Anger at mail ban over bitten postman

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.sundaysun.co.uk/news/north-e ... -23089811/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

THE postman doesn’t ring once, never mind twice, in one North street since he was attacked by a pet dog.

Now a dozen householders, many of them elderly, have been left without their mail for two weeks . . . and there’s little chance of them getting their letters anytime soon.

The delivery drama began when the postie who delivers to Arran Grove, Thornley, near Peterlee, County Durham, was badly bitten by a four-year-old German Shepherd called Simba, owned by showman Philip Cooper who lives in a neighbouring street, Fair View.

The postman was bitten on the leg and wrist, and requires plastic surgery to hand wounds.

Royal Mail bosses have sent letters to the residents — ironically delivered by a postman — saying deliveries will be stopped until “actions have been taken to guarantee the safety of our staff”.

The 12 outraged residents in the quiet cul-de-sac now have to walk two-thirds of a mile to the nearest Post Office to ask if they have any mail, and on some days it could be a wasted journey

They say they are being unfairly penalised for the actions of a dog which does not even live in their street.

Irene Robson, 82, whose husband Bill, 75, a retired miner, is recovering from open-heart surgery, stormed: “I think the Royal Mail has a nerve to send a postman round here to deliver letters saying it is unsafe to deliver our mail.

“I feel sorry for the postman who was bitten, but the dog does not come from a house in this street. Now I have to leave Bill, who is unwell, in the house alone and catch a bus to the Post Office at the other end of the village just to pick up the mail.”

Next-door neighbour Elsie Crisp, 55, a retired factory worker, said: “You feel daft having to walk 500 yards to the post office every day asking if there is any mail to collect.

“It is no fault of the people living here that the postman was attacked.”

Now residents have contacted local councillor Brian Wilson, who has been in touch with post office bosses to try to find a solution to the problem.

He said: “To send a postman round delivering letters telling them their mail has been suspended simply adds insult to injury.”

And Simba’s owner agrees. Mr Cooper said: “Simba is a family pet, he gets on with everybody except this postman.

“I gave a guarantee that I would keep him tied up until after 2.30 so the mail could be delivered. I think it is a disgrace that the people of Arran Grove are not getting their mail delivered.”

A Royal Mail spokeswoman told The Sunday Sun: “Following a serious dog attack on a postman in Arran Grove, Thornley, Royal Mail has had to temporarily suspend deliveries to 12 addresses in the area. Normal service will be resumed as soon as it is safe to do so.”

Durham Police said they had received a report of a postman being attacked and were preparing a file for consideration by the Crown Prosecution Service.

[axeman]

But of course he's also breaking the law by alowing a dog to roam on the streets we all know that dogs should not be out in the streets unless on a lead ...... the police are a disgrace in this country

[Stormproof]

Elsie Crisp, 55, a retired factory worker, said: “You feel daft having to walk 500 yards to the post office every day asking if there is any mail to collect.

Don't over do it love, retired at 55! probably needs the exercise

[k979aaa]

It's always the postman fault why are not the residents of the street angry with the dog owner it could have been a child with their arm ripped off or even killed!. All dogs can bite i don't care what the owner says he should be put in the stocks for a month and his dog eradicated.

[brothermagrew]

Royal Mail has a legal commitment to deliver to all addresses. To effect this commitment delivery postal staff travel along virtually every thoroughfare daily and enter countless private premises. In doing so, they face the hazards present, which includes the threat or actuality of attack by dogs. Royal Mail also has a duty under health and safety law to reduce risks and prevent injury to their employees at work.

Temporary suspension of mail deliveries to residents by the business on health and safety grounds is a fair call.

The USO has provisions where under some exceptional circumstances mail cannot be delivered.

Typical examples include:

Where the local infrastructure does not allow us to access the address every working day. This may include addresses on some of smaller islands around the UK where there is no daily scheduled ferry or air service.

Where there is an obstacle making it impossible to gain access to the delivery point at the address. This may include locked gates or doors or entry phone systems that prevent access to the address or where there is no letterbox in place.

Where access to an address is unsafe for our staff due to short-term health & safety issues. This may include instances where we believe our postmen or women are at risk from attack by people, or dogs, or other animals.

Where access to an address is unsafe for our staff due to long-term health and safety issues. This may include instances where there’s a poor track to the property or an address is located on the side of a mountain.

Where an address with private access is not unsafe but is so poor that it takes over a fifteen minute round trip to get to the address (or group of addresses).

Should of course add, that I hope that the postie concerned makes a full and speedy recovery.

[brothermagrew]

But of course he's also breaking the law by alowing a dog to roam on the streets we all know that dogs should not be out in the streets unless on a lead ...... the police are a disgrace in this country

More disgraceful is the inconsiderate actions of the dog's owner. Punish the deed and not the breed.

[max_gain]

All so typical of irresponsible dog owners.

I own a German Shepherd and am a Postman. As a responsible owner I control her, have trained and socialized her and take full reponsibility for her actions. There was a case in Bristol a month back where some total arse would let their Shepherds out (two of them) to roam and exercise themselves. Then one day they took dislike to everything insight and caused much carnage.

When I got our Shepherd I read up on the breed and realised that dog owners would become an ambassodor for that breed !! This is something I took very seriously. And I am often praised for the good nature of the dog. Its just a shame that complete morons can purchase and rear something that in the wrong hands can resemble a threat to society.


Stu

[andy2007]

It's always the postman fault why are not the residents of the street angry with the dog owner it could have been a child with their arm ripped off or even killed!. All dogs can bite i don't care what the owner says he should be put in the stocks for a month and his dog eradicated.

And that's precisely WHY RM's attitude is wrong! Think about it for a moment.... What if one of those residents is attacked by the dog, while on their way to check if they have any mail?
They're just swapping the danger of one person being attacked, for the danger of several people being attacked.

Why hasn't the Police taken the dog off the owner, until the case goes to Court?
Why leave all those residents in danger?

[NWpostie]

It's always the postman fault why are not the residents of the street angry with the dog owner it could have been a child with their arm ripped off or even killed!. All dogs can bite i don't care what the owner says he should be put in the stocks for a month and his dog eradicated.

And that's precisely WHY RM's attitude is wrong! Think about it for a moment.... What if one of those residents is attacked by the dog, while on their way to check if they have any mail?
They're just swapping the danger of one person being attacked, for the danger of several people being attacked.

Why hasn't the Police taken the dog off the owner, until the case goes to Court?
Why leave all those residents in danger?

Fu.ck the Residents, They don't care about the Postman they must have known about the Dog problem as it may have roamed before.

[andy2007]

The residents aren't always in a position to complain about roaming dogs. They would first have to find out who's dog it was. Then, there's the problem of repercussions. I've no way of knowing what type of person the dog owner is (except that he's an irrisponsible w****r!). Would it be safe, for someone to report him?

The fault here, lies with the Police. I've already made my views on who's responsible for dangerour dogs plain, in another Thread. So I won't go into too much detail here. But surely, they should have taken the dog away, until a decision is made about the attack. As it's still potentially a threat to anyone who crosses it's path! WTF is wrong with them!?!?
I thought they were supposed to protect the Public from violence! If a person had attacked the Postie, particularly if it had done him serious damage (as in this case). He/she would be kept in custady, until a Judge had ascertained whether he/she was safe to be released on Bail, until the Trial. Or kept in custady, until the Trial. Why should a dog, owned by an irrisponsible owner, be considered less of a risk?

[brothermagrew]

The residents aren't always in a position to complain about roaming dogs. They would first have to find out who's dog it was. Then, there's the problem of repercussions. I've no way of knowing what type of person the dog owner is (except that he's an irrisponsible w****r!). Would it be safe, for someone to report him?

The fault here, lies with the Police. I've already made my views on who's responsible for dangerour dogs plain, in another Thread. So I won't go into too much detail here. But surely, they should have taken the dog away, until a decision is made about the attack. As it's still potentially a threat to anyone who crosses it's path! WTF is wrong with them!?!?
I thought they were supposed to protect the Public from violence! If a person had attacked the Postie, particularly if it had done him serious damage (as in this case). He/she would be kept in custady, until a Judge had ascertained whether he/she was safe to be released on Bail, until the Trial. Or kept in custady, until the Trial. Why should a dog, owned by an irrisponsible owner, be considered less of a risk?

Why then in your previous posting above is Royal Mail's attitude wrong? Surely in the best interest of their duty of care to their workforce, the right course of action was in this instance adopted by the business. Temporary suspension of mail delivery due to health and safety reasons, until actions have been taken to guarantee the safety of their employees. As has been said their care of duty in this sad chapter is towards their employees and not to the residents of the street. Granted the business has a service to provide under the USO but for reasons given mail cannot be delivered under the USO provisions under some exceptional circumstances.

[andy2007]

I know that RM have a duty of care to us, and I would never condone taking unneccessary risks with ANYONE'S safety. Whether they be Collegues, or members of the Public.

The sad fact is, that the decision they took, has simply exchanged the threat to 1 person (whoever is covering that Duty), for a threat to the safety of dozens of people. The VERY LEAST they should be doing, is offering to phone residents, if there is any mail for them. That way, they would only have to go to the DO, if there was actually something to collect.

People are still people, whether they are our Collegues, or other members of Society. We all need to have our safety taken seriously, regardless of who we are!

But in my opinion: RM should have insisted that the Police take the dog off the streets (and away from the owner), as a matter of urgency. And the residents should have done the same.

[BELIAL]

Give all the mail to the dog,let the residents pick up their stuff from Bruno. Everyones happy

[andy2007]

In this hard and fast new UK its all so easy to blame the front page! Why as Posties do we NEVER seem to blame the owners? Its them that abuse the animal to make them bad! Its them that dont train the animal that makes them so bad, and worst of all we allow owners a very small fine for allowing it to happen and destuction of the animal because of that abuse to us. I say blame the owners for not controlling their animals with a HUGE FINE and or PRISON TERM and see how fast this problem goes away! Cause the t*ssers that allow it dont mind a small fine or their dog destroyed! But stick em with a huge fine and or a term in clink and see how fast that fence goes up!

I couldn't agree more!

The sooner the Law is changed, to protect Dogs from irrisponsible owners, and people from the dogs they have mistreated, the better. When you adopt a dog from a Rescue Centre (RSPCA, Dogs Trust, etc.), they check that you are suitable to look after him/her. Why the Hell don't they make the same type of checks, and issue Licences, before allowing ANYONE to have a dog?
They could give 4 figure fines to anyone who allows their dog to become a threat. Say £5,000 for example?
That should give the bad owners something to worry about eh?
And Jail the ones who default on the fines.

Sorry if I seem heavy handed here. But one of my best friends at School, had a Doberman. But he was a big softie, who wouldn't hurt a fly. One of my relatives has a big powerful dog (mixed breed), and has 3 small Children. But the dog is perfectly safe with them, as he's well trained, and looked after. Why did they pick a big powerful dog?
He was a really cute puppy, and they know how to train dogs properly. So there was no risk to the family. He's now about 18 Months old, and about 3ft tall now. But crucially, he's amazingly patient and well behaved.

If they can do it, why can't all the owners?
Some actually WANT their dogs to be intimidating. And in some cases, they even want them to fight other dogs. Although that's still quite rare, as far as I know.
Some get a dog they aren't capable of looking after properly. Some breeds are easier to look after and control, than others. But some people, just pick a dog (particularly puppies), because they're cute. But have no idea what's involved in looking after them properly.

It's worth knowing, that as a Pack Animal: If a dog feels that he/she isn't being looked after properly, he/she will attempt to take over control of the Pack (the family that owns him/her). In fact: It's such a common problem, that there are people who specialise in reversing this situation. They even had TV programs about them. How depressing is that?

Why can't people realise, that a dog is a sentient being. And as such, has needs and desires. Therefore, you need to take these into consideration, and treat them appropriately. The Aussies are particularly good at this type of thing. I remember a couple of years ago, seeing a demonstration by a very experienced Australian Sheapard. Where he was training a new Sheepdog, and whenever she made a mistake. He didn't shout at her, or hit her. He called her over, turned her on her back, and partialy lifted her up, by her throat. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HER MOTHER WOULD HAVE DONE, IF SHE WAS WILD. I went back the following year (he does demonstrations over here, in the "off season" in Austrailia). And Jess (the Sheepdog) was fully trained, and did an almost flawless demonstration of a Sheepdog Trial.

If we're to have safe and happy Dogs, we need to understand them, and their behaviour patterns. They're not fashon excessories, or mascots to make you look "hard". They are living creatures, who deserve proper treatment, respect, love, attention, and above all EFFORT, from their owners!!!!!

[andy2007]

I would like to add after refusal by posties a "Good Manager" would don a Hi VIZ and deliver letters in person to those affected as one of mine would and has done! This i know happens as he has done it for ME! Its the law and the owner that does the damage not the animal in truth! We need to make the owners pay for the crime and very hard! Most all of these animals have suffered enough and we need to make these so called owners pay and yes a simpe phonecall would help but at the end of the day someone was only thinking of X that worked for RM so have to say i would forgive any mistakes that maybe go a bit far in protection of US!

Sorry if I didn't explain myself properly. But my point wasn't that they should have continued to deliver to that street. As that would have put the Postie in danger. But that it's wrong to expect the residents to turn up every day, to check if they had any mail. They should give them the opportunity to find our by phone, whether they have any. That way, they wouldn't be taking more risks than absolutely neccessary.

I was also trying to challenge NWpostie's misconception, that the residents are to blame, for not doing anything before the attack. They aren't always in a position to do so.

Whether these particular residents could have done anything about it. I don't know. And unless you live there, neither do you.