Hold landlords responsible, accountable, and liable for dog bites from dogs that they allow to live on/in their rental property

My son was bitten by a dog that was not licensed or vaccinated according to Connecticut law. The dog owner, who is a tenant, does not have insurance AND can not afford to pay for expenses.

The way the law is written right now it is very difficult to hold the landlord responsible, accountable, and liable for any expenses because the landlord can argue that they are not the "keeper of the dog".

If the dog bites someone on what is considered "common/community" grounds, then the landlord can be held responsible, accountable, and liable.
BUT
If the dog bites someone INSIDE the tenant's apartment it is very difficult to hold the landlord responsible, accountable, and liable BECAUSE the landlord can argue that they are not the "keeper of the dog".

Connecticut is not the only state that allows the landlord to be LEGALLY excused from responsibility, accountability, and liability. This is a copy of a letter that I sent. I hope it actually works and the law can be changed!!

Wish me luck!!!

And if you have any ideas, please feel free to share them with me.

THANK YOU

September 26, 2008

Dear Governor Rell
Lt Governor Fedele
Atty General Richard Blumenthal
Congressman John Larson
Senator Thomas Colapietro
State Rep Frank Nicastro
State Rep Ron Burns
State Rep William Hamzy
State Rep Elizabeth Boukus
Mayor Ward
City of Bristol Council Members:
Frank Nicastro, Michael Rimcoski, Cliff Block,
Kevin McCauley, Ken Cockayne, Craig Minor

I'm writing you this letter on behalf of my son, Connor, and all dog bite victims. First, I would like to thank State Representative and City Council member Frank Nicastro for the time you spent on the phone with me. I have sent copies of this letter to everyone who represents the city of Bristol and the state of Connecticut. I'm just so frustrated that landlords do not have to take responsibility of their tenant's dog's actions because according to the law a landlord can argue that they "are not the keeper of the dog". The way the law is written right now, it protects landlords more than a dog bite victim. I feel that this law needs to be modified and changed to protect the victim of a dog bite.

On Saturday, February 2, 2008 my son, Connor, was attacked and bitten by the neighbor's dog. My neighbors, the dog's owners, were close friends of ours and at the time she was pregnant. Her c-section was planned for Tuesday due to a breech pregnancy. My son was sitting next to me; the dog walked into the room, left, and came back. The dog gave me his 'toy'. As I was playing with the dog and his toy, the dog backed up and lunged forward and attacked my son's head. My pregnant neighbor was in the room when this happened. The police were called and my 7 year old was transported by ambulance to the Hospital of Central Connecticut. My son received 6 staples to his head. The dog's owners were not able to produce the dog's rabies certificate or city dog license but swore to the police that the dog was up to date on all his shots. My pregnant neighbor complained about having stomach cramps and not feeling well due to the stressful situation. But when we were at the hospital, she refused and denied that she needed any medical attention. The police quarantine the dog to the home, that they were renting, for 14 days and told the dog's owners to bring the rabies certificate down to the police within a certain time frame.

On Sunday, February 3, 2008 I saw the neighbors leave their home with the dog. They brought the dog to the vet's office to get a rabies vaccination. Then they proceed to bring the vaccination proof to the police department. The dog's owners violated a quarantine order given by the police. I was in the ambulance with my son when the dog's owners were given instructions about the quarantine order and did not know that the dog could not leave the property. By the time I realized that they had violated this order and notified the Bristol Police Animal Control Officer it was too late to do anything about the violation.

At the time of this whole dog bite incident, my only concern was my son. The dog's owners had 'promised' to pay whatever the amount the bills may be. In order to protect my son and preserve our friendship, I did not contact an attorney.

In May 2008, I started to receive letters from my health insurance company wanting to know more about this incident. Although they had paid the claim, they felt that a third party was really responsible for the bill and wanted to be paid back. When we told the dog's owners, they told us that they had no money to pay the bill now that there was baby in the home and they only had one income. Then a few days later, they came home with a new 'used' truck. This made me very angry.

In June 2008, I went to town hall and figured out who the landlord / property owner is and I contacted them. I also contacted an attorney at this same time. This was almost 4 months after my son was bitten and I'm the one telling the landlord that my son was bitten, by the tenant's dog, on their property that is located across the street from a school. The landlord's parents live on the property. They knew and saw my son being placed into the ambulance the night of the incident. I saw them as I was getting into the ambulance.

Within a month after me telling the landlord what happened, the dog's owners moved. Now this dog is in another town and unless the dog's owners told their new landlord that the dog has bitten before no one knows. I highly doubt, since they kept it hidden from this landlord. Prior to my son being bitten, the landlord had received complaints from other neighbors about all the dogs living at the rental property. I know this because the dog's owners told me that the landlord had spoken to them about the neighbor's complaints and concerns. I have also discovered that their previous landlord had taken them to small claims court for property damage that the dogs had done to their apartment in New Britain, CT. The landlord from New Britain was awarded and received payment for property damage that the dogs had caused.

