FOI 224/25 Seized Dogs & Kennel Costs
Enquiry Reference: 224 -25
I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request. Below is your request and our response.
- Please provide the number of S1 dogs you seized between February and September 2024.
- a) 25
- Please provide the number of dogs you kennelled in each month between February 2024 to September 2024.
|
Feb-24 |
10 |
|
Mar-24 |
8 |
|
Apr-25 |
5 |
|
May-24 |
6 |
|
Jun-24 |
15 |
|
Jul-24 |
11 |
|
Aug-24 |
9 |
|
Sep-24 |
7 |
The NPCC has also revealed that it can cost up to £1,000 per month to kennel a dog.
- Please provide the total amount you spent kennelling dogs in each month between February 2024 to September 2024.
|
Feb-24 |
13539 |
|
Mar-24 |
17873.71 |
|
Apr-25 |
14149.71 |
|
May-24 |
12140 |
|
Jun-24 |
11800 |
|
Jul-24 |
14305 |
|
Aug-24 |
15845 |
|
Sep-24 |
18718 |
- Please provide the total amounts you spent on (i) food and (ii) care in respect of kennelled dogs in each month between February 2024 and September 2024.
- a) See above this cost will be included in the above.
- Please provide the names of all businesses/organisations you used to kennel dogs between February 2024 and September 2024.
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held. Where exemptions are relied upon, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act requires that I provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) state (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
Cleveland Police can confirm it holds information relevant to your request as the duty in Section 1(1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 31(1)(a) & (b) Law Enforcement.
Section 38(1)(b) Health & Safety
Sections 31 & 38 are prejudice based qualified exemptions and there is a requirement to articulate the harm that would be caused in confirming or not that the information is held as well as carrying out a public interest test.
Factors favouring Disclosure:
The purpose of the Act is to make public authorities more accountable, and the public interest will favour disclosure, where the authority has not fulfilled its function. It can be argued that the public have a right to know the where public money is being spent.
Factors favouring Non-Disclosure:
To release information that Cleveland Police holds could compromise law enforcement operations which would lead to a hindrance on the Police Force’s ability to prevent and detect crimes. Animal welfare is an emotive issue and releasing this information could lead to individuals attending the establishment to cause a nuisance or harm.
Balancing Test:
The ability to deliver effective law enforcement is of paramount importance to the Police Service. Releasing this information could compromise law enforcement. As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced the public interest will favour non-disclosure when individuals or third-party interests might be jeopardised by release of information. Release of the information could cause significant risk to the staff at the kennels health and safety therefore the balance falls in favour of non-disclosure.
In accordance with Section 17(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this notification acts as a Refusal Notice to this section of your request.
Having made enquiries within the Force above is all the information we hold. Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to constant change/updates.
The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.
If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice
Yours sincerely
Information Rights Decision Maker