Jump to content

To the woman in a brown coat and black trousers walking two dogs on Underhill at 2.15pm today


Recommended Posts

One larger dog - one of those lupine grey ones with black along its back - and a smaller ?brown one.


Did you really have to dump the plastic bag full of dog poo in the gutter over a drain grate?


You glanced around to see if anyone was looking before you dropped it. I was, actually.


I mean, nobody really wants to carry a bag of warm dog poo around but, y'know, it's part of the deal with owning a dog, right?


And there was a poo bin just a matter of a few metres further in the direction you were going, on the corner of Belvoir Road.


At least if you hadn't bagged the poo, it would've washed away eventually, but instead you left a little gift for the road sweeper.


Lazy and revolting.

You glanced around to see if anyone was looking before you dropped it. I was, actually.


So why not say something? Sheesh. What is the point of trying to locate and shame a complete stranger on a website that is used by thousands of people? Do the right thing - pull the slatternly dog owner up over her bad behaviour at the time, but don't come on here and whine impotently about it.

Some people don't like the direct approach, that's a personal choice..


The root issue here, as you have clearly detailed is about lazy, irresponsible behaviour! Hopefully said person reads this and thinks twice next time.

talk about shooting the messenger!!


actually, sometimes confronting the perpetrator can end in right old mess. I had a polite and I thought friendly word with someone (who I thought was nice neighbour ) about a howling and distressed dog once, and they threatened to shove my teeth down my throat.


So I quite understand someone not wanting the face to face thing. But perhaps, if the 'guilty party' reads the edf they might recognise themselves. and think twice about doing it again.


please don't attack the people who report such antisocial behaviour

I agree with Nigello. Nothing worse than a curtain twitcher who snoops on people and doesn't confront them there and then, maybe the person would own up and learn from their mistake? Instead you critisise them on a forum they may never read and the tut tut brigade join in because they too don't have the gumption to confront said person. Yawn. Next please...


Louisa.

Dog poo is a huge problem in that area. I live on Overhill Rd and one side of the street has been gradually turning into somebody's dog's bathroom in recent months. Somebody new must have acquired a dog - somebody not responsible enough to have one. I have written to one of my councillors about the poo problem. He says he is aware of the problem and it is being looked into by the council. Not exactly sure what that means but what is frustrating is that cleaning up the mess is an easier option than trying to change behaviour and stop it happening at all.


So although challenging someone who you see not cleaning up after their dog may be the right thing to do, it doesn't necessarily feel like the safest. My experience of challenging people who drop litter is that 90% of the time you are told to F off or get some other defensive reaction that makes you wish you hadn't. You walk away feeling like the busy body. With a selfish dog owner there's also a good chance that they are a bad dog owner and have reared their dog to be aggressive. Having said that, with the woman that Fortified saw it sounds like she was conscientious enough to pick up the poop. Just too lazy to do the right thing once she had bagged it.

The woman bagged it, and to be fair, once it's bagged it is no longer a danger to young kids or anyone else for that matter so well done for bagging it at least. I agree she should have put it in a bin, maybe she had been carrying it for a while and didn't know/forgot about a nearby bin? If she was smart enough to bag it then she my have good reason on this occasion for not binning it for whatever reason. That's why confronting in a pleasant, polite manner would have worked better for this example than naming and shaming on a public forum. I'm sure if directed towards a "nearby bin" she would have obliged. Far easier to bleet about a gripe on a forum than face to face isn't it?


Louisa.

Recently I found a runny one in the middle of my front doormat so someone actually allowed their pet to go into someone else's porch. That was fun.


I generally say something if I see a dog owner turning a blind eye, but agree it can be intimidating and some reinforcement in the forum might make a few people think twice.

Louisa, you really do enjoy being contrary for the sake of it. You can't justify someone dumping a bag of sh*t in the street. The fact that it's bagged hardly makes it OK.


The OP said that they would have confronted the individual but didn't have the opportunity to intervene. It's not always possible.

I was sitting in outside my place couple of weeks ago in the car,

whilst my husband went indoors to collect something.

A man passed with a small dog who immediatley stooped.

Man stopped went in his pockets withdrew something

I thought maybe a bag, After a while realised he was texting

he then put phone away looked back at his dogs doings

then picked a stick up and flicked it under my back gate.

I obviously went after him. He said its only a little bit

He did eventually pick it up in a bag

I must admit I can see the funny side the silly bugger must have seen me

as the engine was running and we had moved the car out of the gutter somewhat.

Come on Louisa nails it. Whilst mothers pushing their children around in buagaboos etc with an air of Clapham about them deserve our scorn, people dumping bags of sh1t on the streets are much maligned and missunderstood....

There seems to be a bit of a quandry re the law here, it seems that it is (or was) perfectly legal to allow a dog to do it's business in drainage channel of a roadway (gutter)-assumption rain or road sweepers would clean it up.

But to bag it and then place it in the gutter seems counter productive, why not just pop it in a bin ? Doesn't have to be a dog poop specified, just in a general rubbish bin.

I've seen dog poop bags left in gutters many a time, in fact 1 this morning that had obviously been squished by a vehicle tyre

I wasn't referring to the bagged part, but to the defecating part. Lots of dogs used to be trained to do their business off the kerb in the gutter, and street sweepers would sweep it up like BR said. So maybe elderly people still let their dogs do that.

I think it is the reasonable responsibility of every dog owner to clear up after their pet's mess whether they find it difficult or not. I get incredibly angry if I accidentally walk in the stuff.


You should definitely approach the owner if you catch them doing it, hopefully shaming them into changing their ways. I agree that you don't know how that person might react but you would be able to tell from their reaction whether it could turn serious/physical and then exit the scene if necessary.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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