Pitbull Attacks Man Shopping For Car--Dog Bite Debate

Once again, another tragic story of a pitt bull attacking a man who stopped to look at a car for sale is dominating the news in Ottawa, Ontario. The lawyers at Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodzki LLP, personal injury lawyers Ottawa, know a lot about dog bites and unprovoked dog attacks. While there are many stories like the one in Gatineau, Quebec today, people should be aware that it isn't only large vicious breeds that attack people. Any breed of dog, regardless of how docile, friendly, and good natured they may be, represent a risk for people, especially children. As the debate about certain breeds and dog bites is reignited by the recent pitt bull attack, we would like to make a modest proposal to the politicians--they could make a difference. Our proposal is with respect to the victims, with respect to providing them with adequate remedies in the event of being attacked and suffering serious injuries. As lawyers, we at QTMG LLP have no better ideas about how to prevent dog attacks than most experts in the area. However, we do have experience as direct observers of the profound impact of the injuries caused by dogs gone mad. In short, dog bites / attacks can lead to profound disfigurement, loss of one or more of the senses in all or parts of the body, loss of parts of the body, and deep psychological scarring that will take years of treatment. In the extreme, death. A person who suffers a dog bite/attack can have their entire life changed, destroyed, wiped out in moments. The ability to work, to function normally, to earn a living, to live without pain, to attend school, to interact normally with family--all of these things can be destroyed by an unrestrained dog, someone's pet. When this happens the injury victim needs help and lots of it. Help in the form of medical treatment, counselling, income support, plastic surgery, tutoring, home care, someone to help take care of dependents including children and the elderly, and special care. Most of these items/services, delivered efficiently and in a timely manner, are exceedingly expensive. Most often, the victim lacks the resources to obtain these supports and services and therefore must make do with what is provided through various social welfare programs, their own ingenuity, family and their community. Query, is it right that a dog attack victims are left to fend for themselves in the aftermath of an attack? Is it right that there is uncertainty about victims receiving proper support? Certainly, many people think that a dog attack victim will have the right to sue and therefore get compensated by the dog owner. In theory, this works. In fact, there are many responsible dog owners who are insured. Through their insurance, the dog attack victim may be compensated. Unfortunately, there are many irresponsible dog owners--and they tend to own the dogs that attack people. These irresponsible dog owners are deadbeats who don't take responsibility for their own actions and in this writers view are a scourge on society. These irresponsible dog owners do not have insurance, rarely bother to leash their dogs, and basically set their dogs free on whoever is unlucky enough to be in the vicinity. Against these people, the dog bite/attack victim has no civil recourse. These irresponsible dog owners have nothing, no insurance, no assets, and consequently they are immune to a lawsuit. QTMG LLP's proposal. To make sure that all dog bite/attack victims have the ability to get the compensation they need to obtain the supports and services they need due to the injuries caused by a dog attack; the Dog Owner's Liability Act should be amended to require every dog owner in Ontario to carry pet insurance for the benefit of third parties. There should be severe penalties--i.e. large fines and forfeiture of animals if an owner is caught without insurance. Further, the law should establish a fund, similar to the fund created in the case of uninsured motor vehicle drivers, whereby an injury victim who is unable to recover against a dog owner, or an unidentified dog owner, is entitled to proceed against the Fund for compensation. The cost of the program may be borne entirely by dog owners through the mandatory licensing and insurance requirements in the amended Dog Owners Liability Act. Spread out, over thousands and thousands of dog owners the cost would be negligible in contrast to the benefit conveyed to a child who is profoundly scarred, a mother who has lost her ear(s), eyes, and father who has lost all sensation in a limb. Society insists that people are allowed to keep dogs as pets and accordingly society should make sure that people who are victimized by those pets are at least able to get needed supports and services to help them recover from their injuries. The program would be easy to set up, adjudicative Boards with appropriate expertise already exist (i.e. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, Financial Services Commission Ontario). We believe that the proposal is reasonable and until we figure out how to prevent dog bites/attacks altogether, a dog owner funded compensation scheme is entirely reasonable and proper. QUINN THIELE MINEAULT GRODZKI LLP; personal injury lawyers Ottawa. Michael K. E. Thiele