Unwanted mating can be an expensive event for the owner of a male dog. Bitches in heat are a temptation for males that instincts make them unable to resist. Once a male has taken in the weather, he can hardly be stopped. If there is actually a mating act, the question arises as to what the liability is like. When is the dog’s owner liable and when not?
- An unintentional mating is not always due to the fault of the owner of the male dog.
- The mating damage can be both material (costs of pregnancy, rearing the puppies), as well as conditionally immaterial (financial loss that cannot be clearly determined if champion breeding was prevented).
- The animal owner’s liability assumes the claims for damages if the owner of the male dog can be proven culpable behavior.
What is an unwanted mating act?
An unwanted mating act is when a male mates a bitch without the bitch’s owner having given his / her consent. The financial consequences of an unwanted mating act can be significant. Suppose an owner of a purebred dog lady with awards would like to breed and sell the puppies for a lot of money. The female gets hot, the omens are good. Annoyingly, the neighbour’s male dog, a mixed breed who combines numerous dog breeds, manages to anticipate the planned merging of the female dog with a male that has also been awarded a prize.
What are the consequences of an unintentional mating?
In addition to the costs that arise when the bitch is pregnant and childbirth, the owner also makes a financial loss for the bitch. With a bit of bad luck, the pregnancy is not that uncomplicated and intensive supervision by the veterinarian is necessary. The owner of the bitch cannot call up four-digit prices for the offspring, but only a nominal fee. In addition to the high veterinary costs, he also makes a loss when giving up the puppies. It is understandable that the owner of the bitch would like the owner of the dog to reimburse the actual costs and the accounting loss. However, it must first be clarified whether he is actually entitled to it.
Complicity in deck damage
In a judgment from 1993, the Hamm Higher Regional Court decided that the owner of the bitch may well be complicit. The bitch in heat was unsupervised in the garden for three quarters of an hour. The neighbour’s male had tried again and again in advance to get over the fence, which he succeeded on that day. It came to the mating act. The judges decided that the owner of the bitch had not fulfilled his duty of supervision due to the situation. The claim for damages was denied. On the other hand, it is of course difficult to understand why the owner is to blame if the animal walks on their own fenced property and a strange dog illegally gains entry.
It would be grossly negligent and therefore without a claim to compensation if the owner of a bitch in heat let her walk without a leash.
The unwanted mating act in pet owner insurance
The pet owner insurancenot only helps if the four-legged friend harms another person or scratches the room door in the rented apartment. The financial consequences of an unwanted mating are also covered. The procedure of the insurer follows the same pattern as with any other recourse claim. In the first step, the insurer checks whether the accusation against its policyholder is justified. If the lady dog ran off the leash, he will undoubtedly deny this. In the case described above, the insurance company will argue in the same way as the judges. The owner of the female should have been aware of the danger based on the male’s previous attempts. However, if the fault for the mating is clearly the owner of the male dog, for example because he was not on a leash or was led by a small child.
