Shropshire Star

'Nuisance' dogs cost owner £750

A 67-year-old Shropshire man was today ordered to pay more than £750 after admitting his barking dogs was a nuisance to his neighbours.

Published

sd3166763la11court-2iA 67-year-old Shropshire man was today ordered to pay more than £750 after admitting his barking dogs was a nuisance to his neighbours.

Dennis Haycox, of Lincoln Fields, Billingsley, near Bridgnorth, today admitted eight counts of breaching an abatement notice by failing to stop nuisance caused by his dogs barking between July 4 and August 12 last year.

He was ordered to pay £80 for each of the offences.

He was also ordered to pay a £15 victim surcharge and a contribution to prosecution costs of £100, totalling £755.

Mr Brett Williamson, prosecuting on behalf of Shropshire Council, said the defendant, who lived in a caravan, kept the dogs for a breeding business.

He said over a period of time, four nearby residents had been disturbed by excessive barking from the premises. He said Richard Atherton, environmental health officer for the then Bridgnorth District Council, investigated the noise.

He said: "Mr Atherton heard excessive barking and was satisfied the level of noise was statutory nuisance.

"He attended again and Mr Haycox showed him around the kennels and he saw 25 or so dogs. Mr Atherton told Mr Haycox of the situation and Mr Haycox became abusive and swore saying 'I am going to run you through'."

Mr Williamson said the noise continued over July and August and Mr Haycox was served a noise abatement notice.

Evidence was read from the four residents stating the barking was affecting their sleep and ruining their weekends.

Peter Ravenhill, who also recorded video footage which the court was shown, described the noise as "very stressful". David Maher said the constant noise was like a "tap dripping".

Mr Clive Rees, mitigating, said his client agreed the barking had become unacceptable. He said Mr Haycox had been in hospital for a knee replacement and a severe reaction to the pain relief had put him in intensive care.

The court heard that during this time his daughters had looked after the dogs, which had not liked being looked after by strangers.

He said: "Now he is mobile, he is in a position to get around and check the dogs and move them around so they don't cause these problems."

By Catherine Roche

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.