Welfare case - what more can we do?

[Goldenstar]

That isn't true. According to the Animal Welfare Act failure to comply with improvement notices within the specified time is deemed to fall under Section 9(1) "A person commits an offence if he does not take such steps as are reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure that the needs of an animal for which he is responsible are met to the extent required by good practice."
Those needs are the five freedoms, including freedom from suffering. S4 "(1) A person commits an offence if— (a) an act of his, or a failure of his to act, causes an animal to suffer, (b) he knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the act, or failure to act, would have that effect or be likely to do so, (c) the animal is a protected animal, and (d) the suffering is unnecessary"
The relevant section is S10, and they have already extended the period three times. RSPCA seem to be reluctant to enforce it, and it is well known she has the gift of the gab. The whole purpose of the Act though is that the animals needs are paramount. The pressure IMHO needs to be applied to RSPCA, but they are hard to contact direct.

The five freedoms are not set in law .
No one can offer animals total freedom from suffering it's an unattainable goal .The five freedoms are not law and no one would draft law in such a way .
We do things that ,'break ' the five freedoms all the time .
My favourite being freedom to display normal behaviours not well expressed in a society were we place great weight on controlling animals reproduction.


Improvement notices could be used in court be used as part of the story of a case that's all.
Sadly no one can force the RSPCA to take a certain course they are a charity and can take or not take cases as they choose .
All you can do is keep ringing them and keep reporting it .
If the owner is offering to euthanise the horses rather than sell them then perhaps the best outcome is for people to assist her with that process WHW and the BHS would do that .

I was a welfare officer under the old act and the bar then was very high horses had to be in very very desparate plights before we could remove them .
You had to leave horses in terrible unsuitable situations it was heartbreaking at times .
It seems the new act is not working as well as it was hoped however the biggest issue still is it's very hard to use the law to amend behaviour without the RSPCA and they can answerable only to those who give them money .

 

[JillA]

Animal Welfare Act 2006 - not described as the five freedoms but that is what they have become known as .
Section 9(2) says
"2)
For the purposes of this Act, an animal's needs shall be taken to include—
(a)
its need for a suitable environment,
(b)
its need for a suitable diet,
(c)
its need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns,
(d)
any need it has to be housed with, or apart from, other animals, and
(e)
its need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease."

I also worked with a charity, and I know that hearsay is a waste of effort, you have to go to the source, in this case the AWA 2006. How can you possibly argue that Improvement Notices cannot be used in court when they are clearly set out in the Act, along with what happens in the case of non compliance.

 

[Goldenstar]

What I said was an improvement notices can't make people do anything if they choose not to cooperate they don't and there's diddly squeak you can do.
You can't take someone to court for ignoring an improvement notice .
There are loads of normal behaviour patterns we prohibit animals in our care from doing and that are that are not considered unlawful .

 

[JillA]

What I said was an improvement notices can't make people do anything if they choose not to cooperate they don't and there's diddly squeak you can do.
You can't take someone to court for ignoring an improvement notice .

Yes you can. S9 quite clearly says you can prosecute,, and what is a court if not the vehicle of prosecutions? Can I respectfully suggest you stop posting misleading information with no basis in law

 

[tristar]

i feel for those horses, a choice between neglect and death.

its all well and good to say pts is better than neglect but there is a middle road and there must surely be some decent horses in here, i hate waste, that in itself is cruelty.

JillA your efforts are commendable, it surely must be giving you sleepless nights by now, sometimes though you need to go in and do things, they can`t hang you for kindness.

there must be some way of persuading the owner to accept help, they have helped many others in the past, its their turn now to repaid, if only someone with the right approach could be found to make them see that.

 

[Frances144]

What about the BHS? They are good at animal welfare cases.

Also EHO - Animal Welfare Officer - they have more power than the RSPCA to actually enforce things.

Keep a diary - photos and writing, if you can. It is more power to your elbow if this gets to Court.

 

[popsdosh]

Yes you can. S9 quite clearly says you can prosecute,, and what is a court if not the vehicle of prosecutions? Can I respectfully suggest you stop posting misleading information with no basis in law

You have exactly the same powers to prosecute as the RSPCA so rather than knock them get on. Im sorry but what you list is a goal for animal welfare they are not a set of regulations set in stone and are indeed open to interpretation which will be heavily counteracted in court

 

[JillA]

You have exactly the same powers to prosecute as the RSPCA so rather than knock them get on. Im sorry but what you list is a goal for animal welfare they are not a set of regulations set in stone and are indeed open to interpretation which will be heavily counteracted in court

Well, they are set in stone - in the Animal Welfare Act, which yes, the courts may over time interpret any parts which are open to interpretation. I wouldn't think prosecuting when the improvement notice expiry date has passed without the improvements set out in it is open to interpretation. It is pretty much black and white, although the required improvements might be open to challenge. If they haven't been challenged 4 months on I suspect the court will take the view that they have been accepted

 

[popsdosh]

Well, they are set in stone - in the Animal Welfare Act, which yes, the courts may over time interpret any parts which are open to interpretation. I wouldn't think prosecuting when the improvement notice expiry date has passed without the improvements set out in it is open to interpretation. It is pretty much black and white, although the required improvements might be open to challenge. If they haven't been challenged 4 months on I suspect the court will take the view that they have been accepted

The RSPCA can issue improvement notices but they have no basis in law! There is no legal requirement to follow what is advised. The RSPCA does not have the powers people think they have. They have no more power than you or me !
Everything you have listed under sec9 is indeed open to interpretation and one persons view on what fulfills that will differ from anothers. Example in A who decides what a suitable environment is? If it was set in stone legislation it would need to be specific and list it down to the minutest detail.
At least as far as farmed animals are concerned the rules are a lot more specific and are enforced by a government authority.

 

[jofwigby]

The RSPCA can issue improvement notices but they have no basis in law! There is no legal requirement to follow what is advised. The RSPCA does not have the powers people think they have. They have no more power than you or me !
Everything you have listed under sec9 is indeed open to interpretation and one persons view on what fulfills that will differ from anothers. Example in A who decides what a suitable environment is? If it was set in stone legislation it would need to be specific and list it down to the minutest detail.
At least as far as farmed animals are concerned the rules are a lot more specific and are enforced by a government authority.

Correct RSPCA Improvement Notices are not what is referred to in the act as Improvement Notices, they are their own and can only form part of evidence if they Prosecute. Official Improvement Notices can be issued by Council Officers & Police but lol they rarely do, and in most cases aren't even aware they can, so defer to RSPCA.

System is *****.

 

[JillA]

So the Act refers to inspectors but nowhere defines inspectors of what - Local Authority? Not every LA has an Animal Health Officer, especially if they don't have any cattle markets within their area - Telford does not, neither I would think do any other mainly urban authorities. Police? I would suspect they would be the first to say they don't have the expertise, even though they can call in a vet. Either way I suspect they have delegated their authority to the RSPCA which in the words of the WHW Field Officer is the prosecuting authority. And either way it would evidence lack of appropriate care to avoid suffering. But yes, it often needs a much more proactive
approach by RSPCA.

It is supposed to have been set out here (5.5 refers to Improvement Notices - apologies, the ones RSPCA aren't Statutory but they are evidence) but this seems to just make it more complex. It does make clear that the Police are only prepared to pass reports on to RSPCA

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/National_Equine_Welfare_Protocol.pdf

 

[jofwigby]

Yes Local Authority Inspectors & Police Officers - however all public calls into animal health / trading standards are now screened by Citizens Advice so you can't really get through to them anyway.

Looking at a horse now on an RSPCA Improvement Notice now - good job i don't have a gun with me - horses are often left to improve to the point of no return - with no way for the public to complain - at the system not the organisation - as it is all handled on a charity basis.

(Perhaps the wrong day for me to have read this thread.)

 

[JillA]

That has for a long time been my major problem with RSPCA, ever since Spindles Farm - there is no way to give or obtain feedback, or pressure them into doing the job the public expects them to. Which for an organisation which depends on public donations is appalling. But I don't know what the answer is - at the time of Spindles Farm I even wrote to a couple of their trustees, and the result was a resounding silence. I'm not one of those who advocate getting rid of them, they have too much expertise for that, but changing from within. Except for the brick wall of superiority and indifference you encounter when you try to contact them other than to report a case.
Until now. I am in regular touch with both the BHS Welfare volunteer (*sigh*, volunteer!) and the WHW Field Officer and am basically badgering them on an almost daily basis. The original complaint I made was last December.

 

[Frances144]

It is a terrible situation to be near and to feel so helpless.

I think, and I could be wrong, but perhaps start a Facebook page. The more people complain, different people, then the pressure of social media might have an effect. xx

 

[jofwigby]

I have only just cottoned on which place this is - are those poor things with the feet still in those conditions ? If it's a stud, ie a business don't give up till you get satisfaction from the Council. & Register with MyRSPCA and make complaint online asking for contact with a Chief Inspector. If they are suffering, don't give up.

 

[JillA]

Thanks for that - I wasn't aware of MyRSPCA, I have joined and sent a fairly buzzing query!

 

[Goldenstar]

Correct RSPCA Improvement Notices are not what is referred to in the act as Improvement Notices, they are their own and can only form part of evidence if they Prosecute. Official Improvement Notices can be issued by Council Officers & Police but lol they rarely do, and in most cases aren't even aware they can, so defer to RSPCA.

System is *****.

It is the RSPCA can quite rightly ,as it not an instrument of the state do as it pleases .
If they decide it's not in their interests to pursue something no one can make them and they take judgments based on what they feel they can achieve based on lots of things .
Effectively the horses are without the protection of the law unless a charity who can use its resources as it chooses decide they want to take that course of action.

But of course anyone can take a private prosecution against someone there's nothing to stop OP or any of us doing this if you have the expertise and the money .

I used to know the case law regularity used under the old act I have no idea how it's panned out under the new one not as good as we hoped it seems as these horses sound like exactly the ones it was hoped would be assisted by the change .