going on here but I'll just stick to my query for now folks. You can explain it to me in a pm if you like as it's confusing me a bit. Thanks.


----------



## SingingWhippet (Feb 25, 2015)

Lyracollie said:


> Some people really don't give up.


Probably because every time they post they're getting exactly what they want because people are responding to their threads instead of just using the report button then ignoring them.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

SingingWhippet said:


> Probably because every time they post they're getting exactly what they want because people are responding to their threads instead of just using the report button then ignoring them.


Same answer to you too. Not sure what's going on here but I'll just stick to my query for now folks. You can explain it to me in a pm if you like as it's confusing me a bit. Thanks.

If you don't have anything but abuse could you take it elsewhere please. I'm asking a civil question here.


----------



## pollypage (Jul 7, 2013)

I have to agree with Patsy, I appreciate and understand your not wanting to let them in but now you've roused suspicion and this will just prolong the situation when simple co-operation would have sufficed


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

I didn't get any pm's. You lot are just wind up merchants and I've reported your inciting posts!

To the couple that answered sensibly, thanks for your replies.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

pollypage said:


> I have to agree with Patsy, I appreciate and understand your not wanting to let them in but now you've roused suspicion and this will just prolong the situation when simple co-operation would have sufficed


The RSPCA are charity workers right? They work on donations and I read nothing but bad about them after chasing this query all night.

The legal advice I've just had said I did the right thing.

Why co-operate with what is basically a private concern?


----------



## Amelia66 (Feb 15, 2011)

you dont have to let them on the premises, if there is serious concern they will come back with the police which is fair enough. if you have nothing to hide this wont be an issue either so nothing to worry about


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Amelia66 said:


> you dont have to let them on the premises, if there is serious concern they will come back with the police which is fair enough. if you have nothing to hide this wont be an issue either so nothing to worry about


That's fine. Thanks for your sensible reply.

I've just been informed that the police will need a search warrant to gain access to premises, signed by a magistrate in ink (not a photocopy).

I'll be fine if that's the case as I've now instructed a solicitor who will be present when called.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Did exactly the right thing. Doesn't matter if you are innocent and it will be "cleared up". If someone wants, opening your door in that situation means they have access and things can spiral quickly. The law states you are innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately that is often not the case in reality. You need a paper trail of procedures followed for your own protection. A police record for instance will provide an additional independent witness rather than it simply becoming one inspectors word against yours. Would love to say otherwise and common sense ruled but it doesn't necessarily in modern society.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Did exactly the right thing. Doesn't matter if you are innocent and it will be "cleared up". If someone wants, opening your door in that situation means they have access and things can spiral quickly. The law states you are innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately that is often not the case in reality. You need a paper trail of procedures followed for your own protection. A police record for instance will provide an additional independent witness rather than it simply becoming one inspectors word against yours. Would love to say otherwise and common sense ruled but it doesn't necessarily in modern society.


Thanks. That makes me feel that I did the right thing now. Appreciate it.


----------



## Ownedbymany (Nov 16, 2014)

JeremyVile said:


> That's fine. Thanks for your sensible reply.
> 
> I've just been informed that the police will need a search warrant to gain access to premises, signed by a magistrate in ink (not a photocopy).
> 
> I'll be fine if that's the case as I've now instructed a solicitor who will be present when called.


I'm a private person too but if anyone (such as the RSPCA, not a random person on the street) had any concerns about my pets then I would happily prove that they are fine rather than waste police time given they are already seriously overstretched. _If your genuine_ then are you really happy to take time away from the little old lady that's just been burgled? or the mugging in the street? Get a grip!


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I had an inspector call once after someone locally reported me for leaving my dog out side forever, which wasn't true. He was a Westie, lovely clean white fur, happy boy and pleased to show off his tricks. I let the guy in to see him and he was very happy that it was likely just someone concerned at seeing him at my gate regularly - his favourite observation point. 
I let him in because I was glad some people are concerned for animal welfare and despite the fact that my dog wasn't abused very many actually are. For that reason I am glad concerned people exist and for that reason I was happy to let him see that mine wasn't one of the abused ones. They're doing an important job and and if they're right in just one case out of ten reports, I'm happy with that personally. 
Don't look on it as malicious reporting, look on it as concern in case an animal is being mis treated. I'd do exactly the same if I were concerned about an animal and what the owner was like wouldn't even enter into it.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Ownedbymany said:


> I'm a private person too but if anyone had any concerns about my pets then I would happily prove that they are fine rather than waste police time given they are already seriously overstretched. _If your genuine_ then are you really happy to take time away from the little old lady that's just been burgled? or the mugging in the street? Get a grip!


I see what you're saying but if some people have nothing better to do than report others for bogus rubbish then I won't be entertaining them by having an open house for charity workers who have no legal training.

They dress to look like the police. They are not the police.

They call themselves 'Inspector' to insinuate that they can inspect. They have no 'right of access'.

I don't need to prove anything and I believe that the onus of proof is on the prosecution. By not letting them in, they can gain no evidence. So I will answer anything they have legally, in court and within my rights.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Malmum said:


> I had an inspector call once after someone locally reported me for leaving my dog out side forever, which wasn't true. He was a Westie, lovely clean white fur, happy boy and pleased to show off his tricks. I let the guy in to see him and he was very happy that it was likely just someone concerned at seeing him at my gate regularly - his favourite observation point.
> I let him in because I was glad some people are concerned for animal welfare and despite the fact that my dog wasn't abused very many actually are. For that reason I am glad concerned people exist and for that reason I was happy to let him see that mine wasn't one of the abused ones. They're doing an important job and and if they're right in just one case out of ten reports, I'm happy with that personally.
> Don't look on it as malicious reporting, look on it as concern in case an animal is being mis treated. I'd do exactly the same if I were concerned about an animal and what the owner was like wouldn't even enter into it.


Some might be happy to appease them. I wasn't. I think that you just encourage busy bodies by appeasing them and allowing them access into your home.

Thanks for your reply.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

I'm off to bed now. If they do turn up tomorrow and I expect they shall. I'll let you know how it goes.

Thanks for your responses all.


----------



## Ownedbymany (Nov 16, 2014)

JeremyVile said:


> I see what you're saying but if some people have nothing better to do than report others for bogus rubbish then I won't be entertaining them by having an open house for charity workers who have no legal training.
> 
> They dress to look like the police. They are not the police.
> 
> ...


Proof of identity, check that ID, then film the whole visit on your phone & don't sign anything or hand your pets over if your that worried. They wont just seize your pets without going through the legal channels, particularly if your well informed about what they can/cant do and filming it. I doubt anything would ever get done about genuine complaints if everyone took your attitude because the police wouldn't have time. OFC you may feel its nobodies business if animals are abused...


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Ownedbymany said:


> Proof of identity, check that ID, then film the whole visit on your phone & don't sign anything or hand your pets over if your that worried. They wont just seize your pets without going through the legal channels, particularly if your well informed about what they can/cant do and filming it. I doubt anything would ever get done about genuine complaints if everyone took your attitude because the police wouldn't have time. OFC you may feel its nobodies business if animals are abused...


Before I go. Thanks for that OBM. It's appreciated.

My dog won't be at home tomorrow and I won't be answering any questions put to me by the inspector or the police. I will just identify myself, that's all. If they have a warrant they can come in and search until their hearts content.

Abuse? Prove it? Do you have a dog? Prove it.

I'm not usually rebellious and I have no criminal record because I've always gone straight and worked for a living. Reading some of the RSPCA horror stories online makes me think differently.

Thankfully there's more than one side to the situation surfacing here too.


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

I had several complaints regarding how I kept my dogs back in 2009. One of my neighbours repeatedly called the RSPCA for various (false) reasons. One of them was that I kept my dogs in rabbit hutches, LOL. I was always happy to let the RSPCA in when they knocked. 

The calls were consistently false and when I saw the same woman from the RSPCA a second time, she told me that nobody would be sent out if they received more calls from the same neighbour. 

I've had that happen a few times in previous years (I'm not an awful neighbour, I promise!), and always find it better to let them come in and evaluate the place. They're just doing their job and if the complaints are false then there's no reason to make their job and your life more difficult. I like to stay on good terms with organisations like the RSPCA. 

Aside from having to keep the house tidy to prevent any shame during surprise RSPCA visits, I enjoyed having them come over. It gave me a chance to rave about all things dog for 5 minutes with people who were as interested as I was every once in a while, LOL.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

JeremyVile said:


> Howdy, first post as I'm asking for some advice and opinions please.
> 
> Opening the door this evening I was faced with an RSPCA inspector who immediately intro'd himself and asked me if I had a dog.
> 
> ...


I would say 'well done'. You did exactly as I would have done under the circumstances. These people are trumped up little nobodies who don't give a monkey's wotsits about animals, only about collecting funds and feeling important. Most people when face with these lookalike policemen at the door will panic and let them in and regret it later. As you so rightly say, they have no rights and I doubt very much whether they would be back with the police.



JeremyVile said:


> My real name's Jeremy Veil (my nickname at work is my forum name here). Other than that you've lost me a bit there mate. I'm sure I'll catch up with things later. Any thoughts on my post please?


There is a continuous troll who keeps coming back with a new username and causing problems. I don't think you are him, as you already have 17 posts and your question is a valid one, not a made up, stupid one.

Innocent until proven guilty I think.



Lyracollie said:


> Some people really don't give up.
> Is there no way for mods to IP ban people?


No, but even if there were it is easy enough to use a proxy. I don't believe this person is LP and until I am proved wrong, it is hardly fair to jump on every newcomer with a question. This poster has 17 posts already.



patsymatsy said:


> I think you acted stupidly.
> 
> Someone who had nothing to hide would have let them come in, see that the dog was okay, and that would have been the end of the matter.
> 
> ...


I disagree. I would never let them in. If they had a real case to answer, they would have applied for a search warrant and arrived armed with a police officer. Personally, I wouldn't let one of those plastic policemen called Community officers in either. No one is allowed into your house without a court order, absolutely no one.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

dogsaintdumb said:


> I had several complaints regarding how I kept my dogs back in 2009. One of my neighbours repeatedly called the RSPCA for various (false) reasons. One of them was that I kept my dogs in rabbit hutches, LOL. I was always happy to let the RSPCA in when they knocked.
> 
> The calls were consistently false and when I saw the same woman from the RSPCA a second time, she told me that nobody would be sent out if they received more calls from the same neighbour.
> 
> ...


Having slept on the matter. No, I still won't agree to let them in. There's always good reasons to make my life easier. Not giving in to charity is one of them.

I've found that a lot of the posts, that were happy to let them into my home, seem to have some kind of veiled threats attached to them. Keeping them out doesn't worry me, as I have nothing to hide or fear in the first place.



patsymatsy said:


> Call them, get them to come back round soon, and then the matter is then closed.
> 
> *Dragging it on and messing the RSPCA about is not a clever move. They have far more teeth than you may realise. *
> 
> ...


Patsymatsy, perhaps you could explain why dragging it on is not a 'clever move'? How will it cause me more grief later on? What 'teeth' they actually do have in your opinion?

They have no more powers than any other member of the public. I have learned, since they called, that when you comply with these people, you contract to abide by their rules. I won't be playing by their rules today either. They're a 'pets for profit' organisation and no better than puppy farmers.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

dogsaintdumb said:


> Aside from having to keep the house tidy to prevent any shame during surprise RSPCA visits, I enjoyed having them come over. It gave me a chance to rave about all things dog for 5 minutes with people who were as interested as I was every once in a while, LOL.


But why should you feel shame for the state of your own house for the sake of other people? Obviously, it suits you. That is an infringement of your privacy to start with.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

Not read all the replies .... Even I think you should give up the game (why would an innocent newbie protest that they only have one account when faced with the suspicion that you're repeatedly banned member? :sosp

However, I agree with patsy. You weren't clever in turning the RSPCA away. If I were in your shoes, I would have welcomed them in, apologised for the toys lying around the living room - especially one lion's amputated foot which still has a squeaker inside it which, not only still works but seems to magnetically attract foot and paw alike   and brought my dogs in to meet them. I would have then shown them into the kitchen and directed them to the cupboard where I keep their dog food, explained that they're fed twice a day and asked them if I could be of any more help to them.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

No one gets in my place without an invite and I invite very very few.
AN RSPCA inspector would not get past my door


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Ownedbymany said:


> I'm a private person too but if anyone (such as the RSPCA, not a random person on the street) had any concerns about my pets then I would happily prove that they are fine rather than waste police time given they are already seriously overstretched. _If your genuine_ then are you really happy to take time away from the little old lady that's just been burgled? or the mugging in the street? Get a grip!


That might be something of concern if the police would ever put an animal's welfare before those things you mention. They wouldn't; it would be down the bottom of their list. When my dog got himself stuck in the river and I had to call the fire brigade, some SA on here moaned that someone's house could be burning down while they were rescuing my dog. Of course not; they would have gone to the fire first and if they had a fire to tend to they certainly would not have sent four fire engines:eek6:



Malmum said:


> I had an inspector call once after someone locally reported me for leaving my dog out side forever, which wasn't true. He was a Westie, lovely clean white fur, happy boy and pleased to show off his tricks. I let the guy in to see him and he was very happy that it was likely just someone concerned at seeing him at my gate regularly - his favourite observation point.
> I let him in because I was glad some people are concerned for animal welfare and despite the fact that my dog wasn't abused very many actually are. For that reason I am glad concerned people exist and for that reason I was happy to let him see that mine wasn't one of the abused ones. They're doing an important job and and if they're right in just one case out of ten reports, I'm happy with that personally.
> Don't look on it as malicious reporting, look on it as concern in case an animal is being mis treated. I'd do exactly the same if I were concerned about an animal and what the owner was like wouldn't even enter into it.


That was your decision, and if you were happy to let them in, that is fine. The OP wasn't so why should he have to? I had a phone call from them once because some nosy old biddy peering through my fence thought my rabbits were out in the snow with no shelter. I invited them round to see if they wanted to, but they declined. When I moved and Ferdie refused to get out of the car all night, and it was hot, the police turned up. I was glad someone took the trouble to worry about him so was happy to show her that he had water and a wet towel round him and when I sat on the tailgate, he licked me round the ear and laid his head on my shoulder! The policewoman couldn't get him out either.

Someone reporting animal abuse if they are genuinely concerned is one thing, someone doing it maliciously is a different thing and the RSPCA turning up and demanding entry is not something I would comply with either.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

If malicious callers were fined or details given to the person they were being malicious to, it would stop much of this nastiness.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

JeremyVile said:


> I see what you're saying but if some people have nothing better to do than report others for bogus rubbish then I won't be entertaining them by having an open house for charity workers who have no legal training.
> 
> They dress to look like the police. They are not the police.
> 
> ...


I have no idea whether you are the troll who keeps posting on this forum under different pseudonyms or not, which is clearly what others think.

However I can see you already have a very strong, negative opinion of the RSPCA and you appear to be clear in your own mind that your response was (to you) justified.

So why I are you bothering to ask us?

If the RSPCA come back with the police you are going to have to let them in so I fail to see what you have gained (except I agree with Goblin's comment about having an independent witness with you would be useful).

