The ArgusTenants forced to have pets microchipped in Brighton and Hove (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Tenants forced to have pets microchipped in Brighton and Hove

Thousands of tenants will be forced to microchip their pets – to stop hundreds of dogs being left abandoned on the streets.

Brighton and Hove City Council said the number of stray dogs in the city has doubled since 2008.

Of the 400 reported last year, local authority bosses said only half could be returned to their owners with the remaining 200 placed in over-burdened rescue homes.

To combat the problem, officials are telling all residents in its 12,300 properties they must register and microchip their pets with the council.

It will also ban tenants from “irresponsibly” breeding animals with anyone flouting the law facing a fine and possible eviction from their home.

It is understood that anyone who does not microchip their pet will also face a fine.

Liz Wakefield, chairman of the council’s housing committee, said: “The council is supportive of pet ownership and we do help people to keep their pets when they are experiencing problems.

“But it is equally important for the community as a whole, that tenants are clear about the penalties for disregard of legislated animal welfare.”

Irresponsible ownership

Letters are currently being sent to properties and community groups across the city informing them of the new policy.

It comes after a series of complaints from residents about irresponsible pet ownership.

One resident of a block in Grove Hill, Brighton, said she was getting little sleep as dogs in her building kept her awake.

She said: “When I moved into the block in 1987 it was for over 50s and no dogs were allowed so I had to let my beloved dog go.

“Now the place is full of dogs.”

Dawn Barnett, who represents Hangleton and Knoll on the council, said there were cases in her ward where some tenants had three dogs in a one bedroom flat.

She added neighbours were complaining about antisocial behaviour, including late-night noise and fouling.

Coun Barnett said: “People who dump their pets on the street are not animal lovers. The council is 100% right on this and has to be done to stop cruelty to animals.

“To microchip a pet is to protect it.”

See the latest news headlines from The Argus:

More news from The Argus

Follow @brightonargus

The Argus: Daily Echo on Facebook - facebook.com/southerndailyecho Like us on Facebook

The Argus: Google+ Add us to your circles on Google+

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:58pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Hoarder12345444 says...

Good, surely no one would have an issue with this? I suspect it wont cost the owners anything, and you may be able to see you dog on a satellite one day if they get lost!! Ok, maybe not.
Good, surely no one would have an issue with this? I suspect it wont cost the owners anything, and you may be able to see you dog on a satellite one day if they get lost!! Ok, maybe not. Hoarder12345444
  • Score: 0

2:12pm Mon 25 Feb 13

bug eye says...

good policy at last, permission should always be sought from a landlord to keep a pet, particularly a dog or cat and that it will be taken care of responsibly as well as not mess up the property or disturb neighbours. no one wants responsible owners to abandon or give their beloved pet.

I think it should be extended to say these animals should also be neutered as animal rescue centres insist. I was told a family in-breeding large breed dogs and selling for hundreds of pounds were in appaulling conditions in a council property, no tax paid, and no papers or vaccinations for the new owners, just lots of health problems.
good policy at last, permission should always be sought from a landlord to keep a pet, particularly a dog or cat and that it will be taken care of responsibly as well as not mess up the property or disturb neighbours. no one wants responsible owners to abandon or give their beloved pet. I think it should be extended to say these animals should also be neutered as animal rescue centres insist. I was told a family in-breeding large breed dogs and selling for hundreds of pounds were in appaulling conditions in a council property, no tax paid, and no papers or vaccinations for the new owners, just lots of health problems. bug eye
  • Score: 0

2:16pm Mon 25 Feb 13

fredflintstone1 says...

Is this sensible rule going to be applied to travellers using Horsdean and other sites where they are provided with public facilities, eg litter bins and collections?

If not, why not?
Is this sensible rule going to be applied to travellers using Horsdean and other sites where they are provided with public facilities, eg litter bins and collections? If not, why not? fredflintstone1
  • Score: 0

2:43pm Mon 25 Feb 13

WhatsNotToLike says...

