Hi Lyken sorry but your posts are very confusing.
Please note the post you made in the introduction section yesterday..

http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php...02#post1693802

Minni, i say we have a Husky but she lives with my parents. I still class her as MY dog though as we spend a lot of time with her and she was what formed most of my experience with dogs . . .

Liken, regardless of who the actual owner of the dog was (and I am really sorry the dog is lost to you) I think the allegations made in the first post about the kennel are very serious, read them yourself and imagine you are the kennel owner.

If my dog went missing the onus would be on me to find the dog and although I would leave details with the local Pound /police/vets and anyone else I could think of, I would be round to the Pound every day checking on the new intake of dogs .

If the dog came in to the Pound and I had failed to claimed it and the policy of the Pound was to re home dogs after a period of time, I would not then make accusations about the Pound for doing just that.

Yes it would have been nice if someone could have contacted you but as has been pointed out earlier in the thread, Pounds deal with many dogs and can't spend all their time phoning possible owners.

That's a good question. A receipt from the supplier, vetinary records, witness statements, etc, may be considered proof but AFAIK there is no definitive piece of evidence.

I am involved with a campaign to promote mandatory microchip/tattoo with a 'passport from birth' log book similar to motor vehicles. If successful it would make identification and ownership disputes a lot easier to resolve and may prevent errors occurring such as Kiss, the husky or possibly the case in this thread.

Receipts from suppliers, vet records, pedigrees, registration documents, etc., etc., can all be tampered with or forged. Witness statements could be false; it is not hard to get someone to lie. Pictures can be photoshopped.

Which is why a more robust system would be welcome.

However, in this instance, nobody is disputing the identification of this dog. Nobody is saying that it is not the dog that Lyken lost. What is disputed is where ownership currently resides - with Lyken or with the new adoptive family.

What happens in the case of stolen property? I'm not sure if someone who innocently buys something stolen has to give it back to the owner if there is proof?

There is no dispute. The dog warden holds the dog for 7 days and after 7 days the dog becomes the property of the local authorities. If the dog is signed over to new owners, the new owners legally own the dog. The OP legally does not still own this dog.

this is true

also, whilst it serves in your favour in a wider case alongside other evidence, on its own, microchipping doesn't prove ownership of a dog, it just proves ownership of the chip.
but its still a great idea in the bigger legal picture and if your dog gets lost

Have you told Lyken?




Only on the proviso that the LA has properly discharged its obligations.