Injury to the tennants pet on my property- am I liable for costs?

Erica

Erica

Anyone else had this occur to them?

Tennant's dog has put its paw under the colourbond fence (about 1 inch gap between grass and bottom of fence) it's sliced its paw open and resulted in an expensive vet bill for surgury.

I DO NOT believe I am liable for damages as the property is in a fit, safe and habitable condition for my tennant, plus the tennant bought the dog approx 2 months after signing the lease so they had ample opportunity to assess the property's sutability for a dog to reside. (I advertised the property as pets friendly, they did ring me before purchasing dog to make sure it was ok with me and I agreed).

I have advised them they CAN NOT fill the gaps with expandable constuction foam (which was their bright idea to solve the problem). I have suggested that I will provide some pine sleepers to block off the section of fence with gaps exposed (as I have some lying around at home anyway).

What are your thoughts?
 
We had a similar scenario a few months back. The tenants tried to get the owner to pay for vet bills when their dog was injured trying to get through a fence. Long story short- the owner was not held liable.
 
Erica said:
Anyone else had this occur to them?

Tennant's dog has put its paw under the colourbond fence (about 1 inch gap between grass and bottom of fence) it's sliced its paw open and resulted in an expensive vet bill for surgury.

I DO NOT believe I am liable for damages as the property is in a fit, safe and habitable condition for my tennant, plus the tennant bought the dog approx 2 months after signing the lease so they had ample opportunity to assess the property's sutability for a dog to reside. (I advertised the property as pets friendly, they did ring me before purchasing dog to make sure it was ok with me and I agreed).

I have advised them they CAN NOT fill the gaps with expandable constuction foam (which was their bright idea to solve the problem). I have suggested that I will provide some pine sleepers to block off the section of fence with gaps exposed (as I have some lying around at home anyway).

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Tell them they are dreaming!!! Although I don't think they are holding you responsible.

Tell them that the construction foam has no body and as such can't be sprayed except within a confined space such as a form work type arrangement. Apart from anything else it would use heaps and consequently cost heaps to use in that type of situation.

Then suggest that the only acceptable solution is that sleepers be placed along the bottom of the fence and let them either supply them or you sell them yours and offer to help place them.

Cheers
 
Erica said:
Anyone else had this occur to them?

Tennant's dog has put its paw under the colourbond fence (about 1 inch gap between grass and bottom of fence) it's sliced its paw open and resulted in an expensive vet bill for surgury.

I DO NOT believe I am liable for damages as the property is in a fit, safe and habitable condition for my tennant, plus the tennant bought the dog approx 2 months after signing the lease so they had ample opportunity to assess the property's sutability for a dog to reside. (I advertised the property as pets friendly, they did ring me before purchasing dog to make sure it was ok with me and I agreed).

I have advised them they CAN NOT fill the gaps with expandable constuction foam (which was their bright idea to solve the problem). I have suggested that I will provide some pine sleepers to block off the section of fence with gaps exposed (as I have some lying around at home anyway).

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Admitting the 'problem' and doing something about it might be an admission of liability on your behalf. I'm sure the lawyers here, will confirm/deny, or argue amongst themselves.

Might be an issue for your public liability insurer?
 
Not your fault.

The local tribunal would not entertain that claim for a second, assuming you haven't DIY installed the fence with a rusty chainsaw or something.

I would put in writing that you are willing to do the sleepers to try and help the tenants avoid the situation in future. Don't take any responsibility and don't apologise in any way.

I'm also pretty sure public liability only applies to humans... but happy to be proven wrong by someone who has been successfully sued by a pet :)
 
mattysavager said:
I'm also pretty sure public liability only applies to humans... but happy to be proven wrong by someone who has been successfully sued by a pet :)
Click to expand...

It's not America, so a dog doesn't have legal personality in Australia (but their owner certainly does), yet...

I hope the owner sues for the dogs emotional pain and suffering as well as it's vet bills.

The amounts involved here are small so there will be legal action...
 
mattysavager said:
Not your fault.

The local tribunal would not entertain that claim for a second, assuming you haven't DIY installed the fence with a rusty chainsaw or something.

I would put in writing that you are willing to do the sleepers to try and help the tenants avoid the situation in future. Don't take any responsibility and don't apologise in any way.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I don't think it is as one sided as that. I would say that a successful claim of damages against a landlord in this situation is extremely unlikely, but not impossible.

It would most likely turn on whether there was something wrong with the property that caused the injury to the pet. Not only something wrong, but probably that something would have to be hidden, or unreasonably dangerous, or both.

A small gap in a fence at the bottom sounds pretty standard though. Why would it need fixing? Offering to put in sleepers or to "fix" it in any other way is probably a bad idea at this stage without actually going there to have a look or take photos.

Anyway as pointed out, this all might be a bit pre-emptive since there's no actual indication the tenants are trying to claim against you for it is there?
 
Ed Barton said:
Admitting the 'problem' and doing something about it might be an admission of liability on your behalf. I'm sure the lawyers here, will confirm/deny, or argue amongst themselves.

Might be an issue for your public liability insurer?
Click to expand...

It would become an issue for your liability insurer IF they decided to sue you for damages. You would need to inform them (the insurer) immediately in that case so that they could consider what course of action was necessary, but I would like to think that they would tell the tenant to bring it on, as they (the tenant) would need to prove you had been negligent in some way to try to get a court to award damages, and as the tenant was well aware of what the fence was like before they got the dog, I would think them winning would be highly unlikely.
 
Thankyou all for your responses so far.

The tennant has not indicated they want to persue for vet bill reimbursement, it is just an issue that I thought I'd explore with you experienced investors online.

It has however got me worrying about a fish pond that is on the property, having a quick look for regulations in Australia, fish ponds do seem to be exempt from fencing safety requirements, however if a child were to drown in it (it is probabally 50cm deep in the middle), I think this would be an entirely different issue to a dog with a cut paw...and obviously horrifying to say the least....I have 3 year old myself and have always been vigilent to ensure he isn't unsupervised around it.

Anyone know what my legal obligations toward fish pond safety is in Australia?
 
Erica said:
Thankyou all for your responses so far.

The tennant has not indicated they want to persue for vet bill reimbursement, it is just an issue that I thought I'd explore with you experienced investors online.

It has however got me worrying about a fish pond that is on the property, having a quick look for regulations in Australia, fish ponds do seem to be exempt from fencing safety requirements, however if a child were to drown in it (it is probabally 50cm deep in the middle), I think this would be an entirely different issue to a dog with a cut paw...and obviously horrifying to say the least....I have 3 year old myself and have always been vigilent to ensure he isn't unsupervised around it.

Anyone know what my legal obligations toward fish pond safety is in Australia?
Click to expand...

Laws as to ponds vary from council to council. Many of them state that anything deeper than 30cm needs to be fenced or a grate (with lock is best) placed about 10cm under the level of the water so a child cannot get access to the deep water.

You would need to check with the relevant council. Even if they don't require it I would probably put a grate on it.
 
I have NO legal obligations -so I'm told

thanks Depreciator I will fill the pond with pebbles, as the pond is solid concrete so not easy to remove, plus it is gorgeous and I dont particuarly want to remove it, but as a common sense measure it is much deeper than need be.

I've just started a new thread in legal issues to show others what i've just researched, and i'll cut and paste it here for anyone that is interested

I've spent the morning ringing around a few agencies to find out what my legal obligations as a landlord are for safety pertaining to a fish pond on my rental property:

Fish ponds are exempt from pool and safety fencing requirements per the Australian Building commision website:

"What are safety barriers NOT required for?
Structures not used principally for swimming, paddling or wading including bird baths, fish ponds, fountains, dams and water supply/storage tanks
Swimming pools or spas not capable of containing a depth of water greater than 300 mm
Inflatable swimming pools (typically toddler or wading pools) not capable of containing a depth of water greater than 300mm
Spas inside a building that are used for personal hygiene such as a spa bath in a bathroom."

Information from my local council via phone call to planning department- City of Onkaparinga in SA - "no documents are available/ no council regulations exist."

Phone call to Legal Services Commision hotline: "I don't know try calling the Residential Tennancy branch or try asking a personal lawyer."

Phone Call to the Residential Tennancy branch SA- "as there is no legal regulation in place for safety requirements pertaining to fish ponds, if the tennant were to injure themselves on the pond, you would not have broken any law, it is just the tennants responsibility to exercise common sense, however- you could furthur protect yourself with a clause in the lease agreement something along the lines of- the tennant is to excercise caution with regards to safety around the fish pond, as no legal requirements exist pertaining to its presence on the property"
 
Erica said:
thanks Depreciator I will fill the pond with pebbles, as the pond is solid concrete so not easy to remove, plus it is gorgeous and I dont particuarly want to remove it, but as a common sense measure it is much deeper than need be.

I've just started a new thread in legal issues to show others what i've just researched, and i'll cut and paste it here for anyone that is interested

I've spent the morning ringing around a few agencies to find out what my legal obligations as a landlord are for safety pertaining to a fish pond on my rental property:

Fish ponds are exempt from pool and safety fencing requirements per the Australian Building commision website:

"What are safety barriers NOT required for?
Structures not used principally for swimming, paddling or wading including bird baths, fish ponds, fountains, dams and water supply/storage tanks
Swimming pools or spas not capable of containing a depth of water greater than 300 mm
Inflatable swimming pools (typically toddler or wading pools) not capable of containing a depth of water greater than 300mm
Spas inside a building that are used for personal hygiene such as a spa bath in a bathroom."

Information from my local council via phone call to planning department- City of Onkaparinga in SA - "no documents are available/ no council regulations exist."

Phone call to Legal Services Commision hotline: "I don't know try calling the Residential Tennancy branch or try asking a personal lawyer."

Phone Call to the Residential Tennancy branch SA- "as there is no legal regulation in place for safety requirements pertaining to fish ponds, if the tennant were to injure themselves on the pond, you would not have broken any law, it is just the tennants responsibility to exercise common sense, however- you could furthur protect yourself with a clause in the lease agreement something along the lines of- the tennant is to excercise caution with regards to safety around the fish pond, as no legal requirements exist pertaining to its presence on the property"
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call this legal research or legal advice. The last bit of advice leaves the whole area of law called 'torts' out of the picture.


If one of my children drowned in your pond while I was inside watching reruns of neighbours while drinking warm beer I would blame you and sue you too.

That is just how people think - blame others. And there would be a legal basis for it too.
 
I wouldn't like to comment other than if you know about a problem in your property and a tenant and visitor is injured then you can be held liable for any damages.

I don't know how animals would be treated, but they would probably be property of the tenant and if your negligence has resulted in the damage to the property of the tenant then the tenant would probably have a basis to sue. Whether they would win or not is another matter.

I would also like to argue with Dazz that all lawyers do is argue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
My story
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
steveadl
steveadl
Back
Top