I share your concerns Jenny, and I think there are better ways to deal with the issue - what's wrong with the current law where people can take civil action if they are hurt while on your property?

I disagree I think the onus needs to be placed squarely on the shoulders of the owners of the dogs to ensure their dogs never cause anyone going about their legitimate business any harm. Why would any sane person endanger their dog by not taking all sensible precautions.

I agree with SB and Trouble. Even when I've owned a dog I could put my hand on my heart and say would never harm a soul - I STILL put her out the back if people with young kiddies came calling. And we never opened our front door unless the dog was where she couldn't get to whoever was on the other side whether that meant shutting her in the kitchen or putting her in the garden. My kids grew up with a GSD and they were under threat of death not to just open the door (open plan at the front) before making sure she was secure. 'Watch the dog!' and 'Don't let the dog out!' were frequent calls in my house.

6ft minimum fencing all round and trellis on top of that and in my garden I had dense shrubbery all round and against the fencing. Dog wasn't left to roam the yard if no one was home.

I don't even want to discuss whether a toddler could be guilty of trespassing or whether people should have better control over their kids. I'd rather make sure I'd done everything I could to make sure the situation would never arise.

I've loved all my dogs but I don't think they are higher up the food chain than children.

I think a sensible compromise would be to limit it to the owners land up to the front door, or to a point where delivery people have to deliver.

If a dog is present inside the house and the person has to enter, they should simply ask for the dog to be placed in a different room or refuse to enter/deliver/carry out any work - they'd be well within their right to do that.

I just think it may be open to abuse otherwise. Many dogs will be protective of their homes (and of their owners in their own homes) and mischief makers (such as sales people who refuse to leave and get aggressive - or 'idiots') might tease a dog and when/if bit end up getting that dog put down. Shrug.

Additionally, what about bailiffs, council workers or police officers who might 'barge in' to a property via a raid or otherwise? A dog in that state is very likely to protect it's home, and with this law it will almost certainly be a death sentence for the dog.

I think the dogs need protecting. There are already civil laws that protect everyone else.

I forsee a fair few incidents where neighbours with boundary issues (kids going into gardens to get balls without asking, people trying to wind up neighbouring dogs to get a reaction etc) will try desperately to abuse this and I thank goodness our fence is a good 7 foot job. Gives the neighbours from hell another tool to threaten and intimidate with.

Personally I take the line that you can make reasonable excuses for being in our garden up to the side gate, but anything more than that and you're putting yourself on dicey ground really and I'd be querying why exactly you see the need to be around the back of our house. I don't tend to let the dogs out in the back garden unless I've bolted the gate from the inside anyway - purely as I try never to underestimate the idiocy of others - but that's the choice I've personally made.

No one would ever or has ever had to ask me to put my dogs in another room. If I have workmen in the house my dogs would be away from any area the workmen need to access. The safety of anyone on my property at my invitation is my responsibility.
My dogs are protective of the house but they defer to me and if I tell them to do something they would do it, that's what training is all about in my opinion.
I don't expect visits from bailiffs and they can't force their way in, they need open doors or windows etc. I don't live in a council property so don't have any need for council workers. I certainly wouldn't set my dog on over zealous salesmen and anyway I'm far scarier than the dogs when roused.
There are areas in my house my dogs never go and the front door is one of those areas it's really not that difficult to control your dogs and keep members of the public safe. It's just an attitude of mind in my opinion. Even if the police forced their way into my home in a mistaken address raid or whatever my dogs would remain under my control, if I can do that with 7 dogs (not that the Pugs are much of a threat ) I'm damn sure Joe Public could do it with one dog if they could be arsed and if they can't maybe they shouldn't be allowed to have a dog at all.

Thanks everyone for their replies and feelings on this. My concern is that we have a fair sized dog proof back garden but a wonderful three-quarters of an acre lawned 'front' garden which is also dog proof. However, I would never leave them loose without me being in the front garden in case someone unannounced opened the pedestrian gate and came in . The main gate is electric so cannot be opened other than by us. It just naffs me off that some uninvited person could come in and claim that one of my dogs had attacked them or threatened them. Now if you met my dogs you'd realise that they are the softest, friendliest dogs and would never be a threat. Our postmen adores them. I am concerned that if this proposed law comes in, many dog owners will be open to fraudulent claims that their dog has threatened them! A neighbour had a lad come in to their 'secure' garden to deliver a leaflet on a window cleaning company and he claimed that their dog attacked him. Now apparently the neighbour was on the telephone and watched the lad come into the garden. Their golden retriever went over to the lad wagging his tail to say hello and the lad screamed and then claimed it had attacked him They had a visit from the police and had to fight paying compensation to the lying toe-rag of a lad. They did win but it was a dreadful time for them.

SB - yes I agree with all you say but that is in a perfect world. My dogs ARE in control when I am with them. What for instance if one of your fence panels blew down and a kind neighbour came to prop it up and your dog attacked them- we cannot be expected to be with our dogs every second that they are outside.

Incidentally, The law takes a peculiar stance when it comes to the use of Beware of the Dog signs.

If such a sign is on display when the dog attacks a visitor/trespasser/cold-caller etc, then its owner is liable for prosecution, because it could be argued that by displaying the sign they knew the dog was dangerous. However, if the dog attacks an intruder when no sign is visible then the court would decree that the owner was unaware of the threat of the animal, and is therefore not liable for court action. It is however, acceptable to have a sign that says, 'Beware dogs running free' or 'please close the gate, dogs loose'.

I do not know where you got your information on the Beware of Dogs Sign?

There is, as yet, no case law on this (unless you know different).

In any case signs are there for a purpose to warn people of conditions or circumstances they may wish to avoid and in fact NO signs may also, using your logic, put an individual at risk of being sued.

What people INFER from a sign cannot be controlled, and informing people who may be allergic/phobic of dogs that they exist is a public service.

I deal with the legalities of signage on a daily basis.

As for being prosecuted due to malicious neighbours etc, the rules for the CPS apply equally to all potential prosecutions.

So

a) it has to be in the public interest
b) it has to pass the evidentiary test

Failure to pass either or both = no prosecution.

As for being pursued in a civil court again actual loss has to have occurred and negligence demonstrated.

HTH

SB - I was advised by a local policeman who was doing the rounds after our estate had a spate of burglaries a few years ago not to have a 'Beware of the Dog' sign on our gate. He went on to explain why.

I mentioned this to our neighbour who is on the Kennel Club Committee and she too had removed her sign after a discussion at the Kennel Club.

I have been trying to find info on-line about this and there is loads of info about it. This is just one link, but every thing I looked at all said the same.

http://www.govyou.co.uk/beware-of-the-dog-sign-laws/

If you know better that is fine, but I personally would not have one of those signs on my gate any more.

Oh that really lifted my heart