Fair points but we all know there are people around like this so it is beholdent upon organizations to have practices and regulations. to bar such people o

People lie to get dogs, even breeders must meet people and get taken in sometimes. The rescue was wrong to allow anyone to take that dog without checking them out but the mother was so wrong to ask for it, and to put her child in danger.

Also the rental agreement argument is daft, when we get dogs we are supposed to get permission, however we don't we never tell the breeders or rescues we are even need permission. They have no way if we tell them that to find out so we have never had a problem.


I have tried not to say it as much as possible because how that woman must feel I cannot imagine, blaming her seems so wrong.

Feeling same re your last sentence

My rescue simply asks if applicant rents oor owns home . everyone tends to answer accordingy . then we insist upon written approval from landlord . We don't ask them if they need it ior not . works quite well

She still knew her tenancy agreement banned dogs & yet still chose to ignore this

As for not blaming her-who took the dog into her flat she did, did she have to ? No QED she is to blame & needs to take responsibility for her stupid actions

Doesn't alter the fact though that the pound made it easier for her to be inappropriate by not having obstructive procedure in place . works both ways if pound followed procedures we all know any decent rescue follows then she wouldn't have had that dog and you could still make the same argument might not have happened

Its not about not blaming her though I'm sure she doesn't need that right now. its about her responsibility doesn't therefore absolve the pounds responsibility and vice versa. its their job not to make things easy for such people

You don't think she has been punished enough ?

A council contracted pound has no requirement in their contract to do any homechecks or other investigations-they are not concerned with rescue, they simply sell the dogs that are not claimed.

The woman could have lied when asked it's easily done.

With my GSD hat on I homechecked a person whp claimed to live in ther own home with fenced in graden, had lots of experience with GSDs -so sounded like a good home-however because of my job contacts that I still have I discovered that the property was a council 1st floor flat, no dogs allowed, person had a long prison record & known to police for getting dogs & selling them on for drug money. There was no way any council pound could have found this out as the address appeared to be a detached house & the rest was discovered by my "confidential informant"Obviously they never got a dog from our rescue.

We better agree to disagree this whole sorry episode rests firmy & solely on the mother's shoulders

That's exactly the issues and where the faults mistakes and blame lies ssomething I mentioned Few pages ago that the pound system has been appalling for years and this was bound to happen eventually..using your own gun analogy no One put a gun to this boarding kennels head forcing them to involve themselves in a practise where theywill sell dangerous dogs they know may maim or injure someone or kill someone. also after 7 days they own. the dog entirely so they have the free right to decide dog is dangerous and should be PTS.

and if you are gonna call yourself a rescue , and by all accounts they had this dog for a couple months, then rightly or wrongly you know you are going to get misinformed ill. people thru your doors so you have an ethical and professional duty to educate. them. a. gainst their own ignorance and obstruct them taking the wrong dog