Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Whilst it is great that the dog has been reunited with its owner, could the opening headline be changed? It appears the dog wasn't stolen, from what I can see, but (wrongly) handed in to a vet as being lost or abandoned. The change to 'Returned' is great, but maybe 'Stolen' to 'Missing' as well?


Too many people judge the area based on the headlines on e.g. this forum. This says that there is a dog stealing issue locally (which may be so, but which this thread isn't, it seems, evidence for).

alice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just seems weird



Well if you don't believe Turtle, I guess you could always go and ask the vet yourself :)


ETA: I have sometimes seen dogs who didn't look very happy tied up outside shops and have wondered whether I should do something about it.


If this dog was distressed and/or had been left there for a long time, it doesn't surprise me at all that somebody might have taken him/her to the vet, since there is a vet more or less opposite the shop in question.

It sounds to me as though somehow the dog got loose before someone caught it and took it to the vet (not knowing what else to do). Surely the important thing is that the dog has made it back to the owner? And maybe to also say that whilst most of the time a dog can be safely left outside without anything happening to it, that there are people out there, who do steal dogs, especially pure breeds with a resale or breeding value. Even someone just being mischievous in letting the dog loose could have led to a tragic accident. It just takes one scoundrel to lose a beloved pet and always better to be safe than sorry.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
    • Hey, I am on the first floor and I am directly impacted if roof leaks. We got a roofing company to do repair work which was supposed to be guaranteed. However, when it started leaking again, we were informed that the guarantee is just for a new roof and not repair work. Each time the company that did the repair work came out again over the next few years, we had to pay additional amounts. The roof continues to leak, so I have just organised another company to fix the roof instead, as the guarantee doesn't mean anything. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...