Skip to content

Dangerous Dogs (1526A/22)

Request

  1. How many dogs were seized by your Police Force under S1 and S3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (DDA) in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  2. Of the dogs seized under the DDA, how many were euthanised in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  3. What was the average time taken from the date of seizure to complete a prosecution under section 1 of the DDA in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  4. What was the average time taken from the date of seizure to complete a prosecution under section 3 of the DDA in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  5. What was the average time taken from the date of seizure to complete a prosecution under section 4a of the DDA in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  6. What was the average time taken from the date of seizure to complete a prosecution under section 4b of the DDA in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?
  7. What was the total cost spent on kennelling dogs seized and detained under S1 and S3 of the DDA in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021?

Response

Questions 3, 4, 5 & 6 – This information is not held.

Questions 1 and 7 – Our data are not organised in such a way as to allow us to provide this information within the appropriate (cost) limit of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act (see ‘Reason for Decision’ below).

However, although excess cost removes the force’s obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, as a gesture of goodwill I have supplied information, relative to your request, retrieved before it was realised that the fees limit would be exceeded (see attached file 1526A_22_attachment.pdf). I trust this is helpful, but it does not affect our legal right to rely on the fees regulations for the remainder of the request.

REASON FOR DECISION

With regard to question 1, although we have been able to locate and retrieve the number of dogs ‘encountered’ by dog handlers at reports of dogs being out of control (see attached), in order to determine how many were seized and dangerously out of control, we would need to manually review each of the aforementioned cases. This however would require the examination of nearly two and a half thousand cases and such a search would exceed the appropriate limit (FOIA, s.12).

Similarly, with regard to question 7, although we have been able to provide the yearly budget for the cost of kennelling, vet treatment etc. for seized dogs, it is not possible to separately identify each element of these costs, without undertaking a manual trawl of all associated records. This however would be a huge undertaking and such a search would once again exceed the appropriate limit (FOIA, s.12).

This means that the cost of compliance with the whole of your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond, i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information would exceed the appropriate costs limit under section 12(1) of the FOI Act 2000. For West Midlands Police, the appropriate limit is set at £450, as prescribed by the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004, S.I. 3244.

Further information on section 12 of FOI is available here:

https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/information-management/freedom-of-information/#fees-and-charges

Attachments

1526A_22_attachment