Local RSS Feed


‘Missing’ dog is back home


THE widow whose dog was given away by a dogs’ home resorted to legal action to get her back.

Liz Hiorns, aged 72, was the victim of a bizzare mix-up when her dog, Penny, was given to new owners by Danemere Animal Rescue Shelter, near Droitwich.

The 11-year-old Jack Russell bitch went missing on Monday, April 12, and – despite numerous calls to the police, local vets and the dog wardens at both Stratford-upon-Avon and Warwick district councils – Mrs Hiorns, who lives on a farm near Ashorne, Stratford-upon-Avon, could not find her pet.

A mix-up in communication meant Mrs Hiorns was not told Penny had been taken by the Stratford dog wardens 30 miles to Danemere, where she had been kept for 12 days before being re-homed.

When Mrs Hiorns, who was widowed last year, finally found out where her dog had been taken she was told she could not have her back. Mrs Hiorns and her family then resorted to legal action to compel Danemere to tell them the whereabouts of Penny – and have now been reunited with their beloved pet.

Danemere stand by their original assertion that Penny arrived with an eye infection, flea infestation and had to have more than 20 ticks removed.

A spokesman for Danmere said: “Penny was also filthy dirty and found to have a skin complaint that required treatment with a medicated shampoo. Before returning Penny to her original owner, Mrs Hiorns, the dog warden returned Penny to the vet that had seen her when she was a ‘stray’. The vet now gave Penny a clean bill of health.”

Danemere also questioned why a dog who regularly wanders had not been tagged. “As a known wanderer a collar and tag would have been advisable,” the spokesperson said.

Stratford-upon-Avon District Council has apologised unreservedly and said they were acting in good faith on this occasion, but clearly there were lessons to be learned. A spokesman said: “Unfortunately on this occasion the missing dog, Penny, had no form of identification and was found with an eye infection covered in fleas and ticks. Although the District Council does try to match up stray dogs with their owners who have reported their dogs as lost, on this occasion due to a clerical error and the length of time between the dog being picked up and being reported missing by its owner, this was not the case.”

But the Hiorns family believe that, while there was a “major clerical error”, the council’s statement was misleading in inferring there was any delay in the dog being reported missing.

A family spokesperson said: “We should be interested to know whether the council will be making any contribution towards our legal costs, incurred when trying to compel Danmere Animal Rescue Centre to reveal the whereabouts of our missing dog.”

Comments(7)

diva123 says...
9:20pm Tue 11 May 10

Finally it seems a shame that it had to go that far when common sense should have prevailed in the first place. Very happy that Penny has been reunited with her owner.

Spetchley Dave says...
9:15am Wed 12 May 10

I would be very careful if I was Mrs Hiorns "family spokesperson".

It is a legal requirement for a dog in a public place to wear an appropriate identity tag. It would appear that Mrs Hiorns broke the law in this respect.

Also these days dogs should be microchipped if the owner is responsible and cares about making sure they don't lose their pet!

There is also the not insignificant matter of the poor health in which the dog was found when straying. Infections, fleas and ticks are further signs of neglect.

To be honest it sounds to me like Mrs Hiorns is not the most responsible of dog owners and perhaps should think very carefully before criticising others about their conduct.

If the dog had been tagged and chipped, then she would have had it back within hours of it being found.

Think on Mrs Hiorns, the lessons that need learning, need learning by you.

diva123 says...
11:49am Wed 12 May 10

Oh im sorry the dog must have forgot to put his collar on before wondering in a public place!!!

Spetchley Dave says...
1:15pm Wed 12 May 10

If there is any danger of the dog wandering in a public place, then a responsible owner should make sure it ALWAYS has a collar on. The woman acted irresponsibly, end of.

MrStJohns says...
2:10pm Wed 12 May 10

The compassion Dave, the lady in question did make a mistake and you are correct dogs by law should wear a collar. But the world isn’t black and white is it, the poor lady lost her pet, who had become even more special after the death of her husband. I agree in cases when someone has done something abhorrent no tolerance should be shown, but when a poor old lady ahs made a mistake then abit of understanding and compassion doesn’t go amiss.

diva123 says...
3:04pm Wed 12 May 10

Oh and by the way Dave you may want to get your facts right as the dog did have a collar on!!!

Spetchley Dave says...
1:15pm Fri 14 May 10

If it had a collar and tag on (as required by law) then it would have been identifiable and could have been returned straight away diva!


And Mr StJohns, what I object to is Mrs Hiorns blaming the whole situation on the rescue centre, when a bit of common sense from her could have avoided the whole sorry mess in the first place.


Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses