Sign up to FREE email alerts from Liverpool Echo - Weekly Politics Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

The RSPCA has called for a probe into a dog rescue centre after a raft of allegations sparked a social media storm.

Merseyside Dogs Home (MDH), based in Halewood, has been accused of keeping dogs in unsanitary, freezing cold conditions where disease is rife - leading one owner to successfully sue the charity for £1,000 in vet's fees.

Volunteers and former staff have also raised concerns about the numbers of physically healthy dogs being put down.

The rescue centre denies any wrong-doing, says it has been subject to an "vicious online campaign", and points out that it passed a local authority audit in December last year.

Their accusers have also highlighted a potential "conflict of interests" between the charity, founded by Bolton man Paul Dunne and his wife, Judith Dunne, and Mr Dunne's private business Animals Wardens Ltd.

(Image: Google)

Animal Wardens is contracted to collect and kennel stray dogs for Liverpool , Knowsley , Sefton and Halton councils and has been accused of using Merseyside Dogs Home for illegal boarding - a claim the charity denies.

A spokeswoman for the RSPCA called for Knowsley Council, as the licensing authority, to investigate the allegations which have exploded on social media within the past week.

The RSPCA told the ECHO: "We would strongly urge the local authority which licenses this facility, and those using services for stray dogs, to look into these claims as they have powers of entry which the RSPCA does not.

"We take allegations of animal suffering very seriously. We cannot investigate historical claims but if anyone has new concerns they can report them to us at 0300 1234999."

"Hate" campaign

Merseyside Dogs Home has strongly rejected the allegations - and says the disturbing claims on social media have already had a negative effect on the number of rescued dogs being adopted.

The charity says 40 dogs were re-homed in January, whereas only seven have been adopted so far this month.

A spokesman for MDH said: "We have become the subject of a vicious online campaign. Of course some people who read the posts and love dogs believe the stories, and we are sorry to be alienated from people whose values we share....

"We are horrified about the mob mentality on social media and the targeting of hate against individuals, we are beginning to fear the safety of those who help the dogs."

"The welfare of the dogs in our care has never been compromised. We were inspected and audited in December and received a high grading."

The centre also indicated that three banks of electric heating have been installed, supported by propane space warmers and portable heaters.

Merseyside Police confirmed the force had received reports of alleged threats towards Mr Dunne and the staff.

A spokesman said: "We can confirm officers are investigating a report of malicious communications were sent to a man from Bolton on social media. A report was received on Friday 8 February that comments had been directed at the man, and a business in Tarbock Green on Facebook.

"Merseyside Police takes social media posts of this nature extremely seriously and any offences identified will be investigated."

Troubling stories and court claims

(Image: Handout)

The ECHO has spoken to former volunteers and owners of dogs adopted from the centre who shared concerns about what they witnessed.

David Cathcart adopted a Patterdale Terrier from MDH in June 2016, and was informed the dog, re-named Ryley, had kennel cough, a common respiratory infection in rescue centres.

However when David and his daughter, Melissa, returned home they found Ryley had pneumonia, a perforated trachea due to the hacking cough and after struggling to rouse her one morning rushed her to the vets.

Ryley ended up spending four nights on strong antibiotics before she was allowed home, racking up vets fees of £1,026.

A letter from Mr Dunne stated he "could not justify" spending charity funds contributing to the vet's fees, but Mr Cathcart took the case to St Helens County Court where a Deputy District Judge ruled in his favour.

Sharon Lewis, from Liverpool city centre, said she adopted a Staffie called Cindy from the dogs home in December 2017 - only to end up forking out more than £1,000 in vet's fees.

She said: "I went to see her on December 5, 2017. She was pretty skinny and I noticed she had got three lumps on different parts of her body.

"They said 'we will show that to the vet', and also mentioned she had kennel cough. On the 8th December I brought her home.

"She was just really subdued. She still had kennel cough in January so I took her to the University of Liverpool vets in Cromwell Street.

"It turned out she had three cancerous tumours. My Pet Plan insurance didn't cover it as it was a pre-existing condition at the Rescue Centre so I had to pay out over £1,000 for surgery.

"I sent numerous emails to the rescue centre and they didn't reply."

Ms Lewis said she eventually received a letter from Mr Dunne denying that the home was liable for any vets bills.

An MDH spokesman told the ECHO: "There is always a level of risk when adopting an abandoned dog. It is common for dogs to be abandoned because their owners have discovered they unwell, and they cannot afford to pay for the correct veterinary care.

"Since MDH receives the dogs as strays this information never makes it to us. Our vet visits weekly and every dog received a comprehensive health check before being cleared for rehoming. The vet can only address the dog’s symptoms present at the time. We conduct extensive tests when the vet suspects a reason to do so....

"Mistakes were made with David Cathcart in 2016. We were a new charity, doing the work on Merseyside no one else would do. We addressed the flaws in our process and procedures and sincerely apologised to him."

Dogs 'disappear'

Volunteers who had spent time at the centre told the ECHO healthy dogs would "disappear" without explanation and were later found to have been put down.

One volunteer, Nicola Brightman from Widnes, told the ECHO she had been led to believe that MDH was a "no-kill" dogs home.

She said: "We were told it was a no-kill rescue, that's why we helped out. But maybe a couple of weeks in we started to notice a lot of dogs were going missing.

"They were getting paired up without being assessed; a lot of the dogs were hungry, dirty and smelly and their nails were very long.

"When we walked the dogs, we would be asked by staff at the centre if they had pulled on the lead. We found out that if we said a dog had pulled too hard, it would be put on the van to go to (another home).

"On one occasion we arrived to walk the dogs, and we saw the dog warden van pull up at the kennels. We saw three dogs taken out of the van, and led to the back of the kennels. They were put straight in to kennels with other dogs in.

"We then took our allotted dogs for a walk. When we got back from the walk, there was an awful sound, and members of staff ran towards the back of the kennels. They brought out two dogs covered in blood.

Follow reporter Jonathan Humphries on social media Do you have a story or tip-off? You can get in touch, in complete confidence if necessary, below: Follow Jonathan, or drop him a direct message, on Twitter here and on Facebook here You can read more of his stories here Email him on jonathan.humphries@reachplc.com Keep up to date with the latest breaking news here Like the ECHO Facebook page and follow @livechonews on Twitter

"One of the staff said: 'These two s**** have been fighting'. The dogs were tied up in the vet room, while we were quickly given some other dogs to walk. When we came back, around two hours later, both dogs were still tied up in the vet room, both covered in blood.

"One had a ripped ear, which was dripping blood. One of the senior staff said: 'They can stay there now, as they are going to another rescue'. I asked which rescue they would go to, but got no answer."

But MDH maintains "it does not kill healthy dogs" and said last year 22 were put down to "alleviate their suffering".

A spokesman said: "We do not kill healthy dogs, a position we maintain but neither will we keep alive a dog that is suffering. Under the five welfare needs an animal should be allowed to express normal behaviour; dogs are companion animals and should be capable of engaging to enjoy companionship.

"They are suffering if they are unable to do so. We also must consider the safely of potential adopters and the public. Merseyside is the dog bite capital of the UK.

"Rescue organisations across the UK (and the rest of the world) who are dealing with the effects of poor dog ownership frequently have to make very difficult decisions, but never without very careful consideration and always with the best interests of the dog at heart."

'There were no signs of aggression'

Another volunteer, who wished to remain anonymous, described how she noticed other "healthy dogs" going missing.

She said: "I used to look after a little Staffie.She was about 18 months old. I had been out with another dog and came to get her out, but someone said 'she's gone'.

"I said, 'oh, has she got a home?' but they said she had been sent to be put to sleep. They said she was a bit of a puller on the lead. I could not deal with that on the day because I was so upset but I gave it a week and went to ask Paul Dunne about it.

