Surely there needs to be evidence of a bite? If there's none, what can he actually accuse you/Dan of?

Hugs x

Personally I wouldn't, you apologised at the time. I agree it sounds like it is the son stirring things up. If you go round there to apologise again the son may start asking where you live.

I think this will blow over, I really hope so. Do you have access to a car so you can walk Dan a little bit further afield to give things change to die down?

What excellant advice

I absolutely agree with this. This fella needs some supporting evidence before anything can happen.

By way of an example...last year a group of men broke into our school swimming pool. We had CCTV images and a mobile phone, some keys and clothes which were left behind. Yet the Police said there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute!!!

I know this country sucks in many ways, but at least you can't simply accuse somebody of something without firm evidence.

All the best with this.

I could not agree more xxdk

I guess my English is somewhat Americanized. Let me paraphrase: " Up sh*t creek - without a paddle"

I say this, because I belive your court places the onus on the owner - she has to prove the plaintif wrong, instead of where it should be and he would have to prove that he was bitten.
If I'm wrong - the better for her

Nav

I agree with you Nav - In almost every other European country people would rather die than be shown to be wimps, but in Britain now it's not a problem to be a whinging wimp, the legal system actually encourages you to be one.

Whatever the OP does she should NOT go round the this whinging little wimps house, she should stay well clear, don't go back to the same place with her dog for a long time, and get ready to start a counter claim for deliberatly enticing the dog to incur an attack and claim damages.

Deny everything he will have to prove it was your dog that bit him

The only way in UK to fight this is to get a very good lawyer and claim the man started the incident purely with a view to getting bitten and claiming damages.

And in case you think that has never happened, well it has on many occassions.

If this is a civil case (and a claim for compensation will be) then the onus of proof is on the claimant not the defendent. Therefore if he intends to persue this then he needs to provide the evidence to back up his claim. Pure and simple.
I think it is highly unlikely to go under the DDA as the Police will require the same sort of evidence from the complainant in order to persue the case further.
If they do simply state that you weren't there, his word against yours
Becky