Council Cabinet asked to progress the matter of ASB 19914
Councillor Ian Bevan
Cabinet Member - Housing - DMBC
Pet issues - Housing Department properties - Reference WK/202502491 - ASB 19914
Dear Councillor,

I got in touch a few months back regarding a specific parking issue on Housing Department land that had reached a stalemate - the issue has now been resolved, thanks to much hard work, at least for the moment.

As a reminder, I am a leaseholder within Council freehold apartments that are 'largely fine', even with spring blossom surrounding and the sound of nesting wrens to enjoy, that were commissioned some decades ago, with, I'm told, a comprehensive ban on pets.

Nowadays, cats do cause a few problems, including for wildlife, but the dogs are the biggest headache, with a fairly-recent ban on new such pets instituted in the Borough's high-rise apartments (from about 2018).

My own apartment is within a three-storey complex, with, similarly, no private grounds where the dogs may be toileted; many dog-owners agree, including some Council staff, that the situation is entirely unreasonable - Police concede that dogs should not be kept under such circumstances, with public toileting of these pets (even, in my neighbour's case, on the High Street!) a likely breach of common law, whether or not any faeces is retrieved.

Yesterday, though, I had a 'final response' (11th April) from the Housing Department advising me that "we will not investigate complaints which have already been addressed unless specific details are provided of who is responsible for the fouling".

For brevity and for ease of reference, I shall reproduce a few words from my most recent correspondence: "Dear Caroline [Needham - 
Complaints Officer - Housing - The Customers Team]; please confirm that this important issue (of dog-fouling and the current Public Spaces Protection Order) is still under consideration ... please note that a bar on associated indecent behaviour, such as deliberately taking a dog onto the street to perform its toilet, would be very much easier to police than the dog-fouling itself and would dramatically reduce the need for subsequent cleaning of the footways and verges; it is unreasonable for the civilised resident to have to observe the activities of his/her disgusting neighbours and their pets, potentially 24/7, in order to establish just which of them is fouling ... please also note that there are potentially 'extreme hygiene issues' associated with this matter that Healthy Communities should be considering with greater alacrity than they have shown so far!"

Can Housing Department officials, or some others, be persuaded to discuss this critical matter?

Regards,

David Austin,
162 High Street,
Lye  Village,
Stourbridge.

PS: The last time I accosted my neighbour (reported to Council) over his fouling, he said he was 'just on his way indoors to find a bag' - a common riposte!