The dog's owners say that they can not afford to pay and they do not have the ability to pay. The landlord insists that they should not be responsible since it happened inside the tenant's apartment. If my son had been bitten in what is considered "common / community grounds" it would be a lot easier to hold the landlord responsible. The landlord's homeowner's policy is denying the claim; they state that the landlord is not responsible for the tenant's dog's actions. The dog's owners were told by the landlord and the landlord's parents, who live on the property, to get insurance "incase 1 of the 3 dogs bites someone". I witness this verbal request at least 3 times. The landlord never followed up on this request and knew and allowed 3 dogs to live on his property. There is not a law that makes a dog owner have insurance on their dog. There is not a law that makes a landlord have tenants carry insurance on their dog. The dog's owners lived at this property for almost 2 years with 3 dogs that were not vaccinated or licensed with the city. The landlord did nothing to protect anyone in the community from these dogs.

I believe that a 'good' landlord/ property owner should have made sure that the animals that they allow to live on their property are licensed and vaccinated according to the law. My son was bitten by a dog that was not vaccinated or licensed. I also believe that if an animal is living on your property and you know that the animal lives there and you allow the animal to live there; then you should be held responsible, accountable, and liable for their actions even though you are not the animal's owner or "keeper". Landlords should and need to be held accountable, responsible, and liable for animals living on and in their rental property.

Instead of the law protecting my son, me, and other dog bite victims the law protects the landlord. The law allows the landlord to argue that they "are not the keeper of dog". I would like to request that this part of the law be changed and modified. If they do not want to be held responsible, accountable, and liable for their tenant's animal actions, then I feel that landlords should not allow their tenants to have animals.

Thank goodness my son seems to be doing okay after all of this and my husband's employer provides us with good health insurance. But yet, there is still a good chance that any other future medical bills will not be paid by the insurance company.

Imagine, if we did not have insurance or the deductable was incredibility high? Or what will I do, to pay for future medical expenses if the insurance company denies the claim? We could be in collections, if we could not afford to pay this bill or future bills. Why is the burden of these expenses left for the victim to deal and struggle with? With the way the economy is right now, could the average person or family afford to pay such a bill? Would my choice be; do I pay a hospital bill or an oil bill? Why should my health insurance company not be paid back? Claims that are paid by the insurance company, which a third party is really responsible for, raises everyone rates and premiums. If my child had HUSKY, everyone in the state of Connecticut would be paying this bill. As a responsible dog owner, homeowner, and tax payer I'm insulted and enraged that my hard earned money is being used because of an irresponsible dog owner and a landlord who allowed an animal to live on and in their property. Who is protecting my son or any other dog bite victims? Who is protecting the people of Connecticut from this added expense? Not the law, it is only protecting the landlord. Dog bite victims are physically and emotionally scared for life and now they are being left with the financial burden. How many more times do dog bite victims need to be legally victimized? I always thought laws were made to protect victims.

I am begging and pleading with you to change the law in hopes that it will protect the true victims of a dog bite. By holding a landlord just as responsible, accountable, and liable as the dog's owners; I truly believe that there will be less dog bite victims. Most dog bite victims, that have cases currently pending in court, are bitten by dogs that are owned by a tenant and not a property owner and these cases are judge on case by case basis. If the dog bite victim is lucky, they might have a judge who may hold the landlord responsible. Or the victim may end up with a judge who dismisses the case before the victim has a chance to plead their case because the landlord can argue that they "are not the keeper of the dog". There is not a law that makes a dog owner have insurance on their dog, there is not a law that makes a landlord have tenants carry insurance on their dog BUT most property owners carry a homeowner's policy to protect their property and themselves. To make matters even worst, if a dog bite victim does not "win" their case in court then the victim is left with the burden of all the court expenses. When will a dog bite victim finally get their "justice" instead of being "victimized" again?

I would like to see a law that is very similar to the one where a bar is held responsible, accountable, and liable for its patron's actions after the patron has left the bar. A law that protects the dog bite victim more than it protects the landlord. This way if the dog's owners do not have enough insurance or has no insurance, the dog bite victim is able to make the landlord liable for current and future expenses. Right now the way the law is written, the victim left trying to figure out how to pay for these expenses on their own.

Also somewhere it this new law there needs to be wording that would make sure that any settlement that an animal bite victim receives can not be erased in bankruptcy court.

Thank you for you time and I look forward to hear from you on this issue. Even if this modification and change of the law is not able to help my son with his future medical expenses, it will help another dog bite victim. If you go to the website www.dogbitelaw.com, it provides you with the statistics about dog bites and other information about dog bites in the United States. A copy of this letter has been sent to you by email and also mailed to you.

Sincerely,
Michele Feeney-Wallace
A Responsibile Dog Owner of 3 Dogs