I read in a local paper today about a woman who lost a cat and despite searching failed to find it. Then she read a notice in a shop window about a cat answering the description of hers being handed into the RSPCA. When she called them about it she was told it had been rehomed and she was no longer it's legal owner. The RSPCA won't say where it is and she won't get it back.
How can they get away with this?
2007-03-18 08:16:30 · 18 answers · asked by ♥ Divine ♥ 6 in Pets ➔ Other - Pets
It's a true story, the RSPCA themselves admit it happened.
2007-03-18 08:22:38 · update #1
Is two weeks really a very long time to keep someone's pet in case the owner turns up?
2007-03-18 08:24:00 · update #2
As I understand it the cat strayed, was hit by a vehicle and handed into the RSPCA for treatment without the owners knowledge. With that information I suppose they DID act in the cats best interests, but to deny it's rightful owner the opportunity to reclaim it is just a bit over the top.
And I agree that she could have tried harder to find the cat. And she should have bought it a collar for identification before letting it out. Or had the cat micro-chipped.
2007-03-18 10:26:08 · update #3
Personally i think they are full of it. If you watch these rspca reality shows on tv, all cats are strays, all dogs are uncared for. The other day there was one officer trying to make a vet say that a strangles case was cruelty. Quite rightly the vet said no. They are just after prosecuting people. They don't seem to compute the law of nature. OK a crow is stuck in a tree, its a crow, they do that. Sheesh.
If people are being really and genuinely cruel, then yes, prosecute, but not for the sake of it.
Look at all the involvement in banning foxhunting. That gets banned when the slaughter of halal and kosher meat gets the thumbs up. by the way, mr b'liar owes me for 10 chickens that the fox ripped to bits in my garden where we have never had foxes before!!
The woman should have approached the rspca first though, but i do feel for her on this one.
2007-03-21 03:03:00 · answer #1 · answered by tradcobdriver 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The RSPCA often completely over step the mark, but when there is a real cruelty case going on under their noses they usually don't have the power to do anything until the animal involved is in a really bad way.
The RSPCA completely went against foxes best interest with the hunting ban, now foxes are regularly being anihalated at weekends by amatuer marksmen the only injure the fox & don't kill it outright which is far more cruel than the method of hunting with hounds where the weak, sick, old foxes would be culled & the young & healthy foxes would live to fight another day.
A few years ago I reported a field of mares & foals to the RSCPA as they were in a bad way. The RSPCA were powerless to do anything for the poor horses until they had deteriated to the point (after several more weeks) that one of the foals had to be shot & the others were only then removed & taken into veterinary care.
2007-03-18 08:29:47 · answer #2 · answered by ATP 3 · 6⤊ 0⤋
The RSPCA should know better, you have to keep a pet 10-14 days before rehoming it. I think that this is defo out of order and the lady should take the case further to retrieve the cat. I just feel sorry for the people who now have the cat as i imagine they're very attached already.
2007-03-18 12:07:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I think 2 weeks is long enough to wait for a cat/dog to be reclaimed, if I had lost my cat, then the RSPCA would be my first port of call, and all local cat/animal rescues, and the local police, that way they are on alert and know you are looking, the woman can't have looked very hard in my opinion!
2007-03-19 06:17:10 · answer #4 · answered by Pawstimes16 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WE dont know the facts - i wouldnt be suprised if they didnt WANT her to take the cat back - when the cat was presented at the RSPCA's offices they may have seen its condition was poor and that it could have taken many months to make the cat such a way - so when the owner turned up asking for the cat back they declined - using the old "sorry it has been rehomed" excuse to get rid of her ....its possible. I sell animal feed and its SHOCKING what people think its ok to give to their pets - the rspca take this into account. I have one lady neighbour - very well educated BUT she feeds her cats - dogs on old bread and cakes and old salad vegetables from the throw away pile at the market. She loves the animals but does not comprehend whats good for them or not. I have given up tryingt o explain to her whats right or not. You have to take the stories you read with a pinch of salt without knowledge of all the facts :)
2007-03-18 08:35:44 · answer #5 · answered by celebrityhandbags 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think all animal rehoming centres lie. We got a dog from one of them, thought we'd look for an older one as they don't usually get homes, and found one that sounded perfect. We were warned that he could be possessive over females and that my boyfriend should handle him more than myself. He was also supposedly good with cats and children. A week later he bit me for no apparent reason, then attacked my cat a few months on, and the neighbours cat. There was no way we would trust him with children, we're not silly, we took him back to the home and their response was "well you knew he bit when you took him!" How responsible is that? Doesn't surprise me one bit that the RSPCA is no different
2007-03-20 05:21:44 · answer #6 · answered by gemma_florida 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The RSPCA dont just take in a cat and then re-home it the next day. They do wait to give the owner chance to reclaim it. The woman should have called the RSPCA as one of her first ports of call.
Would you prefer them to just keep all the pets for ever and never re-home them? Where do you draw the line?
2007-03-18 08:20:46 · answer #7 · answered by OriginalBubble 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
If the answerer's above are saying that "we don't know all the facts" or take it with a pinch of salt" then you must also say that the RSPCA doesn't know all the facts and should add a pinch of salt to their over-paranoid view of pet owners. they do over step their bounds it the nature of the beast they are.
I would add more but i tend to rant alot about agencies such as these.
2007-03-19 00:39:34 · answer #8 · answered by Eric J 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
in the first place, yes the lady should have had an ID on the cat and also, if she was that concerned about it, then its obvious she should have checked with the SPCA within the two weeks. when my dog ran off on a camping trip, i called the SPCA the second day, and on the third day someone had found her, took her to the SPCA, and they called me. two weeks is plenty of time. and as for the lady not getting her cat back, well how do you think the new owners would feel if they had to give the cat up to give it back to the lady who lost it in the first place? the SPCA always just tries to do whats best for the animals, and it seems like they are doing just that.
2007-03-18 11:04:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well why was her cat out wandering around in the first place to end up at the RSPCA?
They likely gave some time to see if the owner would come in, if she didn't then the cat gets a new home.
They can't hold pets forever hoping that you'll eventually show up and claim them. If a good home comes along, they have to take it.
2007-03-18 08:40:24 · answer #10 · answered by DP 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