I don't deny it is a positive thing to micro-chip your pets. Mine are both Chipped and insured from the day I brought them home. But, it says in the article it is only 'tenants' I take this to mean Council owned homes? - If so, how is this fair, tarring all with the same brush, for the sake of a minority of owners! It should be a rule for all pet owners full stop. Not just Tenants. There are thousands more homes in B & H, privately rented and owned.
I don't deny it is a positive thing to micro-chip your pets. Mine are both Chipped and insured from the day I brought them home. But, it says in the article it is only 'tenants' I take this to mean Council owned homes? - If so, how is this fair, tarring all with the same brush, for the sake of a minority of owners! It should be a rule for all pet owners full stop. Not just Tenants. There are thousands more homes in B & H, privately rented and owned. WhatsNotToLike
  • Score: 0

2:51pm Mon 25 Feb 13

charlie smirke says...

Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have?
Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have? charlie smirke
  • Score: 0

2:54pm Mon 25 Feb 13

rayellerton says...

Does this include Cats? They are more of a problem because owners let them roam whereas dogs have to be out on a lead and can be controlled....about time irresponsible cat owners were required to prevent their pets from being a nuisance...I have had a gutfull of neighbours cats using my garden as a toilet...
Does this include Cats? They are more of a problem because owners let them roam whereas dogs have to be out on a lead and can be controlled....about time irresponsible cat owners were required to prevent their pets from being a nuisance...I have had a gutfull of neighbours cats using my garden as a toilet... rayellerton
  • Score: 1

3:04pm Mon 25 Feb 13

chrismilo says...

charlie smirke wrote:
Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have?
Yes it was 37.5p when the half penny was scrapped so was the dog licencse as adminstration costs to alter everything would be too high & wasnt benefiting anything as cost hadn't risen for years
[quote][p][bold]charlie smirke[/bold] wrote: Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have?[/p][/quote]Yes it was 37.5p when the half penny was scrapped so was the dog licencse as adminstration costs to alter everything would be too high & wasnt benefiting anything as cost hadn't risen for years chrismilo
  • Score: 0

3:43pm Mon 25 Feb 13

charlie smirke says...

chrismilo wrote:
charlie smirke wrote:
Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have?
Yes it was 37.5p when the half penny was scrapped so was the dog licencse as adminstration costs to alter everything would be too high & wasnt benefiting anything as cost hadn't risen for years
Thanks for the info, I certainly never knew that!
[quote][p][bold]chrismilo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charlie smirke[/bold] wrote: Does anyone know why they stopped the original dog licenses that everyone used to have?[/p][/quote]Yes it was 37.5p when the half penny was scrapped so was the dog licencse as adminstration costs to alter everything would be too high & wasnt benefiting anything as cost hadn't risen for years[/p][/quote]Thanks for the info, I certainly never knew that! charlie smirke
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Mon 25 Feb 13

kkj says...

WhatsNotToLike wrote:
I don't deny it is a positive thing to micro-chip your pets. Mine are both Chipped and insured from the day I brought them home. But, it says in the article it is only 'tenants' I take this to mean Council owned homes? - If so, how is this fair, tarring all with the same brush, for the sake of a minority of owners! It should be a rule for all pet owners full stop. Not just Tenants. There are thousands more homes in B & H, privately rented and owned.
The council can make this a condition of tenancy for its properties, just as it can other conditions. It has no jurisdiction in that regard for tenants of other landlords, or for owner-occupiers.

It would require legislation to apply it all dog-owners. However, the government announced a couple of weeks or so back, that legislation will be introduced to make all dog-owners get their animals microchipped by 2016.
[quote][p][bold]WhatsNotToLike[/bold] wrote: I don't deny it is a positive thing to micro-chip your pets. Mine are both Chipped and insured from the day I brought them home. But, it says in the article it is only 'tenants' I take this to mean Council owned homes? - If so, how is this fair, tarring all with the same brush, for the sake of a minority of owners! It should be a rule for all pet owners full stop. Not just Tenants. There are thousands more homes in B & H, privately rented and owned.[/p][/quote]The council can make this a condition of tenancy for its properties, just as it can other conditions. It has no jurisdiction in that regard for tenants of other landlords, or for owner-occupiers. It would require legislation to apply it all dog-owners. However, the government announced a couple of weeks or so back, that legislation will be introduced to make all dog-owners get their animals microchipped by 2016. kkj
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Mon 25 Feb 13

FC says...

How can council tenants even afford pets when they're on the benefits they claim are hard to live on?
How can council tenants even afford pets when they're on the benefits they claim are hard to live on? FC
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Mon 25 Feb 13

WhatsNotToLike says...

@kkj

Thanks for that feedback. Perhaps, those who don't already have their dogs chipped, get it done sooner rather than later, as no doubt, come the 2016 legislation deadline, micro-chipping will suddenly go up in cost!
@kkj Thanks for that feedback. Perhaps, those who don't already have their dogs chipped, get it done sooner rather than later, as no doubt, come the 2016 legislation deadline, micro-chipping will suddenly go up in cost! WhatsNotToLike
  • Score: 0

11:48pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Juleyanne says...

A solid good decision from the council at last! This makes sense on many levels.
Responsible pet ownership is the aim.
Reducing strays and making owners accountable for their pets is common sense. It breaks my heart to see heartless landlords and letting agencies totally banning a tenants right to have a companion pet, especially as so many of us now live alone. We want to encourage the majority of good landlords and letting agencies to accept pets providing the owner is responsible and is happy to prove as necessary they will care for that pet properly and if necessary, with private tenancies be prepared to pay an additional deposit as an insurance should any damage occur. What we definitely do not want is irresponsible fly by night owners and to all be judged as such by way of finding unflexible landlords or letting agencies placing bans on the responsible good owners! We also want to stop the heartbreaking scenerio of pets being ripped apart from their loving owners and ending up in animal shelters when measures to protect both landlord, letting agent and tenant with well behaved and cared for pet are so easy to set up by way of pet tenancies (see Dogs Trust site) or petfriendlypropertie
s.org.uk. That way everyone is happy and a pet continues to live happily with it's owner with a landlords/letting agents approval and finally animal rehoming charities will no longer be struggling to cope with the tsunami of dumped pets (sadly many shelters are forced to euthanize perfectly healthy animals due to sheer lack of space and funds). The answer to all this is in sensible requirements and agreements between landlord and tenant.
A solid good decision from the council at last! This makes sense on many levels. Responsible pet ownership is the aim. Reducing strays and making owners accountable for their pets is common sense. It breaks my heart to see heartless landlords and letting agencies totally banning a tenants right to have a companion pet, especially as so many of us now live alone. We want to encourage the majority of good landlords and letting agencies to accept pets providing the owner is responsible and is happy to prove as necessary they will care for that pet properly and if necessary, with private tenancies be prepared to pay an additional deposit as an insurance should any damage occur. What we definitely do not want is irresponsible fly by night owners and to all be judged as such by way of finding unflexible landlords or letting agencies placing bans on the responsible good owners! We also want to stop the heartbreaking scenerio of pets being ripped apart from their loving owners and ending up in animal shelters when measures to protect both landlord, letting agent and tenant with well behaved and cared for pet are so easy to set up by way of pet tenancies (see Dogs Trust site) or petfriendlypropertie s.org.uk. That way everyone is happy and a pet continues to live happily with it's owner with a landlords/letting agents approval and finally animal rehoming charities will no longer be struggling to cope with the tsunami of dumped pets (sadly many shelters are forced to euthanize perfectly healthy animals due to sheer lack of space and funds). The answer to all this is in sensible requirements and agreements between landlord and tenant. Juleyanne
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Tue 26 Feb 13

thevoiceoftruth says...

FC wrote:
How can council tenants even afford pets when they're on the benefits they claim are hard to live on?
Not all council tenants are on benefits, FC.

Wow, this must be the first initiative the council has introduced that I agree with. Great news!
[quote][p][bold]FC[/bold] wrote: How can council tenants even afford pets when they're on the benefits they claim are hard to live on?[/p][/quote]Not all council tenants are on benefits, FC. Wow, this must be the first initiative the council has introduced that I agree with. Great news! thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree