I read somewhere last week that the animal charities are at crisis point, even before their usual huge after christmas intake, because of the credit cruch struggling families are dumping, selling and abandoning pets at an alarming rate to save money or increase their working hours.

Thankfully i havent been in that situation (fingers crossed) .... but i just couldnt imagine giving up a family pet through finances, Id rather live on a diet of pot noodles (:gag:) to be able to keep my babies, after all, arnt they 'part of the family'?

Should people who give up/abandon or sell animals on be stopped from owning another for .... say 12 months? .... I know it could never be policed, but its a nice thought.
what do you think?

Nice idea, but would people not just have their pet PTS to avoid the 12 month ban?

Nice idea, but would people not just have their pet PTS to avoid the 12 month ban?
not when PTS costs £100ish

/agreed

People who give up a pet should be banned from having another for a very long period. There's absolutely no legislation on buying animals and anyone can just buy a puppy from the nearby store and do whatever with it.

I've heard some absolute horror stories in the past few months. A lady in the park was telling me she rescued two cavaliers from a home in which they'd been neglected so badly; the house was filthy and the dogs were too. And there was a dead rabbit in the room with the dogs.

I could never give my bundles up either, its not their fault,

not just cat n dogs...seeing it a lot with reptiles, esp cos of the rising leccy and heating costs...our leccy bill has doubled in a year for reptiles come in, 50quid a week on the token meter......that thing is fed better than me!:help:

i think you have to look at it both ways, some of these owners are genuine animal lovers who simply cannot afford to keep their animals anymore , no one can forsee redundancy etc and feel that they are doing best in rehoming them so they get what they need, giving up an animal for some is a heart wrenching thing but sometimes the only thing they can do to ensure they remain looked after. Our rescue have taken from some very sad circumstances where the owners are truly devestated and find it very hard to let them go but loss of jobs etc means they have no choice, please dont judge everyone, some people are genuinely doing the best for the animal.

I love my pets and would never give them up.My pets are a big part of my life and i cannot ever imagine living without pets, I have had pets since the the day i was born and probably will til the day i die. I would go hungry before they did and thats a fact.

in the past a luxery for me was a fishfinger sandwich when times were hard because i always made sure my pets came first.I took them on so it's not there fault....everyone has a different story i supose but i do think a lot of people will now use this as a feeble excuse or they can't think that much of their pets in the first place

I've collected cats for the Shelter from homes that were in the process of being repossessed, usually from women with young children who can no longer keep the mortgage payments going after a relationship breakup and no support incoming to look after the children. This is usually accompanied by real tears (from the woman and her children) and donation of whatever they can afford to help pay for the upkeep of the animals.

Or how about the lady in Doncaster who has 4 cats of her own and who inherited 8 other cats (4 of which turned out to be pregnant) when her friend died.

In circumstances such as these don't you think that getting an animal into a Shelter is just about the MOST responsible thing that could happen?

I've collected cats for the Shelter from homes that were in the process of being repossessed, usually from women with young children who can no longer keep the mortgage payments going after a relationship breakup and no support incoming to look after the children. This is usually accompanied by real tears (from the woman and her children) and donation of whatever they can afford to help pay for the upkeep of the animals.

Or how about the lady in Doncaster who has 4 cats of her own and who inherited 8 other cats (4 of which turned out to be pregnant) when her friend died.

In circumstances such as these don't you think that getting an animal into a Shelter is just about the MOST responsible thing that could happen?

Thats different from them actually being hers , when my mum died I inherted her 2 dogs but i had already agreed that i would have them when she died as she made me promise to have them or she would come back and haunt me lol.

In circumstances such as these don't you think that getting an animal into a Shelter is just about the MOST responsible thing that could happen?

Quite.

I've been forced by circumstance into a heartbreaking handover of a dog to a shelter and 9 years on I still wonder and hope that she found a good home.

I still don't know how I drove home...twice I had to stop because I couldn't see through tears.


Now I'm in better circumstances I feel the same - I couldn't imagine not having my friends around. I bought a new telly a few weeks ago and just after, a vets trip was called for. I know I worried about the bills and thought "wish I hadn't just wasted money on a telly" and I know that the TV would be the first thing to be put on eBay if it looked like the vets bill would need it.

Thankfully it didn't come to that....but I know what I would rather live without, and that would be telly

I've collected cats for the Shelter from homes that were in the process of being repossessed, usually from women with young children who can no longer keep the mortgage payments going after a relationship breakup and no support incoming to look after the children. This is usually accompanied by real tears (from the woman and her children) and donation of whatever they can afford to help pay for the upkeep of the animals.
Or how about the lady in Doncaster who has 4 cats of her own and who inherited 8 other cats (4 of which turned out to be pregnant) when her friend died.

In circumstances such as these don't you think that getting an animal into a Shelter is just about the MOST responsible thing that could happen?

that made me feel really sad - its quick to judge someone giving up an animal - but you never know whats round the corner do you?

i totally agree medusa there are obviously genuine cases and logic says take them to a rescue centre which in most cases i'd hope they would but there is always the ones who just don't think like that and in saddens me thats all. Some one i know took on a dog that had been tied to a pole on the m1,why do that hoping it would get run over or were they hoping more people would see it. Who knows.

I've collected cats for the Shelter from homes that were in the process of being repossessed, usually from women with young children who can no longer keep the mortgage payments going after a relationship breakup and no support incoming to look after the children. This is usually accompanied by real tears (from the woman and her children) and donation of whatever they can afford to help pay for the upkeep of the animals.

Or how about the lady in Doncaster who has 4 cats of her own and who inherited 8 other cats (4 of which turned out to be pregnant) when her friend died.

In circumstances such as these don't you think that getting an animal into a Shelter is just about the MOST responsible thing that could happen?

fair play, i shouldnt be so judgemental ... and will try not to in the future, it just enrages me when i read post after post on pet section about wanting to rehome a pet ..... usually for reasons that could be easily remidied .... a lot of time its the muppets who choose a fluufy cute pup, spoil it rotten, have no idea about pet ownership, dont train it ..... then when the cute fluffy grows into a large dog, totally untrained, probably got lots of problems ....then try to fob it off on some poor bugger with a silly excuse about rehoming ..... again i understand this isnt always the case, but I can not express strongly enough how angry this makes me

Don't get me wrong, I do think that there are a lot of people who don't think through the full responsibilities or implications when they take on an animal. Unfortunately, there are lots of times when it is altogether too easy for people to take an animal on and in my opinion this is the step that needs to change, not the step of judging people for taking an animal into a rescue centre (and I agree entirely about people dumping animals).

What I am really concerned about is the situation for the animals when people have already decided that the animals have to go, but then run into judgment when trying to find new homes for their animals. What happens then? How well are people in this situation likely to treat their animals?

If they haven't thought it through properly when getting an animal and can't afford (or don't want to reorganise their finances to fund) proper veterinary care then isn't it actually better for the animal to be rehomed?

I don't doubt that there is a need for fewer animals, more education and more home checking on behalf of the person/organisation finding homes in the first place, but that's not the same as making life harder for the animals by putting a badge of shame on people who do rehome their animals.

the biggest issue during the credit crunch is housing assocs and the council making the demand that an animal is dispensed with before they'll even start helping to rehome somebody

Many letting agencies have a blanket 'no pets' policy, regardless of the wishes of a landlord signed up with them

I'd like to see a campaign addressing this issue

Many people don't WANT to dump their animals, they're a victim of a system that quite frankly stinks :mad:

the biggest issue during the credit crunch is housing assocs and the council making the demand that an animal is dispensed with before they'll even start helping to rehome somebody

Many letting agencies have a blanket 'no pets' policy, regardless of the wishes of a landlord signed up with them

I'd like to see a campaign addressing this issue

Many people don't WANT to dump their animals, they're a victim of a system that quite frankly stinks :mad:

That's outrageous. I just can't see why a pet would affect a property in any way. Worst case scenario: they tear away the wallpaper or poop on the carpet. You repaper and buy a new carpet when you move. It shouldn't be affecting people who already have animals - especially if they're being forced to put them up for adoption, or worse, abandoning them.

I was talking to a letting agent at a party recently, and she was adamant that they weren't doing anything wrong

I suggested that contracts should be separately negotiable - eg my dog is crated when left unattended so couldn't possibly carry out any of the damage she outlined (completely destroyed doors, messed carpets etc), but her argument was that if somebody is allowed a chihuahua, then they couldn't refuse a rottweiler (or words to that effect)

Children generally cause more damage to property, but could you imagine stating 'no kids' as a blanket agency policy in this day and age?

That's outrageous. I just can't see why a pet would affect a property in any way. Worst case scenario: they tear away the wallpaper or poop on the carpet. You repaper and buy a new carpet when you move. It shouldn't be affecting people who already have animals - especially if they're being forced to put them up for adoption, or worse, abandoning them.

now its mentioned, i have seen many many people having to give up reptiles in new acc. even something as simple as a corn snake or lep gex....

Gah. It makes me so cross.

My parents rented out their beautiful house and the family that moved had kids which poured bleach all over the floor - ruining the Axminster carpets in several rooms - more damage than any dog would do.

If the pet issue is really a serious problem (and people are being forced to abandon their pets) then something needs to be done about it and legislation needs putting in place to protect the poor defenseless animals.

even though i love animals, i can understand why landlords dont allow them, if i had a property that cost me £100K + .... and a few more hundred to fit out, i wouldnt want it ruined, unfortunatly Ive been into a lot of smelly houses from .... shall we say unhygenic pet owners who allow the animals to wee and poo all over the place, not to mention chewed furniture/walls/carpets. We all seem to assume everyones like us, sadly theres a lot of scummy dirty people around that give every dog owning tenant a bad name

I would like to establish better support systems to help pet owners in dire circumstances keep their pets when it isn't an issue of cruelty. Or, if you will, to keep pets in their homes.

Helping a pet owner out with a big bag of pet food, a vet bill, or training has got to be less costly than trying to rehome an animal.

I don't like the idea of essentially punishing people for surrendering an animal to rescue. It sends the wrong message, I think, and would only lead to animals being dumped along roadsides... or worse. If you know you can't do right by your pet, approaching a rescue is the *responsible* thing. And any rescue worth its salt will direct owners to resources that may help in situations where they believe surrender can be avoided.

I suggested that contracts should be separately negotiable - eg my dog is crated when left unattended so couldn't possibly carry out any of the damage she outlined (completely destroyed doors, messed carpets etc), but her argument was that if somebody is allowed a chihuahua, then they couldn't refuse a rottweiler (or words to that effect)

I call B.S. on that one. They could insert a weight/size restriction into a rental agreement, easily.

We had the very same shortage of pet-friendly housing in America. However, recently, more an more landlords are seeing the huge demand for pet-friendly housing, and the huge income potential in letting to pet owners for a premium rent or a very large deposit. Is there some legislation over here that prevents landlords from requiring a large deposit to keep pets? Certainly there would be loads of people willing to pay, if it meant they could keep their beloved animals.

even though i love animals, i can understand why landlords dont allow them, if i had a property that cost me £100K + .... and a few more hundred to fit out, i wouldnt want it ruined, unfortunatly Ive been into a lot of smelly houses from .... shall we say unhygenic pet owners who allow the animals to wee and poo all over the place, not to mention chewed furniture/walls/carpets. We all seem to assume everyones like us, sadly theres a lot of scummy dirty people around that give every dog owning tenant a bad nameyeeeerrrrsss, and have you seen what the same people can do to a property if they have kids, or if they just live there themselves?

Banning sensible people from keeping pets is signing a death warrant on those pets in many circumstances

Like I say, there are many agencies who override a landlord's choice to have pets

Even the Salvation Army have recognised that prejudices against dogs is a factor in keeping people on the streets and out of homes, so they've altered their policy (well according to a friend of a neighbour who works for them anyway)

I call B.S. on that one. They could insert a weight/size restriction into a rental agreement, easily.

We had the very same shortage of pet-friendly housing in America. However, recently, more an more landlords are seeing the huge demand for pet-friendly housing, and the huge income potential in letting to pet owners for a premium rent or a very large deposit. Is there some legislation over here that prevents landlords from requiring a large deposit to keep pets? Certainly there would be loads of people willing to pay, if it meant they could keep their beloved animals.This has long been my argument

when we get people on here looking for accommodation with their pet, we suggest approaching private lets from ads in local shop windows or the paper, and offer them a higher rent/deposit, plus whatever assurance they have at their disposal - eg 'my dog is crated when I'm out'

I would like to establish better support systems to help pet owners in dire circumstances keep their pets when it isn't an issue of cruelty. Or, if you will, to keep pets in their homes.

Helping a pet owner out with a big bag of pet food, a vet bill, or training has got to be less costly than trying to rehome an animal.Sometimes it's not the financial that's the hard part

I've had a foster dog in and out on and off over a period of months when his owner was suffering from depression and couldn't keep him herself. I just provided an instant drop off point whenever he couldn't be cared for at home, and much of the time I was able to 'use' him to ensure his owner was still in one piece, when she wouldn't have opened the door to anybody else

He's now enjoying a more settled home environment - still with his owner :)

The Dogs Trust are running a long term foster scheme - for looking after dogs of women who've gone into prison. Not an attractive campaign to run, but if you step back and look at it sensibly (most women in prison are actually depressives for whom crime is a symptom), returning a dog to their home and giving that woman part of her life back pays dividends all round

That's one of the things I love over here, and I wish was more widespread in America: fostering animals.

Do you know, there's more going out than coming in at this house, O/H ended up with just £3 out of his latest wage.
I'm on just one meal a day and haven't got a clue how we are going to get xmas pressies for kids...it's bad:(
I WOULD NEVER consider getting rid of the dog though! She's part of the family, she has a big sack of food to last her through to next payday, the kids and dog Alway's come first!!!

Have you ever been in the situ where even the dog kimble start's to look tempting:hihi:

I was talking to a letting agent at a party recently, and she was adamant that they weren't doing anything wrong

I suggested that contracts should be separately negotiable - eg my dog is crated when left unattended so couldn't possibly carry out any of the damage she outlined (completely destroyed doors, messed carpets etc), but her argument was that if somebody is allowed a chihuahua, then they couldn't refuse a rottweiler (or words to that effect)

Children generally cause more damage to property, but could you imagine stating 'no kids' as a blanket agency policy in this day and age?

I totally agree, letting agents should always discuss the landlord's wishes with regards to pets and not just have this blanket ban. The argument above doesn't really hold water for me as you can state that pets are at the discretion of the landlord; and a small well trained dog or cat is totally different to a heard of unruly larger dogs!

I totally agree, letting agents should always discuss the landlord's wishes with regards to pets and not just have this blanket ban. The argument above doesn't really hold water for me as you can state that pets are at the discretion of the landlord; and a small well trained dog or cat is totally different to a heard of unruly larger dogs!

And not all larger dogs are unruly or damaging either- it all needs taking on a case by case basis.

I can personally guarantee that my dog would never chew the furniture- my home is damaged far more by the kittens that I foster than it ever has been by the dog.

Oh no, don't get me wrong i'm not saying that all large dogs are likely to cause damage; it all depends on the individual dog. I just used extremes to show that the letting agents argument doesn't stand up :)

even though i love animals, i can understand why landlords dont allow them, if i had a property that cost me £100K + .... and a few more hundred to fit out, i wouldnt want it ruined, unfortunatly Ive been into a lot of smelly houses from .... shall we say unhygenic pet owners who allow the animals to wee and poo all over the place, not to mention chewed furniture/walls/carpets. We all seem to assume everyones like us, sadly theres a lot of scummy dirty people around that give every dog owning tenant a bad name

I agree with you. I've been in some horrible scummy houses :gag: and can't believe people live like that...and think it's normal.....I'd be mortified!

I once rented a flat and although it looked clean must have had a lot of 'cat' left in it. I'm really badly allergic to cat to the extend I could not breathe for about 2 months and nearly moved out. It took 2 months of hoovering twice a day / washing carpets / all soft furnishings lots of times to get rid of the cat skin?fur?mites? affecting me and my allergy to cats is now that servere that I can't visit friends for more than a couple of hours if they have a cat in the house.

When I bought that was one of the questions I asked....I would not buy a house that had a cat living in it recently; I could not feel ill for so long again. I supose I'm in the minority but it made me think :)

Do you know, there's more going out than coming in at this house, O/H ended up with just £3 out of his latest wage.
I'm on just one meal a day and haven't got a clue how we are going to get xmas pressies for kids...it's bad:(
I WOULD NEVER consider getting rid of the dog though! She's part of the family, she has a big sack of food to last her through to next payday, the kids and dog Alway's come first!!!

Have you ever been in the situ where even the dog kimble start's to look tempting:hihi:

Funny end note but you just highlight the seriousness of the credit situation!

When I started to read this post I was so angry at the lack of thought people must put into getting a pet. But after reading your other views nobody knows what's round the corner and you can't possibly prepare for every situation, and your right when some people do have to rehome a dog they are not doing it for selfish reasons-quite the opposite, sometimes being selfish would be to keep the animal and let it suffer.

As for the other people, so many underestimate the true costs of owning an animal. Especially a pet like a dog/cat, it's not just about purchase fee and food it's routine injections, spaying/neutering, insurance, toys, bedding, litter/puppy pads, and all the rest let alone those suprise vet bills! I added up what it would cost for my lab per month and doubled it to make sure I would be able to afford her in the long term!

I really hope me and my boyfriend are never in a situation where we will lose our jobs but if one of us did, with a mortgage we would certainly struggle. I'm like a lot of you on here though, I'd be sat in the dog bed with no furniture, tv etc before I'd give her up!!!!:hihi: