My Dogs Don’t Bark
This blog aims to fully document our experience in dealing with a nuisance dog barking problem relating to unauthorised and unlicensed dog breeding in a small residential rear garden.
The account of our dealings with our local authority in connection with the unlicensed commercial dog breeding on the site and subsequent noise nuisance has been accurately recorded and written without the aid of hindsight together with my own thoughts as the story unfolded over a four-year period.
All correspondence sent and received when dealing with this matter from the many levels of the councils well oiled machine are made available for inspection within this blog.
Our problem with noise and odour nuisance caused by unlicensed dog breeding had been a blight on our lives for around six years and after conveying our displeasure to the owners and discussing their inability to control the source of the said nuisance, it became apparent that stronger action and help was needed.
After contacting our local council, and engaging them in ample correspondence we were given the standard advice, mostly as published on the local authorities own websites, in short we were advised by our local authority to follow their well documented and set procedure. It was largely because of our previous, five-year experiences in dealing with the various council departments that in May 2009 after taking advice from a former member of the councils own staff we set out to fully document and record our experience in implementing the councils well publicised set procedure.
The local authorities advice, and all instructions have been all fully adhered to and complied with and the subsequent results obtained together with all the steps involved have all been accurately recorded and documented within this Blog.
It was purely for future reference, that we set out to record and document the interaction between various parties involved and subsequent action taken by the local authority.
At times it is clear that the author is less than complementary towards “The Council” and its officers, this was born out of the sheer frustration in trying to constructively interact with the various levels of our local authority, their various department heads, and beyond to the Councils own Chief executive (Christine Fisher)
All information contained has been compiled in real-time as and when the situation developed together with a sometimes liberal interjection of frustrated humour and comments. It is hoped that the subsequent documentation will give any interested reader a good insight into the way local authorities and the employees charged with running the various council departments deal with this and other very common nuisances.
What has been a complete surprise is the way the council-run departments have been able to stall, stonewall and fudge both the law and their own well-defined and documented processes, and do it in any way that they see fit. This is usually done until the due process has become so over complex, exorbitantly expensive to police and therefore deemed not in the public interest to pursue. The rules governing any legal time constraints, are another added problem to the complainant and many times they give up out of sheer frustration.
It might be fair to also mention, that throughout this ordeal, the various council departments
have always purported to serve the various parties with impartiality and fairness, but as with all things, nothing is quite as simple as it seems and although this may help to highlight some of the flaws and failings within the system, it did not set out to be a crusade against the local authority, right over wrong , good over evil, or whatever other well-worn battle cry is in vogue at this moment in time.
Law Enforcement
It was the sheer frustration in trying to get our local authority and in particular their Environmental Health and Planning Department to act in accordance with the stated rule of law on the practice of unauthorised dog breeding together with the local authority’s Enforcement officers unwillingness to answer our correspondence and the later denied phone calls that were the driving force behind these few hundred words.
These few pages should also give an insight into the mindset of our local authority, shine a light, and help the reader with a blow-by-blow account of the actual due process as set down and practised by various departments within our local authority, The North West Leicestershire District Council.
Although a generalisation, all local authorities in the UK should be singing from the pretty much the same hymn sheet, so in theory, the procedure for dealing with a reported problem of noise nuisance to any local authority in the UK should be similar if not the same.
.
Officially Sanctioned
by Chief executive N.W.L.D.C.(Christine Fisher)
In order to give a fuller understanding of the problems likely to be faced by others in a similar situation, all letters and documents, answered and unanswered pertaining to this case can be viewed or downloaded from the mail section. These include all the documents, emails, and other supporting correspondence relating to the alleged noise nuisance from the various departments of the North West Leicestershire District Council our locally elected Councilors, and our local MP, there are also accurate transcripts of telephone conversations and face to face meetings with various officialdom over the full five-year period.
Shown are some of the hurdles and frustrations encountered when dealing with issues through the well publicised official channels, all officially denied, ignored and unanswered correspondence, relating to our noise problem will be published via the documents page.
.
Without doubt the one overriding frustration has been the total time wasted in chasing unanswered letters, emails, and phone calls. This fact has been reported to, investigated by, and pushed to, each and all the relevant council staff involved. Their documented findings after a full investigation by The Council, has concluded that there was no evidence to support the allegations of unanswered / ignored correspondence and so ultimately there was no case to answer, this was surprising given the hard evidence supplied to The Council in the form of the actual unanswered correspondence, and our own actual experiences. (Please see their findings)
The validity of the councils written denial concerning the councils widespread practice of stonewalling awkward questions and Ms Fishers reasoning behind her advised denial of reply from elected councillors can be examined in detail via some of the many unanswered letters and emails sent to council employees.
It is also hoped that the reader can get a rounded view of the events that have taken place regarding this practice and the way that council staff, at the highest level, even try to discourage communication between elected councilors and members of the public they purport to represent.
.
The Line Of Fire
What to expect
It should be mentioned that there have been some serious attempts at intimidation in connection with our complaint to the local authority, but like most, for reasons of proximity, anonymity was never really an option, but it did allow Officialdom to make an assurance to us that although they do have a duty to inform the relevant parties that a complaint has been made, they would not divulge the name and address of the complainant.
OK I know it’s not quite in the league of a new identity and a safe house for life but I guess it’s the best Officialdom can do (So we all should sleep easy in our beds tonight).
First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.
(Gandhi)
