[Gregoz]

Can anyone cast a light on a possible predicament that could happen?
What would the case be from a legal perspective if I were to loan my boar out or put any of my pigs in another’s care and during this time they were Ill treated and not looked after properly?
Would the person looking after them temporarily be responsible or you as the registered keeper?

[harmony]

That is a good question and I am interested to know the legal answer.


I wouldn't loan anything without a home visit.

[Gregoz]

No neither would I but all things could happen or not happen even if the initial home visit appears ok
I really hope someone can answer this

[harmony]

There is ill treatment and then there is the accident/death that might occur. Which could have happened at yours or theirs.


If a I borrowed equipment or loaned it I would expect to return it or have it back in the same condition. Same with an animal. You could draw up an agreement but there is always going to be the one who wont pay, can't pay.


The easiest thing is not to loan, especially anything of value both in terms of money but also replacement or not being able to use it yourself for the purpose you have it.


Could the sows come to you?

[Gregoz]

Thanks Harmony

I really want an answer to the specific question; who is ultimately responsible for the well-being of a pig when it is loaned out to another, the owner or the person looking after the pig?

[pharnorth]

The Animal Welfare act 2006 refers to owners and keepers so the simple answer to,your question is both. But I think only a lawyer can reliably answer your question as it then becomes subject to case law. And 'ultimately responsible' will be based on circumstances. Ill treatment that is deliberate may be easier to assign responsibility than ill treatment through ignorance.  For example if Farmer  A let keeper B take his pig without any consideration of how and where it was being kept both would be responsible. If Farmer A had a clear written agreement that keeper B ignored, then the keeper may be held fully responsible. More likely Farmer A has a verbal agreement, that is harder to prove, but is still valid.

Morally, the person who best understands the situation but does nothing is most responsible.

[Marches Farmer]

Are pigs different to sheep, legally?  If sheep are wintered away on tack, for example, the keeper is responsible for their day-to-day care. 

[pharnorth]

No. It is the same for both. But as the owner you are still obliged to make sure your expectation that the welfare would be properly managed is reasonable. E.g you don't deliberately send them on tack to so,some you know to have welfare issues. So the keeper is most likely to be prosecuted but the owner may or may not also be held responsible.

[oaklandspigs]

Animal welfare Act 2006 section 3 states


Responsibility for animals
.

(1)In this Act, references to a person responsible for an animal are to a person responsible for an animal whether on a permanent or temporary basis.
.

(2)In this Act, references to being responsible for an animal include being in charge of it.
.

(3)For the purposes of this Act, a person who owns an animal shall always be regarded as being a person who is responsible for it.
.

(4)For the purposes of this Act, a person shall be treated as responsible for any animal for which a person under the age of 16 years of whom he has actual care and control is responsible.


so yes both you as owner and the person in charge - ie the person you loaned it to.

You may also want to read the new draft Code of Practice for the Welfare of Pigs

https://consult.defra.gov.uk/animal-health-and-welfare/consultation-on-pig-a-draft-code-of-practice/supporting_documents/Consultation%20draft%20pig%20code.pdf


 which states


‘owner’ or ‘keeper’ (*) is defined “any natural or legal person or persons responsible for or in charge of animals whether on a permanent or temporary basis.”

[landroverroy]

In many cases the technical legality of a situation is fairly irrelevant, particularly where livestock are involved.
What exactly are you worried about? That your boar/pigs  come back in a terrible state  - skin and bones, hobbling on 3 legs and full of worms and lice, and that the RSPCA take you to court as the owner and not the person who has borrowed him or was looking after them?
Or are you worried that the animals come back in a similar state and you want to be able to to sue the person who was keeping/looking after them?
Either way, surely the important thing is that you wouldn't let an animal of yours go to anyone unless you were absolutely sure in your own mind that he was going to be well looked after. Liability doesn't really come into it, but common sense does. Whatever the law says, if you've taken all obvious precautions to ensure his proper care , then there's no way you can be taken to court for ill treatment obviously caused by another person.
If you're worried what comeback you would have if the boar/pigs were returned in a poor condition- then in reality - very little, unless the keeper agreed to pay you compensation, which is unlikely. So you would then have to take them to court, get a vet's report, prove the boar/pigs were fit and healthy when they left you (which  the lender could deny) So would you really bother?


So basically if all these things are of concern to you, then is it worth the risk? The legal system does not work as a sort of insurance to guarantee responsibility, it's really down to commonsense.

[honeyend]

Its common to loan out horses. You need a loan agreement, which covers just about everything, vets, feed, who registers them if they are pedigree. I would also set a value on the pig and perhaps even take a substantial deposit in relation to its value.

[pharnorth]

Well I hope [member=132918]Gregoz[/member] that if something unfortunate has sparked the question it is sorted to you and the pigs satisfaction. Sometimes stuff is more obvious with hindsight or just not predictable.

[landroverroy]

Its common to loan out horses. You need a loan agreement, which covers just about everything, vets, feed, who registers them if they are pedigree. I would also set a value on the pig and perhaps even take a substantial deposit in relation to its value.

Definitely a good suggestion to take a substantial deposit. It would certainly concentrate  the mind of the borrower as to what exactly is expected. A loan agreement, although also detailing expectations, is very difficult to enforce if the borrower just walks away and denies everything.

[honeyend]

 I agree that a loan agreement is difficult to enforce, but it is signed by the person loaning. Usually you talk though its contents and often at that stage they pull out. If you end up taking them to Small Claims Court for expenses, vets fee etc, its in black and white what they agreed to. It sorts the wheat from the chaff.
  I have agreements for everything, lodger, renter etc. No one can say they were not aware of the terms of the agreement.

[LeeHambone]

Hi,
Are you asking from the perspective of who is legally liable to prosecution if the animals are neglected whilst in someone else's care, or if there were a dispute between you and career who would be responsible?

Lee