Couple call for law change on dog attacks after ‘horrific’ mauling of pet
LUNA HAD TO HAVE 25 STITCHES IN FACE
A COUPLE are calling for tighter laws on dog attacks to help protect pets and their owners.
Hairdresser Charlotte Lees was walking her dog Luna on November 25, 2023, at West Park, Long Eaton, when another dog came running over and attacked her pet.
Luna, a four-year-old shar pei, was “horrifically” attacked by the dog, who clenched down on the side of her face and only let go after a passerby intervened.
Charlotte rushed her dog to the vet where it had to have 25 stitches due to the injuries caused by the Wheaton terrier.
The 33-year-old said: “I was walking my dog on her lead, a dog came running up to us and I thought ran away again as the owner was shouting it back. I then heard screams and I looked down and the dog had mine in its mouth.”
She claims the owner of the other dog would not give her name or address but handed over her phone number, which Charlotte rang to inform her of the vet bill, which was more than £1,000.
She continued: “She made her way down and paid the bill but never let me know. I called the dog warden and police multiple times and I’ve been told the owner signed a voluntary control order which meant the dog had to be muzzled, but on Tuesday I saw the dog being walked without.
“The man said it was up to him and as the police and dog warden had both told him it wasn’t a dangerous dog he could do as he wanted. I feel let down that nothing more could be done, and something needs to change as it’s most weeks I hear about dog attacks.
“I no longer go to the park with or without my dog. There is no consequence if your dog attacks for no reason and it feels a huge injustice.”
Dog owners have a legal responsibility under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to keep their dogs under control in a public place. A voluntary control order is used to control or improve the behaviour of the dog and includes specific conditions which must be followed.
Charlotte’s husband, Kelvin Lees, 38, described the attack as “horrendous”. The NHS worker said: “We took her to the vet and she ended up with all of the side of her cheek hanging off so she had to be sedated and had 25 stitches in the inside of her face. It’s been a long recovery in terms of getting her back OK again. I think the dog is fine to be honest, but my wife who witnessed it is absolutely devastated.”
The couple feel let down by the system and says there needs to be more legislation in place about dog attacks in general, and not focusing on a specific breed. Kelvin said: “If a dog gets attacked that badly then someone should be there to help you and help put things right and take a bit of action, and all we have got from the dog warden or police or
I no longer go to the park with or without my dog. There is no consequence if your dog attacks for no reason and it feels a huge injustice. Charlotte Lees
anyone we asked is that it’s a dogon-dog attack so there’s nothing we can do about it.
“It feels like the XL Bully thing gets a lot of attention but it is happening with other dogs. It feels like we have to wait for a kid to get attacked before we can do anything.”
He described the local park as being “like a Wild West” for dogs, and says that he sees on social media that “almost every day a dog has attacked another dog”.
Charlotte added that she “never had an apology” from the other dog owner, and is concerned that more is not being done by the police.
A spokesperson for Derbyshire Constabulary said that a “thorough and proportionate investigation” was carried out following the incident.
They said: “A statement was taken from the owner of the attacked dog, the owner of the dog was interviewed under caution and the owner was also visited at their home to speak about ways in which this could be prevented from happening in future. A witness to the incident was spoken to who gave an independent account of the circumstances.
“Both the force legal services and specially trained Dog Legislation Officer agreed that there was not sufficient evidence to show that a Section 3 offence – of a dog being dangerously out of control – had been met.
“There was no evidence that the dog had previously been aggressive, the owner had no previous incidents of a similar nature and there was no indication that the dog had injured any other person or animal during the incident.”
They continued: “The owner of the dog showed genuine remorse for the actions of their animal, gave a reasonable explanation of the circumstances and paid the vet bills immediately of the injured animal. As a force we must work within the law and prosecute based on the evidence that is found. We will also take a pragmatic view based on the specific circumstances in a case.
“In this instance it was felt reasonable to hand the owner a Voluntary Control Order which places specific requirements on how the dog must be handled in public. If there is information to suggest that this order is not being followed, then this should be reported to the force.”