Attacked by horse on public footpath
stephe...@btinternet.com
known route guided by those yellow arrows commonly seen on public
footpaths.
Whilst walking across the edge of a field on this particular
public footpath we were attacked by a horse, we had not in any way
provoked the attack.
It was only a young horse and its mother was sill in the field,
anyway the young horse bit my arm causing a minor bruise, it
chased the wife over a fence and butted my son and bent his
spectacles into his face causing bleeding as it cut the side of
his nose.
The young horse also kicked out with both rear legs as
we climbed over a fence, we were lucky not to have suffered
further injuries as the horse appeared aggressive towards all of
us for no apparent reason. We made no attempt to encourage the
horse to attack us as we were quietly walking across a field at
the edge which denoted the correct route.
As we had by this point all jumped over a fence into what was
probably the owners rear garden, we approached the house to tackle
the owner about the incident with the horse, the owner came out of
an out building and I asked him about the horse attacking all
three of us and he said there is a sign at the edge of the
footpath that read "horses may bite".
I pointed out that this is a public footpath but he said it is
private land and if we choose to walk the path we do so at our own
risk.
This doesn't sound right to me, how can a well known public
footpath be private and has he the legal right to simply put up a
sign which apparently suggests it is our fault if his horses cause
actual bodily harm?
He also had the cheek to ask us not to climb over his fence, I
said we had no choice in order to avoid being hurt by his horse.
We continued the walk having walked to the edge of his garden and
climbed back into the field and then over the stile on the public
footpath.
We were lucky to have been able to make a hasty retreat over the
fence but I wonder what would have happened if a small child
unable to climb the fence was hurt by the horse.
Stephen.
R
<stephe...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:7084b385...@btinternet.com...
I suggest that you contact your local council Highways department footpaths
and byways officer and tell them about it.
The owner of the land has a public duty to ensure safe passage to users if
they are on a marked way. Prevention of injury by loose animals to passing
public might well be part of the byeway local rules/law.
Paul Rudin
> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:10:14 +0100, stephe...@btinternet.com wrote:
>
>> I pointed out that this is a public footpath but he said it is
>> private land and if we choose to walk the path we do so at our own
>> risk.
>>
>> This doesn't sound right to me, how can a well known public
>> footpath be private and has he the legal right to simply put up a
>> sign which apparently suggests it is our fault if his horses cause
>> actual bodily harm?
>
>
> Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 there is specific legislation
> only about bulls, but under the Animals Act 1971 even a keeper of animals
> not of dangerous species will become liable for damage after the dangerous
> nature of his animals becomes known to him.
>
> http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?&ActiveTextDocId=1365631
>
> You might inform the local authority and the police about the incident and
> demand that they formally place the keeper on notice of his liability.
>
Presumably the Occupier's Liability Act is also relevant.
Colin Jackson
and let them take it up on your behalf.
This is what they lobby for, the right to walk.
Colin
"Paul Rudin" <paul....@rudin.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8763d27...@rudin.co.uk...
Stuart B
<not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:10:14 +0100, stephe...@btinternet.com wrote:
>
>> I pointed out that this is a public footpath but he said it is
>> private land and if we choose to walk the path we do so at our own
>> risk.
>>
>> This doesn't sound right to me, how can a well known public
>> footpath be private and has he the legal right to simply put up a
>> sign which apparently suggests it is our fault if his horses cause
>> actual bodily harm?
>
>
>Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 there is specific legislation
>only about bulls,
On that point this suggests that it doesn't apply if the Bull is under
10 months ( presumably as they are docile as that age ) but also says
it doesn't apply if the bull is not of a recognised dairy breed or if
there are cows in the field as well..
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Primary&PageNumber=9&NavFrom=
2&parentActiveTextDocId=809367&ActiveTextDocId=809367&filesize=3267
or
http://tiny.cc/zegTQ
Are bulls not of a recognised dairy breed or accompanied by the "the
wife/wives" also docile? (!)
--
Any posting using my name and/or e-mail address
but other than by newsindividual.net is not being posted by me and should be disregarded .
Remove NOSPAM to reply by e-mail
stephe...@btinternet.com
"Anthony R. Gold" <not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:10:14 +0100, stephe...@btinternet.com wrote:
>
>> I pointed out that this is a public footpath but he said it is
>> private land and if we choose to walk the path we do so at our own
>> risk.
>>
>> This doesn't sound right to me, how can a well known public
>> footpath be private and has he the legal right to simply put up a
>> sign which apparently suggests it is our fault if his horses cause
>> actual bodily harm?
>
>
>Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 there is specific legislation
>only about bulls, but under the Animals Act 1971 even a keeper of animals
>not of dangerous species will become liable for damage after the dangerous
>nature of his animals becomes known to him.
>
>http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?&ActiveTextDocId=1365631
>
>You might inform the local authority and the police about the incident and
>demand that they formally place the keeper on notice of his liability.