Suggest you take the dog for a nice walk and calm down.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

I personally wouldn't let the RSPCA across the door - I have heard too many negative things about them. But I would very probably have brought my dog to the door so that they could see how well cared for she was (actually, I would have a job keeping the nosey little bugger away from a visitor!).

However, you lost my sympathy when you said that if they returned with the police (and a search warrant) you would make sure your dog wasn't on the premises. Why not? If your dog is fit and well, why are you so reluctant to even admit you have a dog?

It is one thing to stand up for your "rights" - quite another to be a bloody-minded time-waster.

Maybe you have a malicious neighbour - or maybe someone is genuinely concerned about your dog. A lady I meet on walks occasionally has a viszla which is just skin and bone (though very friendly and full of energy). It has been to the vet and had god-alone-kows-how-many tests and they can't find anything wrong with him. He's entire, so the only thing they could think of was he's worrying the weight off via sexual frustration (!).

He's a happy, healthy, friendly dog - just very, very skinny, and before I spoke to this woman, I was concerned about him. (I suppose that in the same way there are people who can't seem to put on weight, there are dogs with the same problem.)

It may be that someone is genuinely concerned about your dog - it doesn't have to be a malicious report.

If what you say about your name is true - I'm not surprised your colleagues call you Jeremy Vile - you sound as though you go out of your way to make things difficult for people.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Delilahdog said:


> I have no idea whether you are the troll who keeps posting on this forum under different pseudonyms or not, which is clearly what others think.
> 
> However I can see you already have a very strong, negative opinion of the RSPCA and you appear to be clear in your own mind that your response was (to you) justified.
> 
> ...


I don't have a good opinion of RSPCA either....plenty people are of the same mind.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

I'm in 2 minds...

Part of me would let them in to show them my dogs are okay and a call out wasn't necessary. 

The other part of me would ask them to return with a warrant with police as I understand they dont have the powers to enter your home. 

I don't know what I'd do! But clearly, you made the right choice for you.

Knowing my luck Charlie would hurt his foot and be yelping and Dottie would banging an empty food bowl against the wall when they came in! :lol:


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

lostbear said:


> I personally wouldn't let the RSPCA across the door - I have heard too many negative things about them. But I would very probably have brought my dog to the door so that they could see how well cared for she was (actually, I would have a job keeping the nosey little bugger away from a visitor!).
> 
> However, you lost my sympathy when you said that if they returned with the police (and a search warrant) you would make sure your dog wasn't on the premises. Why not? If your dog is fit and well, why are you so reluctant to even admit you have a dog?
> 
> ...


I have to admit, I can relate to that. If people are polite about things, that is one thing, but otherwise I will go out of my way to be awkward.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Pupcakes said:


> I'm in 2 minds...
> 
> Part of me would let them in to show them my dogs are okay and a call out wasn't necessary.
> 
> ...


Laughed my socks off at this! :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

I`ve had the Dog Warden round in response to a complaint. It turned out the dozy mare who phoned it in got the wrong address. The complaint was unfounded anyway so it didn`t bother me. 
The RSPCA pop in fairly regularly... mostly to bring me another Foster or supplies for them or to take them to the vet. 
Maybe the Jeremy Kyle wannabe should chill......


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> I don't have a good opinion of RSPCA either....plenty people are of the same mind.


I have no strong opinions either way, I haven't really had any first hand experience of the RSPCA or their officers. I have heard enough anecdotes to know not everyone likes their way of operating or finds them effectual. Personally I don't agree with everything they stand for (but I could say that about a lot of institutions)

However I also don't think it helps anyone being confrontational toward individual officers. I feel exactly the same about traffic wardens. They have a difficult job to do and some manage it well and some not so well. Winding them up doesn't achieve anything imo.


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

I would not have let them in either but I would have brought my dog or dogs out so that they could see they were fine 
What type of dog have you got OP


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

It makes me sad to see that some of the regular members on here have such an attitude to visitors. I am very social, my door is never locked and there are frequent visitors and I would be shocked and upset if I was not made welcome if I visited someone whether in a social or official capacity.

I do not approve of the way the RSPCA/SSPCA often act but I would never turn them away. Why would you if you had a clear conscience. I have been reported for my horses, I think just about every horse owner in the area has been. I am glad that there are people who keep an eye on animals and do something about their concerns even if they are usually unfounded (and when they are not nothing is followed up on anyway). When we had a new inspector he used to call round for a chat every so often. He got invited in for a cup of tea, he did not want to see the animals. I am not even sure why he came round, I think he just wanted some contacts in the horse world as he seemed to go regularly on a social basis to a lot of multi horse owners.
I have no faith in them actually helping animals in need but no reason to stop them doing their job. 

It must be so annoying to follow up a complaint which is unfounded and have to involve police and a lot of wasted time to be sure that all is well.


----------



## Snowdog (Mar 3, 2015)

I dont welcome visitors that much
Just the rare few
I don't like visitors


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

JeremyVile said:


> Having slept on the matter. No, I still won't agree to let them in. There's always good reasons to make my life easier. Not giving in to charity is one of them.
> 
> I've found that a lot of the posts, that were happy to let them into my home, seem to have some kind of veiled threats attached to them. Keeping them out doesn't worry me, as I have nothing to hide or fear in the first place.
> 
> ...


Forget it, I am out. You clearly have made up your mind to waste a charities time, and if it comes to also the Police's time.

I think it very telling that you declare your dog will not be at home today, if the RSPCA arrive again today.

I take issue with you implying that I am issuing "veiled threats". I took your question seriously, unlike many here. I will not make that mistake again.

Good day!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> However I also don't think it helps anyone being confrontational toward individual officers


It isn't a case of being confrontational and the very term 'officers' gives the impression of some official capacity. They have none. They have no more authority than you or I until and unless they obtain it from the courts. There's no need to be unpleasant to them if you know this, you can explain the position with a smile on your face.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

I have plenty visitors too..they come because we are being sociable not cos they want to see if my animals are healthy or not.

So much cruelty that is evident all around without people ringing them up yet the obvious stuff remains as it was and obvious.

Its easy for some nasty neighbour/person/no longer a friend to ring them up with an anonymous malicious complaint. Some people have no life and enjoy causing misery for others.

Some people have nothing better to do than gossip.

I have a friend who lives in an affluent area of Manchester. One of her neighbours goes round housing estates looking for animals she can report to RSPCA. If she sees a cat in a window that looks, "sad" she reports it.

Its a pity there is no consequence for people who do this sort of thing cos maybe if there was then RSPCA could get on in more needy areas, do what they are paid to do and maybe more people would have respect for them.

When the Icelandic bank went bust, it took with it millions and millions that RSPCA had invested with them.

Little old ladies leaving money to them in wills is so they can prevent cruelty and rehabilitate animals.....

RSPCA is very good at manipulating more vulnerable members of our society.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

SSPCA go into my grand daughters school quite regularly. They are 10.

No prior warning that there will be a talk in school etc..and what do they ask the kids? Do you have any pet? does your mummy breed them? How many animals have you got?

Drove past some farm land the other week to go shopping. Fields on either side of the roads were black with mud and plenty lame and miserable sheep on them....not a blade of grass in sight, some empty ring feeders in the field....no way of getting a tractor out to fill them up cos of all the mud...where was SSPCA then?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

go and look at any videos on Appleby horse fair. Some amazing sights....RSPCA are more bothered about people selling puppies and kittens there and don't see that yearlings and 2 year old horses and donkeys are being ridden and driven...cos it takes knowledge to spot a young horse or pony etc and usually owned by a gypsy type that they don't want to tangle with...whereas somebody selling a puppy is easier pickings.


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

This forum REALLY doesn't like the RSPCA or PETA. 

Both try and help animals. Yes sometimes mistakes are made, but on the whole these organisations do more good than harm.

Lilythepink, did you call the SSPCA about the poor sheep in the field? The RSPCA or SSPCA can only act if the public make them aware of a cruelty/neglect situation.  They are not mind readers, and do not automatically know the location of every suffering animal in the UK.


----------



## MyAnimals (Aug 14, 2014)

Not sure if this is a wind up or not, but to give it the benefit of the doubt, here's my two penneth.

I half expect the RSPCA or someone to turn up at my door one day. My dogs can play loud and it sounds scary. We have high fences and a very private garden so neighbours can't see in. Maybe if we have a new neighbour they may not realise that they're playing and report dogs fighting on a regular basis. If that day ever comes I'll welcome them in with open arms. They can see my dogs fit and healthy without a mark on them, a big bowl of fresh water, a freezer full of good food, very comfy beds, a secure garden free from poop. I'm 100% confident that I'd pass an inspection with flying colours at any time. 

If you have nothing to hide, just let them in. Why waste time money and effort of a charity or local authority when a quick inspection would tick their box and send them on their way.


----------



## Freyja (Jun 28, 2008)

I'm another who would not let the RSPCA onto my property. I would however take my dogs into the front garden for them to see. They haave no authority and can not demand to enter your property. 

Even if they go away and bring the police and a search warrent you can still refuse the RSPCA entrance you have to let the police in but not the RSPCA 'inspectors'. They have no more authority to demand you let them onto your property than you or I have to go onto any one elses property.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

You may or may not like the RSPCA but they are at least trying to do something about animal cruelty. Maybe not enough nor in the right way for some, but if they didn't exist what then?
They are a charity, not a government body or an arm of the law. Like everyone they have finite resources and limited powers, not magic wands.
I can only imagine what it must be like to be confronted daily with cases of cruelty, neglect & ignorance where the law only allows you to offer a metaphorical sticking plaster. 
And for extra fun some nitwit decides you are the ideal opportunity to wind up their gobby neighbour. But your not allowed to get bent out of shape about it.
I couldn't do it.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> I can only imagine what it must be like to be confronted daily with cases of cruelty, neglect & ignorance where the law only allows you to offer a metaphorical sticking plaster.


The law allows for plenty more than that in cases of neglect or cruelty. There is a perfectly good legal process which works perfectly well when used properly. Where many of us take issue is with private individuals implying they have some sort of statutory authority when they don't. If I (or anybody) turned up to your house asking to check around inside would you let me in? If not why not? I hold as much authority as any RSPCA employee.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

lostbear said:


> Laughed my socks off at this! :laugh::laugh::laugh:


:lol: It's true!

In fact, Charlie would probably jump into their arms and give them a "thank God you're here" hug.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> The law allows for plenty more than that in cases of neglect or cruelty. There is a perfectly good legal process which works perfectly well when used properly. Where many of us take issue is with private individuals implying they have some sort of statutory authority when they don't. If I (or anybody) turned up to your house asking to check around inside would you let me in? If not why not? I hold as much authority as any RSPCA employee.


There is a world of difference between a visit from an identifiable representative of a concerned organisation and some random bloke.
I would take issue with the word 'perfect' in this context.
The law and its process is far from perfect where animal welfare is concerned.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

Pupcakes said:


> I'm in 2 minds...
> 
> Part of me would let them in to show them my dogs are okay and a call out wasn't necessary.
> 
> ...


I really did laugh out loud at that, but it got me thinking about how mine would react.

Max would be whimpering/growling/barking for attention, while Milly would think she was auditioning for the RSPCA TV commericial so will no doubt put on her best "I'm so hard done by" face. :lol:


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> There is a world of difference between a visit from an identifiable representative of a concerned organisation


No there isn't, that's exactly the point. You are ascribing an importance and authority to private individuals which is exactly the impression the RSPCA like to give. I can call myself a concerned organisation if you like. I sit on the committee of a local registered charity.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The RSPCA came round to my house a few years ago and asked to see my dog. I told them I didn't have a dog, I only have two guinea pigs. The inspector informed me that I owned a German Shepherd, which was news to me and told me they had him in their van. :yikes:

Apparently, he'd been straying and neighbours had told them he was my dog. No idea why they would, I live in a small, quiet cul-de-sac where we all know each other and no-one here owns a GSD. They told me to look at him, I don't know why I agreed, he's not going to look anything like a guinea-pig. The dog reacted by barking at the cage bars and clearly behaving as though he'd never seen me in his life, which of course he hadn't. "Oh, he isn't yours is he?" Erm, no. Like I said, I don't have a dog.

I probably wouldn't let them in my house, they weren't very nice to me, very authoritative and insistent. I'd bring Elles to the door to say hello and show how healthy she is, but I'd not waste any more of their time, or mine by bringing them inside.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Elles said:


> The RSPCA came round to my house a few years ago and asked to see my dog. I told them I didn't have a dog, I only have two guinea pigs. The inspector informed me that I owned a German Shepherd, which was news to me and told me they had him in their van. :yikes:
> 
> Apparently, he'd been straying and neighbours had told them he was my dog. No idea why they would, I live in a small, quiet cul-de-sac where we all know each other and no-one here owns a GSD. They told me to look at him, *I don't know why I agreed, he's not going to look anything like a guinea-pig.* The dog reacted by barking at the cage bars and clearly behaving as though he'd never seen me in his life, which of course he hadn't. "Oh, he isn't yours is he?" Erm, no. Like I said, I don't have a dog.
> 
> I probably wouldn't let them in my house, they weren't very nice to me, very authoritative and insistent. I'd bring Elles to the door to say hello and show how healthy she is, but I'd not waste any more of their time, or mine by bringing them inside.


From what I've heard of the RSPCA, they probably wouldn't know a GSD from a guinea pig:thumbdown: I did laugh though.

My daughter used to have their emergency number on speed dial; she was always phoning them. Once she went to an open country house and saw a rabbit outside a shop in the heat, no water, no food. She went in the shop and complained but got nowhere, so she rang the RSPCA. They didn't come out but they did phone the place and insist they attend to the rabbit. The same thing happened in Pets at Home when she complained to the manager about the rabbits and guinea pigs being under fluorescent lights. But, she did phone them once on a hot day when she saw a dog in a car, small gap in the window; they obviously took action because the police turned up ready to break in. Whether it was RSPCA who phoned them or someone phoned the police I don't know, but the owners got a right telling off.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

LinznMilly said:


> I really did laugh out loud at that, but it got me thinking about how mine would react.
> 
> Max would be whimpering/growling/barking for attention, while Milly would think she was auditioning for the RSPCA TV commericial so will no doubt put on her best "I'm so hard done by" face. :lol:


Glad you had a laugh!

Haha! :lol: It's that same feeling you get when you step on your dogs paw by accident when you're walking in public and they scream blue murder and cower up because their hurt and everyone is looking at you like cr*p!


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> No there isn't, that's exactly the point. You are ascribing an importance and authority to private individuals which is exactly the impression the RSPCA like to give. I can call myself a concerned organisation if you like. I sit on the committee of a local registered charity.


