Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: my local pet shop

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    724

    Default

    Excellent Elle, good for you. I sent off those Oscar's Law emails too.

    Another pet shop rant - I took Ruby for a walk yesterday and we stopped on the way home for a rest and look over the beach, and I noticed a guy with a big puppy, huge - he was coming up from the beach and stopped to chat as I asked him about what kind of dog it was. He said it's a sheepdog, and I said oh is it a Maremma sheep dog? he said yes. I've only seen these dogs in pictures, and asked him if the breeder he got the dog from was in WA. He goes oh no, I got him from the pet shop there was two of us guys in the pet shop, I bought one and the other guy grabbed the other one!!!!

    So we chatted and I said he's going to be a big boy from the size of his paws, he goes, yeah I wanted a dog that didn't shed fur (I told him that Ruby sheds constantly), this boy had long hair, very much like a white fluffy lab with long fur, it was soft, real puppy fur. He said I told the vet I wanted to shave him, but the vet said I shouldn't. I told him he should definitely investigate the breed before he gets the fur cut as if it's like the blue heeler, their fur is designed to keep them cool - he did say that he is always allowed inside in the air-con, he was lovely with the pup... but ... dear God, do these pet shop people give people ANY background on the breeds that they buy, any kind of after-care information, I was so angry all the way home.

  2. #12

    Default

    I applaud the letter, it is well written, but it could get you and the forum owners in a bit of hot water. I hope you get some action.

    Cheers

    Rob

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    179

    Default

    thanks but why would it? i didnt say the name of the shop nor the shopping centre...or the email address?

  4. #14

    Default

    You don't have to say the name under the Defamation Act. If the person or business (with under 15 employees) can be identified then that's good enough. Because you've stated fact and not opinion you've also met the required elements for defamation. The third element is to publish the material which you've done when you put it up here and also sent the letter. What could happen now, if, and that's still a very big if, the pet shop owner can contact the forum owner because that person has in effect published the material. I've seen several forums go through defamation proceedings because people don't understand the Act. It's that blazen ignorance of the Act where people say "But it's true" or "they deserve it" than can cost people their homes. Whilst I don't expect that to happen here, every forum owner needs to impress upon people that going down that road is a big no no. There was an instance a while back where a poster in a forum defamed **** Smith. Mr Smith tracked down at his own cost which was well over 30k the perpertrator and enforced a result. I'd suggest that you contact the forum owner now and get him to read up on the Act, remove this post and enforce cast iron guidelines about what you can and can't say.

    Nothing in this post consists of legal advice.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SE QLD
    Posts
    2,903

    Default

    I don't see anything wrong with it. There is nothing that could tie it back to any particular store. Have you had any response to the letter?

    There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face.

  6. #16

    Default

    It doesn't really matter if you don't see anything wrong with it, that's why so much care needs to be taken by you, I and everyone else. Lawyers who stand to make money out of defamation will see something wrong and will be happy to act, and civil law isn't a warm and fuzzy place. Just let me play devils advocate here for a tick.

    There are three elements to defamation.

    Publication, identification and defamatory material.

    Publication: Easily met, there have been letters sent, of particular note, the letter to the shopping centre. Under the law that is publication, so is the post here and so is the letter to the Council which probably also identifies the store. By the way even saying something defamatory is publication under the law. By publishing a letter the writer limits the liability to him/herself. Publishing online expands the potential liability to the publisher, in this case dogforum.

    Identification: Met because the letters or inference "a store selling pets in your centre" (paraphrased). That will also be proven if the Council or centre owner pays a visit. to reiterate that's two of three elements met.

    Defamatory material: Is the material capable of conveying the defamatory meaning alleged by the plaintiff to an ordinary person. If this is answered positively, the next issue for determination is: whether, in fact, an ordinary person would have taken the publication as conveying the meaning alleged. To me the defamatory comments about conditions would be enough to satisfy the third element.

    Three elements are now met and now it is up to the defendant to prove that it isn't defamatory, I wish anyone good luck, it would be like winning a doli incapax hearing in a criminal court of law.. very, very difficult.

    It doesn't matter if the material is true or well deserved, that's not what defamation law is about.

    Lecture/rant/whatever over.

    Good luck with it all, I hope it never comes to pass.

    Nothing in this post constitutes legal advice.

    Rob

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    179

    Default

    well i appreciate you looking out for me.. i really think its a tad over the top.
    It could be ANY shopping centre or ANY pet store how would they prove this post was about them?

    jadielee i got a response today from the centre and from the store...as expected its got me no where.
    the centre said they will keep my suggestions in mind
    the pet store wrote an email saying basically that they dont source their pups from mills and that they are legally allowed to sell them at 6 weeks old. that they take special care to place the pups with the right families (bulls**t) and that the dont legally have to microchip or vaccinate the pups but they do it out of the kindness of their hearts (aw how generous)
    I would post the email but i wouldnt want to get sued lol....not like i have any money anyway

  8. #18

    Default

    I apologise if I offended you in trying to help. If you care to read my previous post, you might identify where I'm coming from with respect to the letter. Briefly, if you send a letter to a shopping centre saying that a store in that centre is doing something that they deem defamatory, you have met the all three elements. If there was a connection to dogforum, then some or all of the liability passes to dogforum. Once again, I apologise if I offended.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    179

    Default

    no need to apologise you didnt offend me at all
    thanks for ur help robk

  10. #20

    Default

    No worries. Hey it has been a few weeks, has there been any change?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •