Am I responsible for vet's fee's?

Toulouse

Some SPCA's have arrangements with vets for cases like this.

Might be worth looking into.

TooManyDogs

scoooby wrote: »

If the OP had requested treatment and the vet had done so before the owner had arrived, then the OP owes the vet and the OP will need to recoup the money from the owner. Why? Because the vet did work for the OP, requested by the OP. The owner might have chosen a different course of action

But by that logic the OP could have requested the vet pts the dog as cheapest course of action for him as the vet was doing the work for him. I can't see the OP having to pay simply cos he brought the dog to the vet when the owner has since been in contact with the vet. It's not like the vet would honour this chain of events contract by releasing the dog to the OP after treatment, the dog would go straight back to the owner because the owner claimed him. So if you're going by logic of OP having hired the services of a vet so therefore should pay the vet and claim money back off owner, then the other half of that agreement is that the vet should give the dog back to OP since OP brought the dog in in the first place, and owner claim the dog off the OP

JustAThought

Fair dues to the OP for stopping & bringing the dog to the vets. I wonder did s/he tell the vet what had happened when they brought it in -most likely they did so the vet would have known it wasn't the OP's dog, and would have known there was /could easily be an issue before they looked at it.

By the sounds of it, the owner sounds a bit of a bully; letting their dog loose ( frequently) on the street to run amuk, and then being a bully down at the vets. Sounds like an inconsiderate knacker.

As for the OP I would write down what happened, including taking the injured dog to get medical aid, and keep a note including the neighbours name who said the dog was frequently out. You used to have to report killing a dog to the gaurds but that is no longer necessary.

The owner is at fault & should pay any damages you incurred personally or to your car to you . As regards the other stand your ground and walk away. Make sure you don't give your phone number to this guy -he sounds like he could be trouble. The driver sounds like a really decent person - it sounds like the dog dosn't deserve it's horrible, inconsiderate, mean, ungrateful owner.

On a seperate note, I always have " insured" put onto my dogs tags as well as my vets number so that if anything were to happen to her & her to be lost & injured, that the person who found her would know that she was insured & if they called the vet, my vet knows us & would know that they could treat her as I would pay anything for her.

I think putting this on the tag is a good idea as it is the reason I would stop & reconsider helping out if the owner couldn't be found . I never imagined a cut & dry scenario like this where the owner was so ungrateful & mean that they didn't want to pay.

meathstevie

The dog is owned by it's owner, not the OP, in the eyes of the law a dog is property and nothing else ( with the exception of animal cruelty and neglect legislation ).

Now given that the dog is property it's the owner of the dog who will have to pay for the vet care as the OP's actions are nothing more or less than what a responsible person would have done to make sure that a)the dog didn't suffer unnecessarily, b) the then unknown 3rd party's property was dealt with in such a way as to prevent further loss or damage.

Ultimately liability for the incident is rather clear cut; the dog owner is liable because the dog was wandering out of control at the time of the incident.

Look at it this way, you drive by a house on fire and ring the fire service acting in the belief that the owner would have done the same had they known the house was on fire. Are you going to pay for the fire service invoice ? Don't think so.

Capercaille

meathstevie wrote: »

Look at it this way, you drive by a house on fire and ring the fire service acting in the belief that the owner would have done the same had they known the house was on fire. Are you going to pay for the fire service invoice ? Don't think so.

I was in a car crash last year. The other driver was responsible. I rang the firebrigade/ambulance for them as the passenger in the car was stuck in the car. I was billed by the County Council for 576 euros since I rung them. I had to get the money off the driver (via his insurance) to pay for it.

monkeysnapper

People make me so angry , well done op , the vet knew the score from the start and the owner was found, the op has done his/her duty. Pat yourself on the back for being a good person and let the vet/ owner sort it out now. If anyone comes looking for money tell them to take you to court.

AllthingsCP

meathstevie wrote: »

The dog is owned by it's owner, not the OP, in the eyes of the law a dog is property and nothing else ( with the exception of animal cruelty and neglect legislation ).

Now given that the dog is property it's the owner of the dog who will have to pay for the vet care as the OP's actions are nothing more or less than what a responsible person would have done to make sure that a)the dog didn't suffer unnecessarily, b) the then unknown 3rd party's property was dealt with in such a way as to prevent further loss or damage.

Ultimately liability for the incident is rather clear cut; the dog owner is liable because the dog was wandering out of control at the time of the incident.

Look at it this way, you drive by a house on fire and ring the fire service acting in the belief that the owner would have done the same had they known the house was on fire. Are you going to pay for the fire service invoice ? Don't think so.

That not how the court will see it, If the owner wont pay the OP can expect a nice bill in the post. At the end of the day the owner mite not have treated the dog, He could have had it put asleep where the OP and the vet had a verbal agreement that will not look nice for the OP in court. experience here i to learned the hard way but with a big bloody cat.

paraletic

This is from the department of the environment website:

"By law all dogs must be kept under effective control – owners may be held liable for any injury or damage caused if their dog attacks a person or livestock."

If the dog isn't licences or doesn't have a tag there are penalties for that too.

As far as I know the dog owner is liable for damage to your car too.

I think that they should pay the vet!
But I don't know the law so get advice from a better source than boards.ie

loveisdivine

I dont think OP is liable at all. I certainly wouldn't be paying for it and then chasing the owners for the money, you'd be a fool to do that IMO.

I can't help but think of the below scenario -

You see a drunk person lying in the street, clearly in distress, you call for an ambulance and the person is treated in hopital for alcohol poisoning. Who should pay for the ambulance and hospital treatment? After all, you called the ambulance, you requested their services.

mickysquint

Sorry everyone for not responding on here for the last few days but I'll try and answer a few questions that have been asked.

1: The dog had no chip or any tag's on its collar.

2: When I arrived at the vets with the dog I made it clear that I wasn't the owner of the dog.

3: I also made it clear to the vet that I would knock on doors in the area that the dog was thought to be from in the hope of finding the owner.

I haven't heard anything from the vet so I assume that the owner has either decided to pay for the treatment of their dog or has decided to put the dog to sleep, or maybe its too soon to assume that.

The one thing I do know is that if it ever happened again I would do exactly the same because no matter how much stress and worries about money I'm just not that sort of person to watch a poor dog lying in the road in agony and drive off. Thank you every one for their input, really means a lot.

AllthingsCP

loveisdivine wrote: »

I dont think OP is liable at all. I certainly wouldn't be paying for it and then chasing the owners for the money, you'd be a fool to do that IMO.

I can't help but think of the below scenario -

You see a drunk person lying in the street, clearly in distress, you call for an ambulance and the person is treated in hopital for alcohol poisoning. Who should pay for the ambulance and hospital treatment? After all, you called the ambulance, you requested their services.

Its different people have names address's the ability to talk and earn money, PPS numbers a lot more ways to bill them, Unlike animals

boomerang

If no owner had been found, OP would have been left with the bill to pay. The vet must be paid and if the owner is a sh*t and won't, then it falls to the OP to pay. Although a decent vet would waive the bill, under the circumstances. I'm sure the dog needed no more than a quick consult and possibly a shot of dex for shock and some pain relief, so we're not talking about much money.

Sadly no good deed goes unpunished.