Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

***** Pet Care Discrimination

kangaroo
November 30th, 2005, 03:20 PM
I recieved a phone call today from *********where Max has been boarded before (on multiple occasions) without incident (if you dont count him getting kennel cough). This privately held family owned business will no longer be accepting Pit Bull or Pit Bull type dogs or Pit Bull crosses. The claim its an insurance concern, but as we all know they are private property and can make the decision that they want to regarding Bill 132. I can no longer go visit with my girlfriends family over christmas now.

If anyone uses these people for grooming / daycare / boarding; I would recommend calling and cancelling and finding another service provider. Your dog may just be next on their list of breeds they refuse service to. I would much rather my money be spent on companies that do not discriminate.

-kangaroo & Max

Georgiapeaches
November 30th, 2005, 03:34 PM
Where is this located???

Prin
November 30th, 2005, 03:58 PM
I would understand maybe if they weren't taking new pitties, but I don't understand why they would turn their backs on regular clients...

marko
December 1st, 2005, 08:49 AM
Dear users - please be aware that we have strict slander rules on our board.

Slandering in an open forum is not allowed, and Mods/Admins will edit/delete/close threads as we have done here.

Please reread the rules for clarification.
http://www.pets.ca/forum/announcement.php?f=9&a=12

Thanks

Marko
ADMIN

SnowDancer
December 1st, 2005, 09:21 AM
Perhaps it is an issue regarding cost of liability insurance to business???

raingirl
December 1st, 2005, 09:21 AM
While it sucks that you can't board there anymore, I would have to agree with their decision.

I used to work in insurance (and we have had a few threads here on getting insurance with a pit bull) and from what I have heard, pretty well ALL insurance companies have changed their liability policies to reflect Bill 132 (in that they are writing exclusions so that anything that happens with a pit involved won't be covered).

Any good business person who knew they wouldn't have coverage if something happened should cover their butt if they want to stay in business. If I had a kennel and got notice that my liability insurance wouldn't cover any pitbull related incidents, then as a business owner I would have no choice but to ban them as I had no insurance coverage. Imagine there was an incident (which can happen in kennels). If it was any other dog, it would be covered (damages, costs, etc) but not for a pit. I wouldn't want to take that financial risk.

I guess the kennel owner could try and find insurance coverage, but it would be hard or impossible, and probably expensive.

Lizzie
December 1st, 2005, 10:05 AM
I have to agree with Raingirl. Put yourself in their shoes. They make their living on this kennel, and if by taking in a particular dog meant possibly losing their business and losing their jobs, then no, I don't think that they should.

I imagine that it's a rather difficult situation for a pitty owner since you know and love your pet, but as a small business owner, they have a right to protect their livelihoods, just as you have a right to protect your pet.

It's the Bill that should be slammed, not the businesses!:thumbs up

gdamadg
December 1st, 2005, 11:11 AM
This is just another thing added to the already long list of problems associated with the Bill. I think that there should be some compensation package for all registered Pit Bull owners in the Province if we win and the Bill is repealed.

babyrocky1
December 1st, 2005, 05:34 PM
[True in some cases, but, not others. I have friends in the bus who are paying the extra dough to do the right thing. These will be the ONLY businesses i support. If enough of us feel that way and act on it, the policy of these businesses may change and quite frankly next to politics isn't insurance just about the biggest scam going? I m not making that statment just asking the question, it seems every time I hear about ins, whether its home, auto, bus, what ever, they re refusing to cover people, rates hitting the roof etc. People being dropped. Apartment insurance-when Shannon and I had our apt broken into, I enquired at our office what the sit uation would have been if we had our contents insured and we would have been no better off. (Btw) my friend does have insurance, I dont know who shes with or how high her premiums are but I do know her insurance covers her doggy day care and her training sessions which INCLUDE pit bulls. Even she says though, that some businesses that are just starting out may have a harder time, Most of these places that we have heard about are definately not just "starting out"

pitbulliest
December 1st, 2005, 06:43 PM
This is just another thing added to the already long list of problems associated with the Bill. I think that there should be some compensation package for all registered Pit Bull owners in the Province if we win and the Bill is repealed.


Yeah no kidding..at the least....
and what about all the pits and pups that are being killed? Its disgusting...genocide...that's what it is...and now we're suffering too..sure..let the responsible people suffer...that's gonna make everyone feel safter alright...:thumbs up

twodogsandacat
December 1st, 2005, 09:28 PM
If the business is open to the public (which it is) and an incident happened then technically unless the dog was muzzled and on leash they could be found liable.

The fine for a dog owner can go as high as $10,000. For a business it is $60,000.

This is why I consider Michael Bryant a lying SOB and as much as his lies may change policy it's really the liability factor that a lot of businesses are afraid of not an actual belief that pit bulls are an issue.

Soon the DOLA will be rewritten by a judge and Michael Bryant will be working for his wife. Until then it sucks.