Well I am afraid we have to agree to differ.
If you were to come around to my house as an identifiable member of a local charity I would definitely give you the time of day. Same if an (identifiable) worker from the local gas or water company knocked on the door. Or an RSPCA inspector.
Whether I let any of you in would very much depend - on why you needed to, whether I was home alone etc etc. 
It's not because I am ascribing any importance or authority to any of you, just behaving in a civilised manner as I like anyone to do to me when I am going about my daily business.
In the case of the RSPCA inspector I would very probably do as many have suggested and bring my dog to the doorstep for inspection and try to find out more about the cause of his/her visit. But if OH was home or I had company I would likely invite the inspector in.
There was nothing in the OP which suggested to me the inspector was overstepping his authority or being nasty.
I am not setting myself up as a champion for the RSPCA but as someone who had worked in the customer service industry one way or another for about 30 years I definitely have a lot of sympathy for individuals who have to deal with grumpy, unco-operative members of the public.
Particularly those who make assumptions based on stereotypes.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Delilahdog said:


> I have no strong opinions either way, I haven't really had any first hand experience of the RSPCA or their officers. I have heard enough anecdotes to know not everyone likes their way of operating or finds them effectual. Personally I don't agree with everything they stand for (but I could say that about a lot of institutions)
> 
> However I also don't think it helps anyone being confrontational toward individual officers. I feel exactly the same about traffic wardens. They have a difficult job to do and some manage it well and some not so well. Winding them up doesn't achieve anything imo.


very good...and at most you can get a parking ticket off a traffic warden....whilst an RSPCA Inspector can take your pet away, PTS and then its down to you to find out why.

happens all the time.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Delilahdog said:


> You may or may not like the RSPCA but they are at least trying to do something about animal cruelty. Maybe not enough nor in the right way for some, but if they didn't exist what then?
> They are a charity, not a government body or an arm of the law. Like everyone they have finite resources and limited powers, not magic wands.
> I can only imagine what it must be like to be confronted daily with cases of cruelty, neglect & ignorance where the law only allows you to offer a metaphorical sticking plaster.
> And for extra fun some nitwit decides you are the ideal opportunity to wind up their gobby neighbour. But your not allowed to get bent out of shape about it.
> I couldn't do it.


How many animals do they euthanise every year? ask them for help....see where it gets you cos if there is no money or publicity in it for them, forget it.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> I probably wouldn't let them in my house, they weren't very nice to me, very authoritative and insistent.


Whether you invite them (or any stranger) in to your home or not is up to the individual. The point is they can't come in without an invitation and they shouldn't give the impression they can. That impression can be made up of many things - their attitude and the words they use is down to the individual employee, wearing uniforms which are very similar to the police and calling employees 'officers' or 'inspectors' is a policy decision and a dodgy one in my opinion.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> very good...and at most you can get a parking ticket off a traffic warden....whilst an RSPCA Inspector can take your pet away, PTS and then its down to you to find out why.
> 
> happens all the time.


Well, I think disputes with traffic wardens have been known to escalate all out of proportion and way beyond 'just a parking ticket'.

As I said, I am not trying to Champion the RSPCA (although I'm steadily feeling I am getting backed into a corner). In the instance quoted here the inspector appears to have been going about his job in a perfectly reasonable manner and imo the OP has been unnecessarily unco-operative.

He is at perfect liberty to turn the inspector away but if by posting here he is looking to get a pat on the back I am afraid he isn't getting one from me.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> How many animals do they euthanise every year? ask them for help....see where it gets you cos if there is no money or publicity in it for them, forget it.


So Lilythepink what's your perfect solution? Let's get rid of the RSPCA - and put what in their place?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> There was nothing in the OP which suggested to me the inspector was overstepping his authority


What authority? There was none to overstep. Just because you agree with the motives doesn't change the authority and the householders legal right to tell unwanted visitors to leave.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Pupcakes said:


> :lol: It's true!
> 
> In fact, Charlie would probably jump into their arms and give them a "thank God you're here" hug.


I can here him now - "Oh officer, thank God you've come! You know what I had to eat yesterday? Lobsters - apparently "there was no Beluga", or so she said. Do you believe that? No - I don't either. She just didn't want to pay Harrod's prices. THAT'S the sort of owner I've got. And she calls herself a dog lover . . . "


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Delilahdog said:


> So Lilythepink what's your perfect solution? Let's get rid of the RSPCA - and put what in their place?


oh don't get all defensive and touchy......open your eyes to what they are really all about.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

patsymatsy said:


> This forum REALLY doesn't like the RSPCA or PETA.
> 
> Both try and help animals. Yes sometimes mistakes are made, but on the whole these organisations do more good than harm.
> 
> Lilythepink, did you call the SSPCA about the poor sheep in the field? The RSPCA or SSPCA can only act if the public make them aware of a cruelty/neglect situation.  They are not mind readers, and do not automatically know the location of every suffering animal in the UK.


ha ha ha. PETA trying to help animals - get real 



lilythepink said:


> oh don't get all defensive and touchy......open your eyes to what they are really all about.


The SSPCA is rubbish very often but then again if no one calls them they do not get the chance to surprise us. What everyone seems to forget is that the local council has an animal welfare officer who really does have teeth - if he/she is prepared to use them.
As far as lame sheep go they would not be interested I am afraid.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Delilahdog said:


> So Lilythepink what's your perfect solution? Let's get rid of the RSPCA - and put what in their place?


Animal welfare is the purview of the police and that is where it should lay, not with a so-called charity who spends its millions on police lookalike uniforms and posh vans and offices. We should have a specialist police force in place, as we do for other areas of criminal activity. Such a force could actually do some good and would not be begging for money and invading out living rooms with film of half starved animals they claim to have saved.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> What authority? There was none to overstep. Just because you agree with the motives doesn't change the authority and the householders legal right to tell unwanted visitors to leave.


No, he had no authority. But from what's been stated he hasn't assumed any either. He simply advised he would return with someone who does have authority, the police. 
No one is saying he DID have any authority.It's just point scoring. 
The RSPCA dude (for want of a better noun) had received a complaint and he was following it up.
How would you go about investigating a complaint of animal cruelty?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

It seems to work in US. Always on discovery channel and have real powers to get down to here its needed.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> oh don't get all defensive and touchy......open your eyes to what they are really all about.


Easy to criticise, not so easy to provide an alternative solution


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Delilahdog said:


> Easy to criticise, not so easy to provide an alternative solution


are you for real???


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

newfiesmum said:


> Animal welfare is the purview of the police and that is where it should lay, not with a so-called charity who spends its millions on police lookalike uniforms and posh vans and offices. We should have a specialist police force in place, as we do for other areas of criminal activity. Such a force could actually do some good and would not be begging for money and invading out living rooms with film of half starved animals they claim to have saved.


I'd go for that.


----------



## piggybaker (Feb 10, 2009)

When we first got Buddy, someone at the school complained to the RSPCA , it was the second week ONG I was devastated in the complaint it was said he was to skinny and my daughter was abusing him!!! 

The school was so supportive with me and was really cross at the person who called ( schools have many ears) and told the RSPCA inspector that it was out of order for them to have turned up at the school but called!! They wouldn't allow the inspector to talk to my daughter or touch the dog but allowed her to observe through glass.... They called me in to tell me and gave me the number. I wasted no time contacting her and asked her to visit our house and Buddy and see all his vet record. Once I had explained we had only had him two weeks and my daughter and him were still getting to know each other... This completely took the wind out her sails and we ended up having a good old yarn about service dogs and how amazing they are  personally I'm not a fan of the RSPCA I was actually really impressed that she listened to what I said and explained what was happening, she didn't judge and said she couldn't understand why she had been called as service dogs have to be a certain weight and Buddy looked good and in time my daughter would settle with him and thee was to many people watching her for any problems to happen...

Hey ho just thought I would share


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

I think I may have mentioned this before, but anyway.... I do actually know someone who let the RSPCA into her home and lost her dog as a consequence.

It was an elderly lady who lived a couple of doors away from us. She had been in hospital for a hip replacement and was recuperating. Me and some of the other kids living nearby used to visit to take her dog (a highland terrier) for a walk, because the lady was still using a walker at that stage.
We also used used to make sure that the dog had food and fresh water. The lady could have managed that, but we did it to help her anyway.

Then one of the other kid's parents heard what she was doing and decided that she didn't want her child 'visiting strangers' houses', so, instead of just telling her daughter not to visit anymore, the ***** phoned the RSPCA and told them that the woman wasn't able to look after her dog.

Two RSPCA inspectors called when only the lady was there. She naturally took some time to get to the door and her dog barked at the inspectors, probably because they were strangers.
The lady let the inspectors in. They told her that she wasn't capable of looking after her dog and that they 'would have to take it into care'.
The lady was beside herself, but there was no one to help her right then, so, depite her protests that the dog was well cared for and well-exercised, they took the dog away.

As soon as us kids found out, we told our parents and they contacted the RSPCA to explain the situation, but the RSPCA didn't want to know.
My parents then offered to look after the dog until its owner was back fully on her feet, but they refused this too.
They told my parents that the dog was elderly and 'in some distress' (of course it was - it was in a strange place away from its owner! Apart from that it was perfectly healthy). My parents didn't give up that easily - they visited some local RSPCA offices and asked to see the dog, but they were again refused access.

The lady never got her dog back and the RSPCA refused to tell us or the lady involved what had happened to it, so we can only guess.
But my parents said that they would have to go a long way to meet more rude, patronising people.

It started my dad looking more into the RSPCA and how they treated pets, and, even before massive use of the internet, he was able to find quite a few more examples of the RSPCA seizing pets for no good reason. But of course in those days (early nineties) it was difficult to get the information out there to warn others.
Luckily nowadays that isn't the case and more and more people are informed.

Before all this, I used to support the RSPCA - us kids used to help them on 'flag days' and the like, but after that....no way!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> In the instance quoted here the inspector appears to have been going about his job in a perfectly reasonable manner and imo the OP has been unnecessarily unco-operative.


If this had been any other random caller would you use a term like 'uncooperative'? If I'd posted on here that I'd had a salesman to my door and I'd asked them to leave is that the term you'd use? If they'd said they'd keep coming back until I let them in would you think it was me being unreasonable? Legally (and morally) there's no difference.


----------



## Apollo2012 (Jun 10, 2013)

If the RSPCA turned up here, letting them come in to look at Apollo wouldn't be a wise choice for me because he would go crazy if I made him stand in a room with a stranger in . I don't quite know how I would handle it actually, I wouldn't refuse to let them see him but I would have to try do it in a way that wouldn't stress Apollo out.

I don't see the point in refusing people access, I've recently had a letter from the TV licence people saying they will be sending someone round to check if I'm watching TV illegally (which I'm not for clarification :lol. I'm not going to refuse them access just because they aren't the police, It's just more hassle for me.


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

Salesmen and the RSPCA are completely different IMO and I don't view them similarly at all. I don't feel the need to settle a salesman's conscious, whereas the RSPCA are there saying "look, someone said such and such and we just want to make sure everything's okay". It appeals to my human sentiment, and that's the main reason why I am happy to let the RSPCA in. The reason would differ from person to person, but that's why I initially decided to let the first RSPCA rep. into my house. 

I treat anybody who knocks on my door respectfully, regardless of whether they're lost travellers, salesmen, RSPCA reps. or Jehovah's Witnesses. Unless they're being unnecessarily confrontational or behaving aggressively, or it's just not appropriate, I invite everybody into my home to finish whatever conversation we're having.

Having said that, I read the rest of the thread this morning and did some thinking. The RSPCA workers I've met have all been friendly and anodyne. I've offered them coffee and had some nice conversations.

If one rocked up to my door all guns blazing, I probably would refuse entry.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> I'm not going to refuse them access just because they aren't the police


No they're not the police, I believe it's outsourced to a debt collection agency. Don't think there are any background checks required to work for such agencies and therefore I wouldn't let them in.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

havoc said:


> If this had been any other random caller would you use a term like 'uncooperative'? If I'd posted on here that I'd had a salesman to my door and I'd asked them to leave is that the term you'd use? If they'd said they'd keep coming back until I let them in would you think it was me being unreasonable? Legally (and morally) there's no difference.


That reminds me of the bloke who came round trying to get me to switch electricity companies and didn't like the look of Ferdie. He said: 'in the interests of health and safety, could you put the dog inside?' Do all these people who think the OP did wrong think I should have complied with his request? I told him, 'Ferdie lives here; you don't'. Someone on this forum suggested I should have said: 'why? Have you got something my dog might catch!' I am saving that one up in case it happens again.:thumbsup:


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

I used to take horses in temporarily for ILPH and RSPCA and a couple of smaller charities. Did this for several years.

For RSPCA I have taken horses, goats and cats. Never met a more inept bunch of people than RSPCA.

Turned up at the gate to some land we had with buildings on but didn't live there one afternoon to see RSPCA Inspector tying an intact billy goat to the gates. I asked what they were doing and was told that as I already had some goats of theirs they thought it best to bring me another one cos they had nowhere else to put an intact male....

I checked this land every day, I could have already been and checked and not de again til next morning...gate was on a public footpath...poor goat.

I had had goats for them in the past but not for a couple of years.

Also, they have new cars. mobile phones and fancy uniforms and like going all over the world on conferences but don't like paying out for the people doing the donkey work for them...same with ILPH...now world horse welfare.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> If this had been any other random caller would you use a term like 'uncooperative'? If I'd posted on here that I'd had a salesman to my door and I'd asked them to leave is that the term you'd use? If they'd said they'd keep coming back until I let them in would you think it was me being unreasonable? Legally (and morally) there's no difference.


The RSPCA inspector was not there in the same capacity as a salesman. If he were there trying to sell something for the charity I would not use the term unco-operative I would have probably said 'abrupt' or 'unfriendly'.
If he had been from the gas or water company I would have still used the term 'unco-operative'.
I do not find the fact that an RSPCA inspector wears a uniform even remotely intimidating, neither is the guy who flips burgers in McDonalds (who also wears a uniform).
Let me repeat my question: how would you go about investigating a complaint of animal cruelty?


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

havoc said:


> No they're not the police, I believe it's outsourced to a debt collection agency. Don't think there are any background checks required to work for such agencies and therefore I wouldn't let them in.


You don't have to let anyone in unless they have a court order or search warrant. That is debt collector, bailiff, even meter reader and certainly not the police. They also need a warrant. They are allowed in to arrest you or collect a court ordered fine, but not for anything else.


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

I am very much on the fence with regard to the RSPCA. I have read of some horrible situations for some pet owners but I have also seen some vile people with many dead and dying animals on their premises who have only been prosecuted because the RSPCA did something about these scum bags. Some seem to ignore that side of the charity when criticising them on this forum.

Like any organisation how well they do will depend to a large degree on the people who they employ but I have no doubt that a great many work for the charity for the right reasons.

I would have let them in personally just to get the neighbourhoods busy body off my case and into the RSPCAs bad books.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Delilahdog said:


> The RSPCA inspector was not there in the same capacity as a salesman. If he were there trying to sell something for the charity I would not use the term unco-operative I would have probably said 'abrupt' or 'unfriendly'.
> If he had been from the gas or water company I would have still used the term 'unco-operative'.
> I do not find the fact that an RSPCA inspector wears a uniform even remotely intimidating, neither is the guy who flips burgers in McDonalds (who also wears a uniform).
> Let me repeat my question: how would you go about investigating a complaint of animal cruelty?


Firstly, I would be polite about it. I may be wrong, but I got the impression from the original poster that this inspector was not polite, but his attitude was one of 'I have the right to demand entry'. That is different altogether.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Let me repeat my question: how would you go about investigating a complaint of animal cruelty?


The police because it's a criminal offence. Let the RSPCA run its animal shelters.


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

I always put my dogs in a secured room when someone is working on my house (surveying it, repairing it, evaluating it, etc). Mainly because one of mine is a borderline civil dog and it's common sense for me to keep me safe, her safe and whatever stranger is in my house safe. I don't have a problem with people who choose to leave their dogs loose when someone is trying to do a job on the property (it is your property after all). 

I like to make other people's jobs easier if it won't cause inconvenience to me. My dogs are happier not being in the room while a stranger does weird things to electric cables, and I feel better knowing they won't get in the way.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

newfiesmum said:


> Firstly, I would be polite about it. I may be wrong, but I got the impression from the original poster that this inspector was not polite, but his attitude was one of 'I have the right to demand entry'. That is different altogether.


Well I suppose it's all according to how you read it. I read it that the RSPCA guy turned up with a smile and received short shrift. So he advised he would be returning with a policeman. You can take that as a threat or a statement of fact?

I am in no way suggesting that the RSPCA (or anyone else) has the right to demand entry into a private residence just on spec. Honest. I really don't know if I would let them in just ad hoc like that. But I don't see the need to be awkward for the sake of it, that's all.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> The police because it's a criminal offence. Let the RSPCA run its animal shelters.


Well don't hold your breath expecting a big clean up. The police barely take the time to visit the scene of a burglary, they just dole out crime report numbers for insurance purposes.

Can't really cover this with insurance can you?


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

Have to agree that the RSPCA seem pretty incompetent TBH, just from the couple of experiences I've had.

I was part of 3-group search party (with DogLost) for a Bassett Hound who was accidentally let to escape from a local boarding kennel while the owners were abroad, and a woman from the RSPCA was called out to help as well. She seemed nice enough, but thought that setting a trap with no food would be enough to catch the dog, LOL. Dog was terrified and had been hit by three cars and on the run for 8 days. I suggested some food as a lure and the woman just kept avoiding it. I don't know why!

Happy ending as I spotted the dog close by and the owner had returned home the previous day. She came out and we were able to get the dog back. Dog was still terrified, but recognised the owner after about a minute of calling and careful following. It was really fulfilling to be able to help someone out, having lost one of my own dogs in a similar situation a few months before. 

A few years ago I found a rabbit suffering from myxomatosis on a footpath. I had rabbits of my own, but didn't want to leave the poor thing there and wasn't comfortable doing anything else at the time, so brought it home and popped it in a cat carrier and then called the RSPCA out to collect it. I explained the situation on the phone and two women turned up. I told them I had my own rabbits and asked that they be careful with how the handle this one, and on their way out they took the rabbit from the carrier, put it on my living room floor...Picked it up, showed it to my cat, went outside...Put it down in the grass and watched it run for a second...Picked it up, took it to their car and put it down again while they made up the cardboard box for transport.

Wasn't all that impressed and I don't call them out for wild animals with issues like that anymore. It would have been less traumatising for the rabbit had it just been run over.  

They're the only personal experiences I've had with the RSPCA when it comes to actively trying to help an in-danger animal. The ones who have visited my door to check out my own animals have been really nice people, though am not sure how effective they would be if they actually found my animals were being mistreated or neglected and had to remove them. I'm glad I don't have to learn how efficient they are at their job in that sense.


----------



## gskinner123 (Mar 10, 2010)

Like most, I prefer my life to be as simple and straightforward as possible. Many years ago an RSPCA inspector knocked at my door, saying there had been a complaint with regard to a "distressed cat locked in a chicken coop". I am a cat breeder - the cat was in season (making a 'calling' noise) and had been outside in a really rather nice, spacious, brand new cattery building.

I invited the inspector in, showed him my 'distressed cat' and the 'chicken coop', he laughed, joked about some of the ludicrous complaints they receive and off he went.

Why would you want to waste time with further visits, police, warrants, etc?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Why would you want to waste time with further visits, police, warrants, etc?


The advice is to ask the RSPCA employee to request a police presence so the visit is properly recorded with an independent witness. That doesn't require a warrant, it is on invitation and there's no need to be unpleasant. Allowing them in on their own can lead to a biased report or intimidation. It can be cleverly done, comments such as 'if you sign the animal over to us today there'll be no further action' aren't unknown. It's enough to cause the vulnerable to give up a well cared for and much loved pet.



> Well don't hold your breath expecting a big clean up. The police barely take the time to visit the scene of a burglary


But they do turn out for the RSPCA when necessary and that includes every forced entry because RSPCA employees don't have the authority on their own. I'd suggest that the RSPCA spend a great deal of time and money investigating malicious reports. If the police were first in the reporting chain then a few prosecutions of the busybody types for wasting police time might just result in a better targeting of resources.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> The advice is to ask the RSPCA employee to request a police presence so the visit is properly recorded with an independent witness. That doesn't require a warrant, it is on invitation and there's no need to be unpleasant. Allowing them in on their own can lead to a biased report or intimidation. It can be cleverly done, comments such as 'if you sign the animal over to us today there'll be no further action' aren't unknown. It's enough to cause the vulnerable to give up a well cared for and much loved pet.
> 
> But they do turn out for the RSPCA when necessary and that includes every forced entry because RSPCA employees don't have the authority on their own. I'd suggest that the RSPCA spend a great deal of time and money investigating malicious reports. If the police were first in the reporting chain then a few prosecutions of the busybody types for wasting police time might just result in a better targeting of resources.


It is probably fair to say most people would be happier if the police were the first port of call for animal welfare issues (ideally as per Newfie's suggestion, a special designated branch). But they are so overwhelmed/under-resourced that I'm not sure the police themselves would be keen to take on this responsibility.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm sure there are plenty of things the police would rather not do but it's their job. It's already their job if somebody does report a case of animal cruelty to them. It's a criminal matter. If anyone believes a crime has been committed then they should report it to the police.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Delilahdog said:


> It is probably fair to say most people would be happier if the police were the first port of call for animal welfare issues (ideally as per Newfie's suggestion, a special designated branch). But they are so overwhelmed/under-resourced that I'm not sure the police themselves would be keen to take on this responsibility.


The police were called in on a local to me cruelty case. They were only interested in the fact that the animals were dirty - ignored that they were emaciated and dying. Needless to say there was no action taken.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> I'm sure there are plenty of things the police would rather not do but it's their job. It's already their job if somebody does report a case of animal cruelty to them. It's a criminal matter. If anyone believes a crime has been committed then they should report it to the police.


In a perfect world. But unfortunately the police fall short in a lot of instances where 'it's their job' my burglary example being just one of them. And I am not police bashing I am just stating the reality.
As it stands you are most likely to be told to call the RSPCA or it will be delegated to the RSPCA. Or resources will be focused on crimes which can guarantee results as in other areas of police work.
This already happens with the RSPCA and it is another area they are roundly criticised for.
There are also areas in animal welfare which are not really the police's remit, in the cases of elderly or ill owners. How would these areas be addressed?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> There are also areas in animal welfare which are not really the police's remit, in the cases of elderly or ill owners. How would these areas be addressed?


Don't know what you're calling elderly but I resent the implication that older owners neglect or abuse their pets


----------



## Jellypi3 (Jan 3, 2014)

My two cents, the neighbours next door to us had two very aggressive dogs who used to fights and literally rip pieces out of each other, they would be locked in the garden all day and night, regardless of the rain, hot sun, snow, anything. They would be covered in bites and open wounds and the garden stank of dog poo. It was a serious case of neglect.

I reported it (as did my grandparents) to the RSPCA 5 times, and each time they said they would send someone round. They never did (we even offered to let them come to our house and look over the fence) and in the end we reported it to the police. They came and the next day the dogs were gone.

Do I trust the RSPCA to uphold animal welfare? Not a chance.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Do I trust the RSPCA to uphold animal welfare? Not a chance.


They can't and don't. They aren't an official body, they aren't the police. Somehow we've ended up with a situation which is arse about face. The police should be asking the RSPCA for assistance when there are reports of neglect or cruelty, not the other way round.


----------



## JeremyVile (Apr 16, 2015)

Home from work now. Firstly, I'm not wasting any official organisations time. I haven't called them. They came to me. Just because I don't allow them access doesn't paint me as a villainous time waster. They cautioned me to the effect that I didn't have to say anything and what I did say might be used in evidence against me in court and even if I chose not to say something it could also be used against me in court. Or summat like that and along those lines.

That is as much as they can do without a police presence, legally speaking. Either way, it says to me that they intend to take me to court. In court they will need evidence and the only evidence they have is a malicious phonecall. That's not evidence to my mind.

I said this earlier,



> Opening the door this evening I was faced with an RSPCA inspector who immediately intro'd himself and asked me if I had a dog.
> 
> *Smiling,* I said "It wasn't me barking, what's up?"
> 
> ...


I'm 63 and I've always had a dog in the home. A well looked after dog I might add and after researching this last night, including some advice from here, there's no way in this world that I would let those people through the door. I don't trust their agenda.

Someone here said that I gave them 'Short shrift'. View it as you will, but I was just taking the decision to exercise my legal rights and I'm glad I done so now. This is not about me winning votes on personality or attitude making the charity rep at my doors job in life easier for him. I couldn't care less about that. Why? because they took a phonecall and were happy to jump into action over that. They don't seem to have met the complainant in person and investigated the matter properly before coming to me. Not that they could.

I'm not after sympathy or a pat on the back as someone else said. I know where to find that. It's in the dictionary in between sh!t and syphilis. Funnily enough you all answered my initial question on did I do the right thing. I thank you all for putting your bit in and I'll see what the evening brings.

Like I always do about this time of day, I'm off to walk the dog now. He's had his dinner and needs his walkies. Bye for now.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> The police should be asking the RSPCA for assistance when there are reports of neglect or cruelty, not the other way round.


Seems to me we are arguing the same thing from different ends.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

JeremyVile said:


> Home from work now. Firstly, I'm not wasting any official organisations time. I haven't called them. They came to me. Just because I don't allow them access doesn't paint me as a villainous time waster. They cautioned me to the effect that I didn't have to say anything and what I did say might be used in evidence against me in court and even if I chose not to say something it could also be used against me in court. Or summat like that and along those lines.
> 
> That is as much as they can do without a police presence, legally speaking. Either way, it says to me that they intend to take me to court. In court they will need evidence and the only evidence they have is a malicious phonecall. That's not evidence to my mind.
> 
> ...


Did he really give you the official caution that the police give when they arrest someone? He had absolutely no authority to do that, or to arrest you, and it seems he is one of those who wears his uniform and thinks he is the police. I don't think he will be back but do please let us know.


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

JeremyVile said:


> I couldn't care less about that. Why? because they took a phonecall and were happy to jump into action over that. They don't seem to have met the complainant in person and investigated the matter properly before coming to me. Not that they could.


Sorry but if the RSPCA get a call and don't follow that up by visiting the owners about whom the complaint was made they are failing to properly investigate. What they did was a proper investigation and I don't know what else you expected them to do frankly.

If the Police receive a complaint from a neighbour about another neighbour do you think they would not visit the person about whom the complaint was made as part of their "proper" investigation?


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

lymorelynn said:


> Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


Bothered?
It's been a really boring rainy day in my part of the world and I found the posts on this thread really interesting.
Thanks for your company all, l really am off to walk the dog :thumbsup:


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Seems to me we are arguing the same thing from different ends.


Could be.

Let me give you another example which is nothing to do with animal welfare. A couple of years ago two security 'officers' at a local supermarket were stopping older people as they left the store and demanding to look through their shopping. I'd noticed this and clocked that I fitted the target demographic. Sure enough they tried it with me and I refused. They threatened to call the police. I did it for them. Obviously the police didn't come but the duty manager did. I refused to move from public view to discuss it further. I asked what cause they had to search me - and every person over 50(ish) leaving the store. They were doing it for fun, because they could and targeting easy marks. It was nothing more than a power trip. What I found truly frightening was the number of people who had complied, who believed they had to for no reason than these goons wore a sweater with the word 'security' printed on it. Their actions were no different really than the actions of many employees of many organisations which attempt to imply an authority which doesn't exist. It's wrong whoever does it.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

lymorelynn said:


> Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


He was outed on the first page so it was just a matter of time before B word appeared.

J


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

lymorelynn said:


> Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


:laugh: Can't say I'm surprised the posting style was pretty obvious but its been an interesting discussion subject nonetheless.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can't say I'm surprised the posting style was pretty obvious


Talking rubbish and trying to be controversial. Yup. But don't worry ...whilst one personna may Banned there are others who will still be free to post ...such is the nature of trolling 

J


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

lymorelynn said:


> Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


Well, I bleedin' knew that from the word go.

No flies on me see. I'm daft not stupid.

And what's really funny is that he's already started new threads under new names.:laugh:


----------



## sskmick (Feb 4, 2008)

I wouldn't have refused an RSPCA inspector checking my dog to satisfy themselves he is not being neglected or ill-treated, provided he/she was an official inspector I would request to see ID, perhaps even make a phone call to confirm it.

Why assume it will go to Court  If there is nothing to hide what's the problem, you are either being obstructive and wasting their time or there is cause for concern, so of course you will have set alarm bells ringing.

I don't understand why you don't believe it isn't enough for one complaint to prompt them to investigate.

All this anxiety you have caused yourself could have been resolved the day the inspector called. 

I will read the rest of the thread now.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

Pupcakes said:


> Glad you had a laugh!
> 
> Haha! :lol: It's that same feeling you get when you step on your dogs paw by accident when you're walking in public and they scream blue murder and cower up because their hurt and everyone is looking at you like cr*p!


Or when you don't let your self-appointed cat/small furry huntress complete their self-appointed Search and Destroy mission and their screams are enough to curdle blood and convince anyone within a 3 mile radius that you're torturing the poor wee darling simply by holding the other end of the lead. 



newfiesmum said:


> That reminds me of the bloke who came round trying to get me to switch electricity companies and didn't like the look of Ferdie. He said: 'in the interests of health and safety, could you put the dog inside?' *Do all these people who think the OP did wrong think I should have complied with his request*? I told him, 'Ferdie lives here; you don't'. Someone on this forum suggested I should have said: 'why? Have you got something my dog might catch!' I am saving that one up in case it happens again.:thumbsup:


Yes, actually, I do. With the new DDA laws, I think you could be making a rod for your own back by being so stubborn with such a reasonable request. You might know that Ferdie is a big soft teddy bear, but how are professionals to know that? People have a right to carry out their job in safety and if that means putting your dog away while they complete a visit to your property, I think, for the safety of all concerned (including your own dogs' sake) putting them away is a small price to pay. There's nothing stopping you from letting him out in the garden again when the visitor leaves.

As a principle I lock my dogs away, either in the bedroom, or in the living room before I even open the door, or, if they're in neither of those rooms and I know the person isn't likely to get past the front door, I close the inner door behind me so that there's a solid wooden door between them and my "visitor" (if the situation changes, I ask them to give me a couple of minutes to secure the dogs). It prevents complaints about dogs being "dangerously out of control" or in a position to "frighten" the person at the door, and if anyone should complain about the dogs, they wouldn't be able to pick them out of a line-up because they'd never have seen them. Plus Milly would be over the wall like a shot, so I couldn't trust her to be loose anyway.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> You don't have to let anyone in unless they have a court order or search warrant. That is debt collector, bailiff, even meter reader and certainly not the police. They also need a warrant. They are allowed in to arrest you or collect a court ordered fine, but not for anything else.


Or if they think there's a suspect inside. Or drugs etc.



havoc said:


> Could be.
> 
> Let me give you another example which is nothing to do with animal welfare. A couple of years ago two security 'officers' at a local supermarket were stopping older people as they left the store and demanding to look through their shopping. I'd noticed this and clocked that I fitted the target demographic. Sure enough they tried it with me and I refused. They threatened to call the police. I did it for them. Obviously the police didn't come but the duty manager did. I refused to move from public view to discuss it further. I asked what cause they had to search me - and every person over 50(ish) leaving the store. They were doing it for fun, because they could and targeting easy marks. It was nothing more than a power trip. What I found truly frightening was the number of people who had complied, who believed they had to for no reason than these goons wore a sweater with the word 'security' printed on it. Their actions were no different really than the actions of many employees of many organisations which attempt to imply an authority which doesn't exist. It's wrong whoever does it.


That is absolutely outrageous.  I saw security at a well-known bargain sports shop frisking people and demanding to look in bags. I was horrified. Only the police can stop and search and they certainly don't do body searches in public. There are some companies that need to be informed and trained in how to deal properly with security.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> You might know that Ferdie is a big soft teddy bear, but how are professionals to know that? People have a right to carry out their job in safety and if that means putting your dog away while they complete a visit to your property,


What professional? We're talking about an uninvited dodgy salesman here who knocked at a door and wanted the householder to comply with their wishes. They had no right whatsoever to be there, to stay there, to make any demand at all. The only thing they were entitled to do was leave.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> That is absolutely outrageous. I saw security at a well-known bargain sports shop frisking people and demanding to look in bags. I was horrified


Well the 'apology' I negotiated paid for a long weekend for four at a popular theme park in Europe  I find it truly worrying that so many people are giving in to such behaviour. It's no wonder the con artists are doing so well. We used to say if you want to make people do as you say then carry a clipboard so you look official. More and more it seems a cheap fleece jacket with a logo is all it takes.


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

havoc said:


> Well the 'apology' I negotiated paid for a long weekend for four at a popular theme park in Europe  I find it truly worrying that so many people are giving in to such behaviour. It's no wonder the con artists are doing so well. We used to say if you want to make people do as you say then carry a clipboard so you look official. More and more it seems a cheap fleece jacket with a logo is all it takes.


I would say the real con artist, was the person walking away with a very expensive free holiday! Compensation/apology for what? A bloke looking in your trolley ha ha!  :laugh: :yikes:


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> That reminds me of the bloke who came round trying to get me to switch electricity companies and didn't like the look of Ferdie. He said: 'in the interests of health and safety, could you put the dog inside?' Do all these people who think the OP did wrong think I should have complied with his request? I told him, 'Ferdie lives here; you don't'. Someone on this forum suggested I should have said: 'why? Have you got something my dog might catch!' I am saving that one up in case it happens again.:thumbsup:


I would comply with the request - when I was a District Nurse I frequently asked that dogs be put away before I entered a property. Why not? Takes a few minutes and doesn't harm the dog. I always put the boys away to answer the door and if strangers need to come in such as workmen the boys stay shut away. If protects the dogs and protects myself in addition to the workmen - win - win .


----------



## RottieRubysMum (Apr 6, 2015)

Just thought I'd chuck my 2 pence in about the RSPCA (ignoring the troll issue), it frustrates me that they are the only rescue in the UK with the power, with police help, to seize an animal who needs help. Because of this, I feel like I have to support them, because what other hope do these poorly treated animals have?

However, their conduct is appalling and I recently saw a statistic that they PTS half of the animals they rescue, which kills me when they have so much money at their dispense to prevent this, I worry animal welfare will never again be a number 1 priority for them. So, I completely understand people's apprehension of letting these people into their house.


----------



## caroleduffin (Mar 12, 2009)

There is nothing worse than being accused of something you haven't done. However, if the RSPCA did not check out every call, cruelty could be missed. With that in mind I would prefer officers to check out a hundred unfounded accusations if they manage to protect and help one poor animal, and it would not have been difficult for you to prove very quickly that you are a caring owner.
Carole


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

caroleduffin said:


> There is nothing worse than being accused of something you haven't done. However, if the RSPCA did not check out every call, cruelty could be missed. With that in mind I would prefer officers to check out a hundred unfounded accusations if they manage to protect and help one poor animal, and it would not have been difficult for you to prove very quickly that you are a caring owner.
> Carole


so you wouldn't mind them coming hounding you week in, week out cos they saw you as an easy target?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

patsymatsy said:


> I would say the real con artist, was the person walking away with a very expensive free holiday! Compensation/apology for what? A bloke looking in your trolley ha ha!  :laugh: :yikes:


do you think we don't know who you are?


----------



## kare (Sep 8, 2014)

Dogless said:


> I would comply with the request - when I was a District Nurse I frequently asked that dogs be put away before I entered a property. Why not? Takes a few minutes and doesn't harm the dog. I always put the boys away to answer the door and if strangers need to come in such as workmen the boys stay shut away. If protects the dogs and protects myself in addition to the workmen - win - win .


I was once asked to put my german shepherd away by a man sent to do a safety check and asked instead for the man to leave and send someone else.

I understand people do not like dogs, that is fine in their own home, and if she was not controlled and was for example barking at him or something then I would have had some sympathy, but I felt no valid reason to send a dog who was sat on the sofa watching him away and felt uneasy his request would leave him and I alone in the house.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Dogless said:


> I would comply with the request - when I was a District Nurse I frequently asked that dogs be put away before I entered a property. Why not? Takes a few minutes and doesn't harm the dog.


Absolutely. I automatically put mine away. When i worked the Census (doing home visits) a few years back we were instructed to take care around loose dogs in the home and not to enter a house which has free running dogs out front. I never had anyone refuse but I would have thought them a bit rude if they had.

J


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

kare said:


> I was once asked to put my german shepherd away by a man sent to do a safety check and asked instead for the man to leave and send someone else.
> 
> I understand people do not like dogs, that is fine in their own home, and if she was not controlled and was for example barking at him or something then I would have had some sympathy, but I felt no valid reason to send a dog who was sat on the sofa watching him away and felt uneasy his request would leave him and I alone in the house.


I always put my dogs away when anybody comes to the door...even if they know who it is that comes.


----------



## Fluffster (Aug 26, 2013)

Daisy always goes away for workmen etc coming in, unless they specifically say they are happy for her to be out. Belle doesn't, but that's because she's usually asleep in her bed and being deaf, doesn't wake up. 

Some people are uncomfortable around dogs, or frightened, and I don't think it's too much of a hardship for my dog to be in another room for a short time if someone feels uncomfortable carrying out their job with her loose, it's just courtesy IMO when someone is coming into your home to carry out their work.


----------



## tinaK (Jun 12, 2010)

kare said:


> I was once asked to put my german shepherd away by a man sent to do a safety check and asked instead for the man to leave and send someone else.
> 
> I understand people do not like dogs, that is fine in their own home, and if she was not controlled and was for example barking at him or something then I would have had some sympathy, but I felt no valid reason to send a dog who was sat on the sofa watching him away and felt uneasy his request would leave him and I alone in the house.


My dog always goes in my bedroom if I have workman in the house. It maybe my home and that of my dog, but a workman is entitled to to do his work without feeling uneasy


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

My OH asks for dogs to be put in another room when doing his job which involves looking round other peoples houses, going in their loft space, tapping walls, bouncing on floors, opening cupboards etc etc. Even though we have big dogs ourselves and he isn't scared of dogs you would be surprised how many "friendly dogs" react badly to this and have a go at his ankles. I always shut my dogs away in the lounge if anyone has to come in, if its the gas man and he wants to get to the fire I move them to another room first. I just wouldn't want to make someone else feel uncomfortable and ill at ease whilst trying to do their job.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

kare said:


> I was once asked to put my german shepherd away by a man sent to do a safety check and asked instead for the man to leave and send someone else.
> 
> I understand people do not like dogs, that is fine in their own home, and if she was not controlled and was for example barking at him or something then I would have had some sympathy, but I felt no valid reason to send a dog who was sat on the sofa watching him away and felt uneasy his request would leave him and I alone in the house.


Some trusts I believe now do not allow staff to enter homes with dogs loose in them. I was afraid of one or two dogs but liked them out of the way in the main so that I could concentrate on my job without a dog getting involved. I was also wary of their reaction should I cause their owners pain. Far better to be 100% focussed on the job at hand than have your attention diverted by a dog.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

With workmen we shut the dogs away but invite the workmen to meet them. We don't aim for any accidents or the dogs getting out but just in case.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

My lot are usually shut away. I don't see why workmen who might not like dogs should be subject to my three fetching gobbed on toys or trying to jump at strangers. They're there to do a job, not make friends with my dogs and I don't mind them having the idea that the dogs might not be friendly. Nice barky dogs shut away are quite handy.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> do you think we don't know who you are?


I seriously think you might be barking up the wrong tree here.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

havoc said:


> What professional? We're talking about an uninvited dodgy salesman here who knocked at a door and wanted the householder to comply with their wishes. They had no right whatsoever to be there, to stay there, to make any demand at all. The only thing they were entitled to do was leave.


Professionals - sales reps, carers, delivery people, nurses, RSPCA investigators, fundraisers, postal workers, ambulance crew. Anyone at your door in order to carry out a job. Even if it's an Eon sales rep. They are there for the purpose of carrying out their job whether you sign up/comply or not and have the right to do so without fear of being attacked by the resident dog, so it isn't an unreasonable request that the dog's owner put the dog behind a door or in another room.

Perhaps you need to read up on the changes to the DDA:
Advice - Changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act - Advice for Owners | National Animal Welfare Trust

Taken from the above:


> *You need to make sure that any visitor can safely access your front door without encountering your dog*.


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

kare said:


> I was once asked to put my german shepherd away by a man sent to do a safety check and asked instead for the man to leave and send someone else.


I don't think you understand how he was feeling! To you and me, our GSDs are big cuddly loveable companions. To the man doing his job in your house its a big frightening animal he doesn't know or have any connection with whatsoever with big teeth sitting on the sofa looking at him!


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

lymorelynn said:


> Just to let you all know that the OP of this thread is no longer with us - all evidence led to them being one you have met before


What is the point in banning me in a very popular thread of well over 4000 views and around 150 posts up to now?

*Do you not want people to know what occurred when the RSPCA and the Police turned up at my door this evening? Or are you trying to protect the RSPCA in some small way?*

You're so bloody minded here to insist on trying to ban a genuine poster like me, labeling me as a 'troll' merely because I have trained my dog on bleeper recall!

Why don't you let bygones be bygones and not ban me for a change. Or simply concede that your ban was improper in the first place. Let's face it, how can someone comply with a 'lifetime ban'?

*Murderers get life! Not someone who has trained their dog on an ecollar.*

Youtube and FB don't seem to have an issue with that fact. Why is it a problem here? Why the nazi doctrine and dictatorship telling people what they can and cannot discuss? Why have you sent me to a virtual Siberian gulag!

I do hope that you see my point. I won't bother saying what happened tonight as it'll only get edited out again!

Anyway, thanks for all your input. That goes out to all the non trolls here that took a genuine part in this discussion. Most of you know that the main trolls here are those shouting 'TROLL!' whenever a new member joins. You know who they are. 

Hey.. and 'Lilo-Lynn' why don't you clear off back to the pussy forum and mind your own business! This is 'Nofussmums' area and sometimes she does a good job here. So, get your nose out of it and stick to your moggies please!


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

I don't understand your reasons for continually returning to this forum, which focuses primarily on positive training methods.

The majority of advice that you have to offer likely won't be appreciated or well received here, and I doubt you'll gain much from this forum as the methods you want to use and the methods that the majority of people here use, are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

You're not displaying a very open-minded attitude, and that means you're not going to gain a thing from this forum at all.

As an unnecessary and possibly dangerous side-note, I personally don't understand your reasons for using a training collar to teach an ineffective recall. I watched the video and the recall was poor, especially for a *typically* trainable/quick breed of dog. You would get a much sounder response using reward based methods for that particular command. If you are inclined to use punishment of any kind, the vast, vast, _vast_ majority of handlers who use more aversive methods would agree with me that fair punishment is only effective when the dog understands the command and is purposely ignoring/disobeying.

In my area, handlers who use aversive methods will typically have a warning command that they'll give the dog following shunned instructions, prior to fair punishment. I don't know what it's like elsewhere.

I'm opting out of this thread now, though I did enjoy the comments regarding the initial subject. Someone (I don't remember who) pointed out that, while the thread was started by a stirrer, it was very informative. -Agreed.


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

dogsaintdumb said:


> I don't understand your reasons for continually returning to this forum, which focuses primarily on positive training methods.
> 
> The majority of advice that you have to offer likely won't be appreciated or well received here, and I doubt you'll gain much from this forum as the methods you want to use and the methods that the majority of people here use, are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
> 
> ...


*There's no punishment involved in bleeping a dog on recall. I don't use a shocker on dogs. Why do you all assume that an ecollar is simply a shocker. It's not.*

As for the recall being 'poor'. Did he come back or did he not come back? Yes, he came when called and that is all I require.






As for advice not being well received. Are you the forum spokesperson now? Do you not value diversity?

The dog comes when called, whatever. I was just testing it for longer range. Poor recall lmao! Some of the people here must be scared sh1tless to hear what you think of their dogs that never return to them. How does your destructive attitude help those newcomers? It doesn't.

Try not to sell your brand of BS training to me. I'm not buying it and I gain lots from this forum. I think that's for me to say. I like it here and I'm going to pop in from time to time to remind you how much. 

I'm happy to hear your opinions at anytime. I actually support 'free speech' and differing approaches. You should try it sometime. Go ahead, just come out of your bubble and try it. Alternatively, you could train ostriches to bury their heads in the sand.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

JeremyVale said:


> What is the point in banning me in a very popular thread of well over 4000 views and around 150 posts up to now?


I'm afraid the credit for the length and strength of the debate goes to the many passionate members of this board that you are so desperate to be a member of. Not you. We debate well.

And I am interested in 'what happened next' in your 'senario'? No.

The problem is that when someone is not who they say they are ...then everything that such a poster posts becomes suspect. So please excuse me if I now yawn and find another thread to read.

J


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

JeremyVale said:


> What is the point in banning me in a very popular thread of well over 4000 views and around 150 posts up to now?
> 
> *Do you not want people to know what occurred when the RSPCA and the Police turned up at my door this evening? Or are you trying to protect the RSPCA in some small way?*
> 
> ...


Such tantrums.:001_rolleyes:

Won't tolerate being reprimanded.

Obviously the result of deplorable parenting.


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

Zaros said:


> Such tantrums.:001_rolleyes:
> 
> Won't tolerate being reprimanded.
> 
> Obviously the result of deplorable parenting.


Wow, I never got the blame for once.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> And I am interested in 'what happened next' in your 'senario'?
> J


What scenario?

Do you mean the fabricated bull sh1t and bolox that started this thread?

Well, I'm not buying it.:nonod:

It's not difficult to stir up opinions/debate especially when the chosen topic is known to be received with very mixed feelings.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

JeremyVale said:


> *There's no punishment involved in bleeping a dog on recall. I don't use a shocker on dogs. Why do you all assume that an ecollar is simply a shocker. It's not.*
> 
> As for the recall being 'poor'. Did he come back or did he not come back? Yes, he came when called and that is all I require.
> 
> ...


Liked your video though a little worried at the size of ball you used at the end. Just a little concerned that your dog may get it stuck in it's throat. Please use a larger ball


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

JeremyVale said:


> Wow, I never got the blame for once.


Do you ever sleep? :lol:


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

rona said:


> Liked your video though a little worried at the size of ball you used at the end. Just a little concerned that your dog may get it stuck in it's throat. Please use a larger ball


I agree with you there. Although I've now drilled a hole through the golf ball and put a bit of string through it. Two reasons, it goes for miles when I throw it and the other one is to pull it out of his throat if he should choke on it.


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

rona said:


> Do you ever sleep? :lol:


It's a long complicated story. I'll tell you all one day. Not today though. 



Zaros said:


> It's not difficult to stir up opinions/debate especially when the chosen topic is known to be received with very mixed feelings.


You know about those things?

It's a true story with a perfectly rational outcome. I'll get it out there soon enough.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

LinznMilly said:


> Or when you don't let your self-appointed cat/small furry huntress complete their self-appointed Search and Destroy mission and their screams are enough to curdle blood and convince anyone within a 3 mile radius that you're torturing the poor wee darling simply by holding the other end of the lead.
> 
> Yes, actually, I do. With the new DDA laws, I think you could be making a rod for your own back by being so stubborn with such a reasonable request. You might know that Ferdie is a big soft teddy bear, but how are professionals to know that? People have a right to carry out their job in safety and if that means putting your dog away while they complete a visit to your property, I think, for the safety of all concerned (including your own dogs' sake) putting them away is a small price to pay. There's nothing stopping you from letting him out in the garden again when the visitor leaves.
> 
> As a principle I lock my dogs away, either in the bedroom, or in the living room before I even open the door, or, if they're in neither of those rooms and I know the person isn't likely to get past the front door, I close the inner door behind me so that there's a solid wooden door between them and my "visitor" (if the situation changes, I ask them to give me a couple of minutes to secure the dogs). It prevents complaints about dogs being "dangerously out of control" or in a position to "frighten" the person at the door, and if anyone should complain about the dogs, they wouldn't be able to pick them out of a line-up because they'd never have seen them. Plus Milly would be over the wall like a shot, so I couldn't trust her to be loose anyway.


I am not opening the door to any stranger I am not expecting without one of the dogs with me. That has always been my way, whatever dog I've had. If I was expecting someone, had invited someone or, as yesterday, a meter reader, I would ask if they are ok with the dogs before I invited them in. If they say no, I will usher them outside or in the living room. But none of those apply to some jerk disturbing my Saturday to tell me I can get my electricity cheaper from them. If he wants to do that sort of job, he needs to get used to dogs - full stop.

Of course you could comply with a request like that, since you are so accommodating, only to find the person at the door wants you to put your dog inside so that he can push his way in, rob or even attack you. Obviously you would then be able to tell the police or other interested parties that at least you were polite.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

JeremyVale said:


> I agree with you there. Although I've now drilled a hole through the golf ball and put a bit of string through it. Two reasons, it goes for miles when I throw it and the other one is to pull it out of his throat if he should choke on it.


That's if you get there in time to stop asphyxiation.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

JeremyVale said:


> I've now drilled a hole through the golf ball and put a bit of string through it to pull it out of his throat if he should choke on it.


You're an even bigger danger than I first thought.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

LinznMilly said:


> Professionals - sales reps, carers, delivery people, nurses, RSPCA investigators, fundraisers, postal workers, ambulance crew. Anyone at your door in order to carry out a job. Even if it's an Eon sales rep. They are there for the purpose of carrying out their job whether you sign up/comply or not and have the right to do so without fear of being attacked by the resident dog, so it isn't an unreasonable request that the dog's owner put the dog behind a door or in another room.
> 
> Perhaps you need to read up on the changes to the DDA:
> Advice - Changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act - Advice for Owners | National Animal Welfare Trust
> ...


I once had a traveller type come to my door wanting old clothes. She wanted me to put my dog inside; that was my mongrel, a quarter of the size of Ferdie but the best guard dog I ever had. He did nothing but stood beside me, while I held his collar, but she kept asking me to put the dog inside. I suppose you would have complied with her request as well so she could come in while I was looking for old clothes and take whatever she liked?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Zaros said:


> You're an even bigger danger than I first thought.


lolololololololololol


----------



## JeremyVale (Apr 18, 2015)

Zaros said:


> You're an even bigger danger than I first thought.


I'm ok when I take my meds. 

Rightio, I'm off to walk the Jetmeister now. Catch you all on the next iteration.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

newfiesmum said:


> I once had a traveller type come to my door wanting old clothes. She wanted me to put my dog inside; that was my mongrel, a quarter of the size of Ferdie but the best guard dog I ever had. He did nothing but stood beside me, while I held his collar, but she kept asking me to put the dog inside. I suppose you would have complied with her request as well so she could come in while I was looking for old clothes and take whatever she liked?


My elderly mother used to look after my last dog when I was at work. If someone came around, she would hold my dog by the collar at the door.
Even though my dog was as soft as could be, my mother was convinced that she had put of at least two unsavoury characters


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

newfiesmum said:


> I once had a traveller type come to my door wanting old clothes. She wanted me to put my dog inside; that was my mongrel, a quarter of the size of Ferdie but the best guard dog I ever had. He did nothing but stood beside me, while I held his collar, but she kept asking me to put the dog inside. I suppose you would have complied with her request as well so she could come in while I was looking for old clothes and take whatever she liked?


You want to risk your dogs being seized because people at your door feel threatened by them, fine, but don't expect anything more than a curt "I told you so" if you post a thread wanting sympathy because you flouted the law and someone felt threatened enough by your dogs to report you.

I wouldn't be in that scenario in the first place because my dogs would be shut away before I opened the door, and, if I needed to retrieve something from inside during the visit, I would have closed the inner door (which has an old style, self-locking system to it and no handle on it bar the letterbox) so that my property remains secure.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

LinznMilly said:


> You want to risk your dogs being seized because people at your door feel threatened by them, fine, but don't expect anything more than a curt "I told you so" if you post a thread wanting sympathy because you flouted the law and someone felt threatened enough by your dogs to report you.
> 
> I wouldn't be in that scenario in the first place because my dogs would be shut away before I opened the door, and, if I needed to retrieve something from inside during the visit, I would have closed the inner door (which has an old style, self-locking system to it and no handle on it bar the letterbox) so that my property remains secure.


The Act is not there to prevent owners from legitimately showing their dogs to dodgy characters who knock at the door; if some idiot salesman feels threatened for no reason, he would have more to fear from me than my dog.

I once sold a car on Ebay to a dodgy foreigner who was obviously terrified of Ferdie and I put him in the kitchen while we sorted out the money. He kept trying to get me to turn away from the money he had counted out, when that didn't work, he said he was £20 short while he turned away to count hide the rest of the money he had. I told him he had better find the other £20, unless 'you want to meet my dog'. Oh, Heavens! I should have let him do me out of £20 rather than threaten to open the kitchen door.

You are being ridiculous.



rona said:


> My elderly mother used to look after my last dog when I was at work. If someone came around, she would hold my dog by the collar at the door.
> Even though my dog was as soft as could be, my mother was convinced that she had put of at least two unsavoury characters


Precisely.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> You want to risk your dogs being seized because people at your door feel threatened by them,


There has to be a *reasonable *fear. The mere presence of a dog isn't enough.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

havoc said:


> There has to be a *reasonable *fear. The mere presence of a dog isn't enough.


Anyone who is afraid of dogs is going to feel threatened by any dog so would hardly take a job where they need to go knocking at people's doors uninvited. The very idea that I cannot take my dog with me to the door when a stranger knocks is completely misinterpreting the law. Thanks for the voice of reason, Havoc:thumbsup:


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> Anyone who is afraid of dogs is going to feel threatened by any dog so would hardly take a job where they need to go knocking at people's doors uninvited. The very idea that I cannot take my dog with me to the door when a stranger knocks is completely misinterpreting the law. Thanks for the voice of reason, Havoc:thumbsup:


I will take Rudi or have him sat behind me if it is a stranger at the door, but anyone pre -arranged who needs to come in for work I put them away straight away. If it turns out to be a courier with a parcel to sign for many of them don't want to step forward to give me the parcel which is understandable - a postman round here was showing em some awful scars on his leg from a dog that had twice attacked him the other day - so I will step outside and shut Rudi inside.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Dogless said:


> I will take Rudi or have him sat behind me if it is a stranger at the door, but anyone pre -arranged who needs to come in for work I put them away straight away. If it turns out to be a courier with a parcel to sign for many of them don't want to step forward to give me the parcel which is understandable - a postman round here was showing em some awful scars on his leg from a dog that had twice attacked him the other day - so I will step outside and shut Rudi inside.


That is reasonable and I would do the same, but not for some salesman I did not invite.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

My bite is worse than my Bullmastiff's.lol


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

newfiesmum said:


> Did he really give you the official caution that the police give when they arrest someone? He had absolutely no authority to do that, or to arrest you, and it seems he is one of those who wears his uniform and thinks he is the police. I don't think he will be back but do please let us know.


I would imagine he is allowed to give a caution, and in fact maybe has to in certain circumstances. When we had a heating fuel leak and SEPA officials came round we were cautioned - that is as far as it went legally.



Zaros said:


> You're an even bigger danger than I first thought.


I think the Vile man was being tongue in cheek rather than ball in throat


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

I am now very confused how can someone who has been Banned or is not here keep posting Just wondered


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Well, I don't know if I would have let the RSPCA in either.
If I did, I think I would have recorded the conversation on my phone. 
I have heard too many poor tales about them and experienced their incompetency first hand. 
Twice now, I have reported what are clearly, obviously, puppy farms and / or dealers.
To be told that I need to gain evidence and there is nothing they can do.

Is that not their job?!?! 
It's not up to me to play detective, risk my safety and potentially break the law by trespassing. 

I also usually open the door with the dog.
I will put her away if I am expecting workmen because she's quite bouncy and I don't want any accidents and I want them to be able to concentrate on their job. 
But for unexpected visitors, I usually would answer the door with her and if they asked me to put her away and were not a professional that needed to enter like a nurse or police or similar I would simply shut the door in their face. 
They would probably think that rude, but I don't really care.


----------



## Guest (Apr 18, 2015)

shirleystarr said:


> I am now very confused how can someone who has been Banned or is not here keep posting Just wondered


They rejoined with a slight difference to the username. They also must have got clever changing the ip.


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

danielled said:


> They rejoined with a slight difference to the username. They also must have got clever changing the ip.


Oh thanks as I don't have any idea about any of this takes me all my time to just post with one persona never mind numerous ones


----------



## Guest (Apr 18, 2015)

shirleystarr said:


> Oh thanks as I don't have any idea about any of this takes me all my time to just post with one persona never mind numerous ones


They should just give up because every time they join they will only get rebanned.


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

danielled said:


> They should just give up because every time they join they will only get rebanned.


They must have a very boring life that's all I can say


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

I think a lot of us here knew that the OP was a banned member, but once the thread got going, it turned into a proper debate and we didn't need the OP's input anyway


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

The best thing about forums is everybody has a chance to express their opinion...even if its unpopular or not the usual....but when people come on with the sole intention of being abusive it spoils it and its also a shame when someone does come on with good points and questions to get a ban for then starting trouble and being rude.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Blitz said:


> I think the Vile man was being tongue in cheek rather than ball in throat


The danger was also in the comment itself. Imagine, someone less wise browsing the forum looking for new and innovative ideas to entertain their dog and they stumble upon 'that post.'

I'm sure most of us have seen the eccentric Mr Bean remove his steering wheel to prevent his car from being stolen.....

Well, some moons ago a such a less wise individual living in a high car crime area thought it the perfect solution to foil the would-be Twoca.

Only trouble was he wasn't all that savvy when it came to technical matters, re-installed the steering wheel incorrectly and crashed his car whilst attempting to negotiate the first bend he came to.

I kid you not.:nonod:

The post should be removed before someone unwittingly chokes their dog.:yesnod:


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

shirleystarr said:


> I am now very confused how can someone who has been Banned or is not here keep posting Just wondered


It's not that easy to keep track, I'm afraid. They use proxy servers for a different IP address and a new email and off we go again.



silvi said:


> I think a lot of us here knew that the OP was a banned member, but once the thread got going, it turned into a proper debate and we didn't need the OP's input anyway


I think this one backfired. I think this time he thought he would cause trouble by saying he refused entry to an RSPCA inspector, not taking the time to see that this forum has little time for the organisation and as it happens, as you say, it is an interesting thread. I don't think that was his intention.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

shirleystarr said:


> Oh thanks as I don't have any idea about any of this * takes me all my time to just post with one persona never mind numerous ones*


*
*

Same here. I can barely remember my own name and address most of the time, let alone anything more complicated.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

lostbear said:


> I can barely remember my own name and address most of the time.


Same with me I'm afraid. It must be an age thing.

Not only is my short term memory failing me, my short term memory is also failing me.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Hello Pam. :laugh:


----------



## Guest (Apr 18, 2015)

newfiesmum said:


> It's not that easy to keep track, I'm afraid. They use proxy servers for a different IP address and a new email and off we go again.
> 
> I think this one backfired. I think this time he thought he would cause trouble by saying he refused entry to an RSPCA inspector, not taking the time to see that this forum has little time for the organisation and as it happens, as you say, it is an interesting thread. I don't think that was his intention.


The proxy serves is what I was thinking of when I mentioned about them being clever with ip addressess, they visit these proxy servers and change their ip.


----------



## kare (Sep 8, 2014)

Zaros said:


> Same with me I'm afraid. It must be an age thing.
> 
> Not only is my short term memory failing me, my short term memory is also failing me.


Some useless fact I will never need is stuck in there forever! 
where to hell my door keys are? Haven't got a scooby!


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I have read nearly half way.

Me, personally, would always let them in if I had nothing to hide. In fact, I did just that when they showed up at my door. Now, I knew I didn't _have_ to let them in but I had no reason not to. The SSPCA inspector was lovely, and was great with the boys (who treated her like a long lost friend). She said there was nothing wrong with their condition (what the complaint said) and even had to pay another visit a few weeks later when they had a second call. She rang me first and apologised for having to visit again but they needed to follow it up in case the dogs condition had changed. It hadn't and was still exactly the same so she said it will be dropped but she will call me if there are other calls out of courtesy.

