Raked over the coals

Status
Not open for further replies.

perchgirl1

New Member
Hello,
I have a BIG problem. I am on what you would call the "other side of the dog attack fence"
I'm not looking to sue or anything like that, because it was my dog that got loose.
July 3rd my dog got loose, he ran into the housing development and there happened to be a gentlemen walking his dog. According the the incident report my dog was acting fine with the man and his dog. The man (tryng to be a nice neighbor) decided to bring my dog back to my house. (His dog has gotten loose before and has come into my yard while my dog has been tied up and my dog attacked theirs.) So as they approached my house my dog supposedly "attacked" his dog. The man stuck his in the middle of the dog fight and pulled his dog out from under my dog and the man got bit by his own dog. I was not home at the time of this incident. When I arrived home at 9pm i pulled into my driveway and my dog had been in the yard loosr of his cable and stainless steel clasp. Everything was intact his collar was on him and his cable was just laying on the porch. The ACO called the next day July 4th and told me that my dog mauled a dog and that she doen't know the extent of the injuries. I was horrified!!!! I said I would pay for the vet bill. She went on to tell me that the guy got bit, but by his own dog. I assumed the dog was in surgery or getting stitched.

July 5th ACO called me again and told me that the man had to have the vet come and pick up his dog because they couldn't get her in the car. I was a bit shocked that the dog was not at the vet and it had been mauled. Now this is 36+ hours after the incident and after i said I would pay the bill.
Long story short, my dog didn't bite anyone or anything, I hardly call that a mauling. So on July 9th I received a call from the dogs owner and he was nice but stern and he was telling me that his dog had internal injuries and she shut down and he is antibiotics and his dog lost all kinds of weight.
He proceeded to tell me that the vet bill was $1200 I just about died, especially when my dog did not bite. So I told him I wanted an itemized bill and he said OK. I got the bill on july 16th. As I was reading I noticed there were tests done that had nothing to do with the "attack" also the vet wrote that the dog had shock and trauma due to the attack and blunt trauma to her abdomen which is a likely cause of a urinary infection a corneal ulcer trauma to her hips and a heart arrythmia. The letter was made out on july 7th. on the 6th the incident report say the ACO called the vet and the vet told her that the dog was treated for dehydration and what seemed to be a scratched cornea. So bascially my dog scared their dog

I went to the Vet board and they reviewed my bill and they said they dont feel the vet did anything wrong but all the board members where confused about the bill, they sent me to the state vet. He instructed me to call the owners and ask for the dogs med records but when I called I was screamed at and denied. I decided to pay HALF of the bill and that was not good enough so they called me and said they were having the vet send the check back to me and they BETTER have the full amount in their hands by such and such a date or they will take appropriate action.

I am not saying that I am not responsible for the bill, but I feel that I am responsible for only the injuries my dog caused. Some of the tests were a Thyroid test a lipase tests it was put on 5 different antibiotics It was loosing weight in march, it weighed 73lbs March and in April it weighed 69lbs 14oz so it's obvious that the dog had medical issues before the incident and I got stuck paying for the extra tests.


I spoke to 2 local vets who thought the whole thing's redicules but they do not want their names mentioned which I dont blame them and the board and the state vet also questioned the bill.

So I went to see an attorney and he basically said you can let this go to court or you can just pay it. I would spend more that 1200 on court. So he made up a release form which says that i will not be liable for anything else once I send the rest of the check to the vet. I sent it the form to the owners certified mail they need to sign it and send it back to me and I will gladly send the vet the rest of the money. What really bugs me is that I have been raked over the coals by my neighbors!!!!! They are also saying how dangerous my dog is and they fear for their lives and the neighborhood children. C'mon, my dog got loose once in his 6.5 yr life and if the guy had any brains he should have stayed away from my dog and called the police about a loose dog. Not bring my dog back to my house with his dog in tow knowing the dogs do not get along. My dog is not dangerous, aggressive yes, on his own propetry. He visits schools full of children once a year and I certainly would not own a dangerous dog as my nephew was attacked by a dog at his daycare when he was 19months old.

I am very upset knowing that these people raked me over the coals and there is not a darn thing I can do. The owner must have gotten the release form today because he called once again but his message didn't come out on the machine. I would really like him stop calling me. I said I would pay the vet once he sends that form back.

Do you think I had the right to question the bill? I am not playing the victim as I know I am at fault because my dog got loose. Thanks for any input.
 
Well, so far I don't really see any major problems in what happened.

Under tort law you had a duty to exercise reasonable care in keeping your dog from doing harm, you failed to exercise that care, the dog got lose, and caused damage. You have never denied that. You might have contested this in court, but I can't say how a jury would probably have decided since we don't know the circumstances.

The trickier question then was if the other party was contributorily negligent. That could have been claimed, but under most states' laws it would only have led to a certain apportion of fault. The litigation costs would still probably have been much higher than your settlement offer.

The trickiest question was now how much damage did your dog, or you, cause? You had all the right in the world to question the medical bill. However, as in comparable "human" cases, first of all a lay person often does not understand medical procedures. Looking at a bill one might ask why certain tests were done which seem not to be connected to the injury, but a doctor then might show they were reasonable procedure. Second, there is a legal doctrine saying that you have to take your victim as you find it. If the victim has certain medical conditions that unforeseeably aggravate the harm you have caused, that is your problem, not the victim's. Example: You give someone a gentle push thinking the worst that can happen is that the person stumbles a little. Unknown to you this person just had surgery at the hand, she tries to hold herself with the hand, the injury comes back and she needs surgery again. You cannot say now: well, this I did not expect, I will not pay for the surgery. You have to. So here, it could well be that pre-existing conditions were aggravated by the attack and therefore the medical bill was higher than one would have thought.

But you questioned the bill and got not really clear answers. That happens in personal imjury cases all the time, it is somewhat frustrating that it seems that two doctors never will agree on one opinion. In the end the jury must decide.

Again, litigation might be more expensive than settling. So you finally offered to settle. The other side proved to be a hard bargainer, but that is also normal.
 
NYClex- Thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated. I know I was at fault. Your explaination is great, it makes more sense to me. I have only heard rumors, nothing right from the horses mouth that they are telling everyone to fear for their lives. I just don't get it. :confused: anyway, thanks so much again!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top