>
>Tony
The information on the above site doesn't seem to coincide with
what the Police have said to me when I contacted the Police, they
wont follow up my complaint because it is not a Police matter as
no criminal offence has taken place according to them. They also
said I could try a solicitor, but as the law appears to be on the
land owners side I don't think I'd get very far. the Police said
he has covered himself by erecting a warning sign, even though we
could have been seriously hurt we did so at our own risk.
I'll see what the council can do.
People I've spoken to who have horses said they think the land
owner is deliberately trying to stop people using the public
footpath.
Stephen.
stephe...@btinternet.com
"R" <no_...@nowhere.tv> wrote:
>
><stephe...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:7084b385...@btinternet.com...
[snip]
>>
>> We were lucky to have been able to make a hasty retreat over the
>> fence but I wonder what would have happened if a small child
>> unable to climb the fence was hurt by the horse.
>
>I suggest that you contact your local council Highways department footpaths
>and byways officer and tell them about it.
>
>The owner of the land has a public duty to ensure safe passage to users if
>they are on a marked way. Prevention of injury by loose animals to passing
>public might well be part of the byeway local rules/law.
>
>
I have informed my local council (footpaths department)
on Wednesday and waiting for them to get back to me.
Stephen.
stephe...@btinternet.com
"Colin Jackson" <cojack6ATbti...@giganews.com> wrote:
>I suggest you let your local Ramblers Group know of the incident
>and let them take it up on your behalf.
>
>This is what they lobby for, the right to walk.
>
>Colin
>
Good point, I have emailed my local Ramblers association and await
their reply.
Stephen.
stephe...@btinternet.com
"Anthony R. Gold" <not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 15:15:20 +0100, stephe...@btinternet.com
>wrote:
>
>> the Police said
>> he has covered himself by erecting a warning sign, even though
>> we could have been seriously hurt we did so at our own risk.
>
>I think the police have it backwards. That would cover him on
>private land with no pubic access, but not here. IMO his
>erecting that sign suggests he had already been made aware that
>his horses were dangerous, perhaps from complaints previous to
>yours, and if that is so then he is liable for any damage. But
>it will be up to you to seek compensation for the bent glasses
>and any other matters by way of making a civil claim; that part
>is not a police matter.
In have been recommended to seek a "no win no fee" solicitor based
on what the Police told me regard it not being a Police matter.
>> I'll see what the council can do.
>
>Yes, ask them which department will deal with hazards that have
>been placed on public footpaths.
>
>> People I've spoken to who have horses said they think the land
>> owner is deliberately trying to stop people using the public
>> footpath.
>
>It maybe deliberate, but if not then it is clearly negligent IMO.
>
>Tony
Hi,
Still no word from the council yet, I suspect they might be doing
a spot of research first, but I'll phone them again for an update
on their progress.
Also still waiting to hear from the local ramblers association.
I will let the group know when I receive some/any information.
Thanks,
Stephen.
The Todal
<stephe...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:b1e69289...@btinternet.com...
> In message <t5mo7515eijdsalj7...@4ax.com>
> "Anthony R. Gold" <not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 15:15:20 +0100, stephe...@btinternet.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>> the Police said
>>> he has covered himself by erecting a warning sign, even though
>>> we could have been seriously hurt we did so at our own risk.
>>
>>I think the police have it backwards. That would cover him on
>>private land with no pubic access, but not here. IMO his
>>erecting that sign suggests he had already been made aware that
>>his horses were dangerous, perhaps from complaints previous to
>>yours, and if that is so then he is liable for any damage. But
>>it will be up to you to seek compensation for the bent glasses
>>and any other matters by way of making a civil claim; that part
>>is not a police matter.
>
> In have been recommended to seek a "no win no fee" solicitor based
> on what the Police told me regard it not being a Police matter.
>
The owner is almost certainly liable in law for the injuries and damage
caused by the horse. He can't use the excuse that the horse was docile and
not expected to bite - he was displaying a sign showing that he knew of the
horse's propensities.
However, it sounds as if your claim won't be worth very much and hence a
solicitor won't be interested in taking it on. But you can write to the
owner, claim damages and then negotiate with his insurance company. Or if
that produces only a long silence, you can sue using Money Claim Online.
stephe...@btinternet.com
"The Todal" <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:
The glasses luckily were fixed free of charge by our optician, but
I fear that my pursuance on this matter will be to no avail given
that the people who I thought should be interested are not at all
concerned, for example;
The ramblers association have not contacted me either in three
weeks so perhaps it is not important to them either? probably
because the footpath is hardly ever frequented by walkers.
I have contacted the Council again and they have said it is not
there responsibility making a footpath safe, apparently it is a
bridleway and the Council have suggested I contact the RSPCA to
make a complaint about a dangerous animal. I do not wish for the
horse to be put down, just to make aware this area is NOT safe,
but the landowner has done this already and we walk it at our own
risk.
My conclusion is the Police aren't interested because they claim no
crime has been committed and the Council have passed the buck by
saying it is not their problem either.
I don't wish to appear negative but the only solution for me is
not to walk down the path, whereas my main concern was to avoid
any injury or death that this animal could cause to a walker and
this seems to be irrelevant to my local council, land owner and
even the police.
Thanks for all the help though, it is appreciated.
Regards,
Stephen.