People may have a problem who the organisation as a whole but the inspectors are generally people on a low wage, who just love animals. I considered it myself, and I would hate to be doing my job, trying to help, and meet rude people.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

lozzibear said:


> I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I have read nearly half way.
> 
> Me, personally, would always let them in if I had nothing to hide. In fact, I did just that when they showed up at my door. Now, I knew I didn't _have_ to let them in but I had no reason not to. The SSPCA inspector was lovely, and was great with the boys (who treated her like a long lost friend). She said there was nothing wrong with their condition (what the complaint said) and even had to pay another visit a few weeks later when they had a second call. She rang me first and apologised for having to visit again but they needed to follow it up in case the dogs condition had changed. It hadn't and was still exactly the same so she said it will be dropped but she will call me if there are other calls out of courtesy.
> 
> People may have a problem who the organisation as a whole but the inspectors are generally people on a low wage, who just love animals. I considered it myself, and I would hate to be doing my job, trying to help, and meet rude people.


Why is it rude to refuse entrance to your own home?


----------



## EAD (May 10, 2013)

Some people have way too much time on their hands.


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

rona said:


> Why is it rude to refuse entrance to your own home?


That act in itself isn't rude, but I, personally, found what was written in the OP quite rude... as well as some of the comments. Of course, that might just be how I have read people's comments, but I can imagine plenty people in that situation are rude...


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

No, I wouldn't let them in. And I have a perfect right not to do so.

Did you know that if you DO let them in, and they give you an "Improvement Notice" (if they think you're not doing something quite right) it is not actually legally enforceable? 

But.... they get 90% compliance with these Notices because most people don't know they aren't legal.... and are terrified their pets will be taken away if they don't comply.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

lozzibear said:


> I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I have read nearly half way.
> 
> Me, personally, would always let them in if I had nothing to hide. In fact, I did just that when they showed up at my door. Now, I knew I didn't _have_ to let them in but I had no reason not to. The SSPCA inspector was lovely, and was great with the boys (who treated her like a long lost friend). She said there was nothing wrong with their condition (what the complaint said) and even had to pay another visit a few weeks later when they had a second call. She rang me first and apologised for having to visit again but they needed to follow it up in case the dogs condition had changed. It hadn't and was still exactly the same so she said it will be dropped but she will call me if there are other calls out of courtesy.
> 
> People may have a problem who the organisation as a whole but the inspectors are generally people on a low wage, who just love animals. I considered it myself, and I would hate to be doing my job, trying to help, and meet rude people.


That's just it...on a low wage. Why should this be? RSPCA/SSPCA....make millions every year. They should pay good wages and expect good service.If you only pay peanuts, you can only expect monkeys.


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

lozzibear said:


> Me, personally, would always let them in if I had nothing to hide. In fact, I did just that when they showed up at my door.


Let's just turn that on its head for a moment.

(I know your situation Lozzibear, so it's not aimed at you personally).

IF you have nothing to hide, then why let them in on the basis of what is probably going to be a malicious call? Is it fair for either parties to be pawns at the receiving end of someone else's spite? If they kept coming back and asking, even with the police eventually if necessary, then surely the person making the calls should be accused of wasting the authorities' time?

I'm just musing here, and doing some lateral thinking.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

i let them in when they asked to see my rats, as, at the time, I thought I had to, plus i had nothing to hide

Someone had called them [we believe, despite her protestations, my sons social worker called them, as she was only person allowed in house at the time] and told them i had a bald rat that i was refusing to take to the vet

Yep I had a bald rat, he was a genetic naked, I had to educate him as he'd never heard of such a thing and was hell bent on seizing him
He also tried to tell me off about having a wild rat in the cage, :confused1: when i got him out, I also educated him ['inspector'] that yes pet rats do come in agouti and if he looked properly he would see he was a rex, with nice curly fur and frizzy whiskers

would i let them in again, despite having nothing to hide, 
not in a million years,
I have educated myself since then
Jumped up pseudo policemen wannabes in pretend uniforms, with fake titles who want nothing more than to be on tv or do nothing at all


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

Very few people are legally allowed to enter your property without your consent, and I know that the RSPCA pretty much have no legal power for the most part. They have to do what everybody else does and call the police if you're refusing to comply with their wishes.

I'm actually pretty surprised that people think the RSPCA have legal powers. 

Reading some of these comments, I can see why people won't let the RSPCA in without putting up a fight. mrs phas, it's really concerning that the RSPCA rep. wouldn't know fancy rats from wild rats! I hope it wasn't too much effort convincing the guy that he was &#7424;&#822; &#7429;&#822;&#7452;&#822;&#7437;&#822;&#665;&#822;&#7424;&#822;ss wrong.


----------



## MerlinsMum (Aug 2, 2009)

dogsaintdumb said:


> mrs phas, it's really concerning that the RSPCA rep. wouldn't know fancy rats from wild rats! I hope it wasn't too much effort convincing the guy that he was ᴀ̶ ᴅ̶ᴜ̶ᴍ̶ʙ̶ᴀ̶ss wrong.


I'm going back maybe 30 years now, but there was a terrible incident when a Champion Cornish Rex stud cat escaped, and was later picked up by the RSPCA. They had him PTS because they thought there was something wrong with him, because of his coat.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

lozzibear said:


> That act in itself isn't rude, but I, personally, found what was written in the OP quite rude... as well as some of the comments. Of course, that might just be how I have read people's comments, but I can imagine plenty people in that situation are rude...


It all depends on the attitude of the inspector who calls really. If they are polite and ask to see my animals, I would probably invite them in. If they turn up at the door as though they had some authority and started with the caution copied from The Bill, then I would tell them to pee off and come back with someone with a real police uniform.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

dogsaintdumb said:


> Very few people are legally allowed to enter your property without your consent, and I know that the RSPCA pretty much have no legal power for the most part. They have to do what everybody else does and call the police if you're refusing to comply with their wishes.
> 
> I'm actually pretty surprised that people think the RSPCA have legal powers.
> 
> Reading some of these comments, I can see why people won't let the RSPCA in without putting up a fight. mrs phas, it's really concerning that the RSPCA rep. wouldn't know fancy rats from wild rats! I hope it wasn't too much effort convincing the guy that he was ᴀ̶ ᴅ̶ᴜ̶ᴍ̶ʙ̶ᴀ̶ss wrong.


This is it.....people don't know who have powers and who don't etc. In Scotland, SSPCA do have more powers...but even so, general public here won't know what they can and can't do either.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> IF you have nothing to hide, then why let them in on the basis of what is probably going to be a malicious call? Is it fair for either parties to be pawns at the receiving end of someone else's spite?


To me the point is that an RSPCA employee is no different to anyone else. If any other stranger knocked on your door and said they wanted to check inside your house, question you, check how much food you had in stock etc. would you let them? 


> If they kept coming back and asking, even with the police eventually if necessary, then surely the person making the calls should be accused of wasting the authorities' time?


Even if they come back with the police you don't have to let them in unless they have obtained a warrant. I'd always ask for a police presence though, the police are not perfect but at least they are subject to proper controls with a defined complaints procedure. It's also more likely that a malicious time waster would be spoken to because a real authority had been involved.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

If you are a pet owner whose circumstances are out of the ordinary (eg of an exotic pet, a pet with health or behaviour issues, your personal circumstances are not 'conventional' or are in flux) I can completely understand why you might have misgivings about laying yourself open to the (questionable) judgement of a zealous but perhaps not very well informed representative of some charity. And the law protects you from that.
By definition almost, I would say the members of this forum are responsible owners, open to learning and change.
Unfortunately not all pet owners are like this and a whole host of animals are vulnerable to benevolent neglect and downright ignorance. How do you go about protecting these animals? I know ideally we would probably all like it to be exclusively a police matter but the average policeman would have even less idea how to deal with some of these situations.
I am a part time dog groomer and I can tell you many folk who will tell you they love their pets haven't a clue how to take care of them.
One example: when I was doing my work experience in a salon, there were 2 lovely Cavs that came in. Never mind the state of their coats, which had never seen a comb, they were obese and their nails were so long they were curling back into the pads. The owner would bring them in annually for an 'all off' and her excuse for not walking them/brushing them was that she was disabled (true, she had a mobility scooter but it didn't justify the state of those dogs). My young boss would go to town on the dogs, send them back scrupulously clean and groomed but felt utterly helpless how else to help them. She didn't feel able to confront a disabled lady, I was new and still finding my feet.
It isn't just puppy farmers and their like who inflict suffering upon animals, it is often well meaning but ignorant, selfish members of the public. And unfortunately someone has to take on the difficult task of pointing out that they are being cruel and/or need help.
The RSPCA and their like are not the perfect solution but they are not the problem either surely? They are just muddling through like the rest of us.
I am sticking up for the individuals who are at the business day to day end here, not the organisation per se. I completely agree their funds and resources could be much better allocated.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

I would welcome an RSPCA Inspector into my home. I have nothing whatsoever to hide. I once reported someone who had a dog that wasn't getting the vet treatment it needed. The person who owned her is basically a byb, she also had lots of cats & various other pets. I daren't put too many details down on here incase she joins the forum, puts 2&2 together & puts my windows through lol So to cut a long story I know the RSPCA were refused entry to see this dog, ages down the line one of her kids dropped out that the dog was still not right, I was horrified but felt helpless. Another incident happened to another pet, the police along with the RSPCA gained entry, saw the dog in question & seized her! Thank god! The case went to court & the woman & her partner were prosecuted! Unfortunately not severely enough as they still breed flippin dogs, but there was a happy outcome for that sick dog, she was signed over to the RSPCA, they treated her & she was rehomed. 

If people don't allow the entry many animals are going to suffer for longer, like this poor dog did.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> They are just muddling through like the rest of us.


The rest of us don't don uniforms which look very like police and imply we have an authority which we don't. It's that I object to.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

havoc said:


> The rest of us don't don uniforms which look very like police and imply we have an authority which we don't. It's that I object to.


It's in the eye of the beholder.
A uniform can be perceived in the context you appear to choose, as a way of displaying authority (imagined or otherwise) and intending to intimidate.
Or it can be perceived as a way of enabling others to identify what you are about.
When you see a policeman walking down the road (not often these days I know) are you alarmed or reassured?
Personally I'd take on the RSPCA inspector AND the copper over a disgruntled pensioner


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Delilahdog said:


> If you are a pet owner whose circumstances are out of the ordinary (eg of an exotic pet, a pet with health or behaviour issues, your personal circumstances are not 'conventional' or are in flux) I can completely understand why you might have misgivings about laying yourself open to the (questionable) judgement of a zealous but perhaps not very well informed representative of some charity. And the law protects you from that.
> By definition almost, I would say the members of this forum are responsible owners, open to learning and change.
> Unfortunately not all pet owners are like this and a whole host of animals are vulnerable to benevolent neglect and downright ignorance. How do you go about protecting these animals? I know ideally we would probably all like it to be exclusively a police matter but the average policeman would have even less idea how to deal with some of these situations.
> I am a part time dog groomer and I can tell you many folk who will tell you they love their pets haven't a clue how to take care of them.
> ...


But I wouldn't mind betting the RSPCA did nothing about those cavaliers. We have heard it so often, especially on this forum, that someone had phoned them for a suffering animal and were told that as long as it had food, water and shelter they were content.



noushka05 said:


> I would welcome an RSPCA Inspector into my home. I have nothing whatsoever to hide. I once reported someone who had a dog that wasn't getting the vet treatment it needed. The person who owned her is basically a byb, she also had lots of cats & various other pets. I daren't put too many details down on here incase she joins the forum, puts 2&2 together & puts my windows through lol So to cut a long story I know the RSPCA were refused entry to see this dog, ages down the line one of her kids dropped out that the dog was still not right, I was horrified but felt helpless. Another incident happened to another pet, the police along with the RSPCA gained entry, saw the dog in question & seized her! Thank god! The case went to court & the woman & her partner were prosecuted! Unfortunately not severely enough as they still breed flippin dogs, but there was a happy outcome for that sick dog, she was signed over to the RSPCA, they treated her & she was rehomed.
> 
> If people don't allow the entry many animals are going to suffer for longer, like this poor dog did.


But when they were refused entry, did they then go straight to the police, or did they wait for another complaint?

I am against the uniform because it is designed to look like a police uniform. If it were a different colour even, bright red would do, or royal blue, it would not look as though they are obviously pretending to have authority.

As I said, it is a question of attitude. The RSPCA are of no use whatsoever, because they have no authority. If there were a properly trained police division to do this job, they would have authority and they could get a warrant on their own. As I said before, they wouldn't be begging for donations all the time either, or conning old ladies into leaving them all their wealth in their wills.


----------



## Delilahdog (Mar 2, 2014)

We didn't notify the RSPCA or anyone about the Cavs Newfiesmum. Not my proudest moment.
But there was also a Shih Tsu that used to come in and had to be signed for so that the owner could show the RSPCA and confirm that she had been looking after her dog because they had to intervene.
I have since been told that if a customer brings a dog in in that condition not to groom it, call the authorities straight away. Apparently if you do go ahead then the problem is perceived as dealt with and the owner therefore has no case to answer - even though you probably won't see them again for another year. I've no idea if that is the RSPCA's interpretation of the law or the police or somebody else's.
Re the uniforms, I have been oblivious to the similarity to the police, it really never occurred to me until it was brought up on this forum. I guess if that is a general perception they get from the public it wouldn't be hard to address would it?


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Delilahdog said:


> We didn't notify the RSPCA or anyone about the Cavs Newfiesmum. Not my proudest moment.
> But there was also a Shih Tsu that used to come in and had to be signed for so that the owner could show the RSPCA and confirm that she had been looking after her dog because they had to intervene.
> I have since been told that if a customer brings a dog in in that condition not to groom it, call the authorities straight away. Apparently if you do go ahead then the problem is perceived as dealt with and the owner therefore has no case to answer - even though you probably won't see them again for another year. I've no idea if that is the RSPCA's interpretation of the law or the police or somebody else's.
> Re the uniforms, I have been oblivious to the similarity to the police, it really never occurred to me until it was brought up on this forum. I guess if that is a general perception they get from the public it wouldn't be hard to address would it?


I have often seen a man in uniform in the street, getting his sandwich or going to his vehicle or whatever, as you do, and thought it was a copper until he gets back into his van or he gets close enough to read the rspca on his shoulder. From a distance they do look exactly like police uniforms. Not necessary and in my opinion, fraudulent.

There was a programme on a couple of years ago called fat pets, which showed this poor Rottweilers who was so far it was unrecognisable as a rottie. The film showed the row between a groomer and the owner as the groomer told her she was killing the dog, but she wouldn't have it. She fed this poor dog way too much; she kept feeding her and saying but she gets what she wants, she's my baby. Well, most dogs always want food.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Delilahdog said:


> When you see a policeman walking down the road (not often these days I know) are you alarmed or reassured?


If I saw a police officer walking down the road I'd be comfortably reassured that if I was to be assaulted/attacked there'd be help at hand close by.

However, if I found a police officer on my doorstep I'd be suitably alarmed.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

No problem, Noushka. We tend to forget that what we put on a forum is visible to people we know or might know. I had a shock when I went to the vets once to be thanked by him for all the nice things I had said on this forum, which another client had relayed to him. Good thing he didn't see it after I lost Joshua, because it wasn't very complimentary.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> When you see a policeman walking down the road (not often these days I know) are you alarmed or reassured


I don't think the question is that relevant unless you believe there is some connection or comparison between the two organisations. The police are a controlled body. The RSPCA are not and have no regulatory systems. I do agree it's OK for them to have a uniform, just not that they choose to have one so similar to the police.


----------



## dogsaintdumb (Mar 21, 2015)

This is a post in regards to Jeremy's response on a different thread. I didn't want to respond on that thread as his post barely had anything to do with the topic there. This is still off-topic but at least it's not derailing anybody elses thread. 



JeremyVole said:


> I'd be more than happy for you to show me how you do it DogStDumb. Or are you just a critic? Please show us how it's done. I won't forget to remind you from time to time if you don't.


When you predictably return with a different username yet again, I'll be comfortable PMing you a short video of my dog recalling if you really want, LOL. I can't show you how it was taught because she already knows it, but I can tell you that I don't introduce new commands using aversive methods. I think I've already said that before.


----------



## Ownedbymany (Nov 16, 2014)

I honestly couldn't care what their uniforms look like and don't think it is relevant. Someone coming to my door implying they are the cops with how they phrased things or their attitude would bother me. I don't think the majority of RSPCA inspectors would be that rude however, they just want to get their jobs done. 

Yes the RSPCA could be improved, yes they do make mistakes and stupid ones at that. So does the NHS, police force, army politicians, vets etc. You will hear horror stories, some will experience bad things but ALL those organisations do a whole lot of good too most of which goes unreported. Now I'm not totally in support of the RSPCA, I do think they spend too much money on unnecessary things where the money could be spent elsewhere. I hate the fact they PTS so many animals but nobody can deny there aren't enough homes, especially for the older ones or those with behavioural issues. It's sad but a few animals with a happy end is better than none at all. 

As for the police that would be ideal wouldn't it if they could have their own animal rescue division but it's unlikely to happen and would drain resources from elsewhere.


----------



## patsymatsy (Apr 13, 2015)

Ownedbymany said:


> I honestly couldn't care what their uniforms look like and don't think it is relevant. Someone coming to my door implying they are the cops with how they phrased things or their attitude would bother me. I don't think the majority of RSPCA inspectors would be that rude however, they just want to get their jobs done.
> 
> Yes the RSPCA could be improved, yes they do make mistakes and stupid ones at that. So does the NHS, police force, army politicians, vets etc. You will hear horror stories, some will experience bad things but ALL those organisations do a whole lot of good too most of which goes unreported. Now I'm not totally in support of the RSPCA, I do think they spend too much money on unnecessary things where the money could be spent elsewhere. I hate the fact they PTS so many animals but nobody can deny there aren't enough homes, especially for the older ones or those with behavioural issues. It's sad but a few animals with a happy end is better than none at all.
> 
> As for the police that would be ideal wouldn't it if they could have their own animal rescue division but it's unlikely to happen and would drain resources from elsewhere.


The best post award on this thread goes toooooooooo ownedbymany!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> As for the police that would be ideal wouldn't it if they could have their own animal rescue division but it's unlikely to happen and would drain resources from elsewhere.


That same argument could be used for any vigilante group choosing to 'police' some sector. If you didn't agree with the motives you probably wouldn't agree with the methods. Agreeing with the motive doesn't make the method OK. I'm not anti the RSPCA, I am anti any individual or members of an organisation giving a wrong impression to gain some power. When an RSPCA employee acts in this manner they are not really acting any differently from the worst sort of doorstep debt collectors. At its worst level it doesn't happen often. Unfortunately it has happened too often.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Ownedbymany said:


> I honestly couldn't care what their uniforms look like and don't think it is relevant. Someone coming to my door implying they are the cops with how they phrased things or their attitude would bother me. I don't think the majority of RSPCA inspectors would be that rude however, they just want to get their jobs done.
> 
> *Yes the RSPCA could be improved, yes they do make mistakes and stupid ones at that. So does the NHS, police force, army politicians, vets etc. You will hear horror stories, some will experience bad things but ALL those organisations do a whole lot of good too most of which goes unreported*. Now I'm not totally in support of the RSPCA, I do think they spend too much money on unnecessary things where the money could be spent elsewhere. I hate the fact they PTS so many animals but nobody can deny there aren't enough homes, especially for the older ones or those with behavioural issues. It's sad but a few animals with a happy end is better than none at all.
> 
> As for the police that would be ideal wouldn't it if they could have their own animal rescue division but it's unlikely to happen and would drain resources from elsewhere.


But none of the organisations you mention spend thousands on tv adverts designed to part well meaning animal lovers from their money, raise millions by persuading people to part with their money, then spend it on new vans, fancy uniforms and multi million pound premises, do they? The RSPCA is a registered charity, not an official organisation nor qualified professionals. The two are not comparable.


----------



## Ownedbymany (Nov 16, 2014)

newfiesmum said:


> But none of the organisations you mention spend thousands on tv adverts designed to part well meaning animal lovers from their money, raise millions by persuading people to part with their money, then spend it on new vans, fancy uniforms and multi million pound premises, do they? The RSPCA is a registered charity, not an official organisation nor qualified professionals. The two are not comparable.


Yes when we are talking about mistakes or plain stupidity they are comparable.

I also said they should be spending the money in more helpful ways rather than fancy offices etc.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Yes when we are talking about mistakes or plain stupidity they are comparable.


No they aren't. Most of the other organisations you mention are effectively insured by the state, regulated and answerable.


----------



## Clare7435 (Dec 17, 2009)

I think I deserve a gold star for not posting on this thread till page 22...I was advised not to have fun with trolls and I didn't  Anyway..If the RSPCA turned up at my door I would let hem into the hall and show them my dogs....the girls would love it they love attention and belly rubs and I myself have nothing to hide. The reason I would allow them in is because although they have a bad reputation and all that....they do at times come good and whilst they are repeatedly returning to a household who is refusing access when they could just go in, check the pooches and leave...job done...they could be going to places where dogs are being badly treated and do need help. I have had reason to call them in the past and had they not gone to the house I reported a poor dog would have ended up dead, as it was the dog was taken and rehomed as opposed to being in a tiny cage 24/7 full of mouldy food and her own mess. There are many stories that lead us to question them but there are also some that make you think....thank god they are around.


----------



## Valerie999 (Apr 18, 2015)

Clare7435 said:


> I think I deserve a gold star for not posting on this thread till page 22...I was advised not to have fun with trolls and I didn't  Anyway..If the RSPCA turned up at my door I would let hem into the hall and show them my dogs....the girls would love it they love attention and belly rubs and I myself have nothing to hide. The reason I would allow them in is because although they have a bad reputation and all that....they do at times come good and whilst they are repeatedly returning to a household who is refusing access when they could just go in, check the pooches and leave...job done...they could be going to places where dogs are being badly treated and do need help. *I have had reason to call them in the past and had they not gone to the house I reported a poor dog would have ended up dead, as it was the dog was taken and rehomed as opposed to being in a tiny cage 24/7 full of mouldy food and her own mess.* There are many stories that lead us to question them but there are also some that make you think....thank god they are around.


Good for you! You deserve TWO gold stars. 

We rely on people like you to inform on others. It makes our job so much easier. I do hope that you were treated anonymously? However, under the new rules we have to inform the accused of the complainants details I'm afraid.

Still, if it's for the good and benefit of the association, we do encourage you to go ahead with your report as it could well save an animal. After all, that's what really counts isn't it? 

Would you still be prepared to make a report if the accused could be informed of the complainants details?


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Valerie999 said:


> Good for you! You deserve TWO gold stars.
> 
> We rely on people like you to inform on others. It makes our job so much easier. I do hope that you were treated anonymously? However, under the new rules we have to inform the accused of the complainants details I'm afraid.
> 
> ...


That is rubbish. They would not be allowed to give the complainant's details because it would be in breach of the Data Protection Act. We have had someone from the RSPCA on this forum before, declaring she was here to answer questions but running away with her tail between her legs when she couldn't get anyone to donate.


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

Well just copied this from the RSPCA's website

Your own name, address and telephone number for our records. 
It is RSPCA policy to treat all complaints in the strictest confidence. Your name will not be disclosed without your permission, but the RSPCA inspector will need to contact you if you want to know about the result of his or her investigation. Please note that this may only be when the investigation has been concluded.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Valerie999 said:


> However, under the new rules we have to inform the accused of the complainants details I'm afraid.





> It is RSPCA policy to treat all complaints in the strictest confidence. Your name will not be disclosed without your permission,


from
https://www.rspca.org.uk/utilities/contactus/reportcruelty/crueltychecklist

so, Im afraid, your information is incorrect
if you *really* work for RSPCA you should already know this, if you reveal the name and address of any informant you may be open to prosecution under data protection

However, unless i was wanting an animal destroyed I wouldnt report to RSPCA even if my name was kept in a locked vault


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

shirleystarr said:


> Well just copied this from the RSPCA's website
> 
> Your own name, address and telephone number for our records.
> It is RSPCA policy to treat all complaints in the strictest confidence. Your name will not be disclosed without your permission, but the RSPCA inspector will need to contact you if you want to know about the result of his or her investigation. Please note that this may only be when the investigation has been concluded.


It is not a representative of the organisation, it is our troll again.



mrs phas said:


> from
> https://www.rspca.org.uk/utilities/contactus/reportcruelty/crueltychecklist
> 
> so, Im afraid, your information is incorrect
> ...


I doubt an RSPCA inspector would have her picture appear in a police uniform.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

newfiesmum said:


> It is not a representative of the organisation, it is our troll again.
> 
> I doubt an RSPCA inspector would have her picture appear in a police uniform.


ffs!! this is getting so darned boring:cursing:

Instead of keep banning them, which must be really annoying for yourselves, and only gives them more of a challenge to come back and defy you
why not name and shame, so they are outed as the troll, but let them run just ask all of us to ignore anything and everything they post

In the meantime well done mods for keeping tabs :thumbsup:


----------



## Ownedbymany (Nov 16, 2014)

I was under the impression all charities were regulated, Havoc, by the government and you can complain about them but perhaps I need to look into that.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

mrs phas said:


> ffs!! this is getting so darned boring:cursing:
> 
> Instead of keep banning them, which must be really annoying for yourselves, and only gives them more of a challenge to come back and defy you
> why not name and shame, so they are outed as the troll, but let them run just ask all of us to ignore anything and everything they post
> ...


It is not that easy, I'm afraid. He won't care if his real name is published, I don't suppose, but it wouldn't be ethical on our part. Asking everyone to ignore is a suggestion but there is always someone who misses the announcement and once again, he is not that easy to spot until he gets ridiculous. Posting a video of his 'newfie puppy' which was immediately recognised as my Joshua, my puppy who died at only three, was beyond the pale as far as I am concerned.

I did manage to catch him this morning before he had managed to post anything, posting under CesarMilan. If I was wrong and it was the real CM then I don't apologise because I would have banned him as well


----------



## SingingWhippet (Feb 25, 2015)

You'd think a 53-54 year old would have better things to do.

And also have more sense than to use the exact same username for YouTube, every forum they've been on and all their other online activities......

:wink::wink::wink:


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

SingingWhippet said:


> You'd think a 53-54 year old would have better things to do.
> 
> :wink::wink::wink:


Like putting a bit more effort into growing up or tormenting the staff at ToysRus by playing on all the kids ride on toys.:001_unsure:


----------



## LyndseyD (Apr 20, 2015)

Zaros said:


> Like putting a bit more effort into growing up or tormenting the staff at ToysRus by playing on all the kids ride on toys.:001_unsure:


Hey come on now. That was just a test ride. I don't usually ride them.. much.


----------



## Rott lover (Jan 2, 2015)

JeremyVile said:


> I Thank you for a serious reply.
> 
> I didn't let them in because they are charity workers who have no powers or authority. I am innocent until proven guilty in this country I believe.


you are innocent until you give them reasonable doubt and acting like an A$$ is included.Now you threw everyone into a tiz and gave your self a bad rap when you could have just opened the door and it could have been over in a matter of minutes.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Well, if you want my tuppence ha'penny I'd let you stay at least it would stop all the suspicion about the genuine new members.

However, relaxing rules and regulations for you would mean opening the floodgates for others.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

lostbear said:


> I can here him now - "Oh officer, thank God you've come! You know what I had to eat yesterday? Lobsters - apparently "there was no Beluga", or so she said. Do you believe that? No - I don't either. She just didn't want to pay Harrod's prices. THAT'S the sort of owner I've got. And she calls herself a dog lover . . . "


Haha!!

Charlie strutting down with caviar around his mouth and Dottie polishing off her second bottle of champagne.

"Oh darling, this is just squalor! I wouldnt wish this on my worst enemy!"


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Oh, if the RSPCA ever come here, I'm going down.

When the Asda delivery driver turns up, Rosie likes to go and lie on the cold, wet patio, looking like she's been kicked in the head. Occasionally, she ups the anti by going and lying in the mud on the garden.

Two weeks ago, when the Driver said "Oh hey, poor thing, what a shame", I was forced to give my custom to Tesco.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Zaros said:


> Like putting a bit more effort into growing up or tormenting the staff at ToysRus by playing on all the kids ride on toys.:001_unsure:


Oh, Colin! Is that why they banned you?:smilewinkgrin:



Zaros said:


> Well, if you want my tuppence ha'penny I'd let you stay at least it would stop all the suspicion about the genuine new members.
> 
> However, relaxing rules and regulations for you would mean opening the floodgates for others.


We have ways of sussing him out, besides IP addresses. I am not going to reveal them here, for obvious reasons, but I don't read detective novels for no reason. Just keep reporting your suspicions folks; it must be really tedious having so many email addresses.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

newfiesmum said:


> Oh, Colin! Is that why they banned you?:smilewinkgrin:
> .


Not completely. I'm afraid my eventual bar was imposed by the courts after I had made an attempt to make my getaway from the premises on a Turtle Ninja Trike.

The incident, which actually sealed my arrest and court appearance, was due to the fact that the Harry Potter invisible cloak was faulty.:001_rolleyes:


----------



## Clare7435 (Dec 17, 2009)

In response to wether or not I kept it anonymously...usually I couldn't give a crap if I was kept anonymously or not because if an animal is being abused I am likely to tell the owners to their faces before even reporting them but in this case I did ask for it to be kept anonymous because the owners where likely to put my windows through if they found out it was me and aside the fact my Granddaughter lives here my dogs lay on the windowsill and would be the first to get hurt. The RSPCA where happy to oblige too, told me they would always do what is in the best interest of everyone involved. I hardly think they would tell a person who had reported them if asked specifically not to either because all this would do is stop people reporting animals in need and also like in my case put people and animas in danger.


----------



## shirleystarr (Mar 22, 2009)

Zaros said:


> Not completely. I'm afraid my eventual bar was imposed by the courts after I had made an attempt to make my getaway from the premises on a Turtle Ninja Trike.
> 
> The incident, which actually sealed my arrest and court appearance, was due to the fact that the Harry Potter invisible cloak was faulty.:001_rolleyes:


Now that has made me laugh this morning


----------