"He said: 'she's better off, she was full of anxiety'. From this point I knew that dogs were getting put to sleep."

Video Loading Video Unavailable Click to play Tap to play The video will start in 8 Cancel Play now

The volunteer said she was heartbroken when a bulldog named American Cream was put to sleep.

She said: "He was my favourite dog and the one I would always get out first to walk. His picture was put up on the website and used for an adoption album. However they said he was showing signs of aggression. There were no signs of aggression."

She said a friend had offered to take on American Cream but Merseyside Dogs Home refused to allow her to leave.

Another volunteer, who was experienced with dogs, said kennels were only cleaned with a hose pipe even when sick dogs had been suffering with diarrhoea.

He said: "On one occasion I was using some disinfectant in the kennel and someone said 'what are you doing?' I said 'the dog has had diarrhoea' and they told me to just swill it out with a hose."

A Facebook Page aiming to investigate the issue, Stray Dogs Law UK , has been inundated with similar stories.

Merseyside Dogs Home said its staff were "devastated" about American Cream and placed a four-page report on her kennel for staff and volunteers explaining the reasons for "having to let her go".

'Many dogs were put to sleep'

The rescue centre has also attracted the attention of the Charity Commission, which regulates the voluntary sector, after complaints from members of the public.

By law, all stray dogs must be housed in a licensed boarding kennels for seven days after they are collected before which the local authority can "gift" them to a rescue centre or other organisation who can take care of them.

In Merseyside and Halton, strays are gifted to Animal Wardens Ltd who in turn gift them to Merseyside Dogs Home for re-homing.

Most rescue centres, including MDH, do not have boarding licences and are not permitted to hold stray dogs during the statutory seven day period.

Video Loading Video Unavailable Click to play Tap to play The video will start in 8 Cancel Play now

However volunteers and former staff members have claimed dogs remained in MDH for the entire week - a claim denied by Mr Dunne.

One ex-staff member, who wished to remain anonymous, said: "Stray dogs would be brought in by the dog warden and kept there for up to seven days. If there wasn't enough space, they would be sent to [Manchester].

"If dogs weren't reclaimed after seven days, they would either be put to sleep or put up for rehoming. Many dogs were put to sleep."

'Conflict of interests'

Both Mr Dunne and the four councils say strays are taken to MDH as a drop-off point for "assessment" before being taken to Manchester.

It remains unclear whether rescue centres need to be licensed to "assess" dogs.

The ECHO asked whether MDH categorically denies that strays are kennelled at the premises during the seven day period.

Mr Dunne said: "There is an arrangement with the Local Authorities for [strays] to be brought here and kept here for a short time. It is common practice across the country for rescues to take in stray dogs without holding a licence.

"There are those who say that this should require a license but that is not the regular interpretation of the legislation. No rescue has ever been prosecuted for this minority point of view.

"This does not mean that we escape inspection. As part of the stray dog service we are inspected by the local authority, the audit conducted in December 2018 rated our compliance with legislation at the highest grade possible."

Video Loading Video Unavailable Click to play Tap to play The video will start in 8 Cancel Play now

Mr Dunne said Merseyside Dogs Home receives money from Animal Wardens Ltd for the "assessment" service - amounting to £44,000 in 2016/17 and denies housing strays at the centre as part of a private contract amounts to a conflict of interests.

However a spokeswoman for the Charity Commission said: "The public rightly expect trustees to be driven by their charitable mission and purpose in everything they do. That includes ensuring any conflicts of interest are appropriately managed.

"We are aware of concerns regarding the Merseyside Dogs Home and we will be engaging with the charity to establish our next regulatory steps."

A joint statement from Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton and Halton councils said they were not concerned with any potential conflict of interests.

A spokeswoman said: "As the legal owners of the dogs, [MDH] do not require a licence to kennel the animals at the rehoming centre but must comply with animal welfare legislation.

"The councils are fully aware of the relationship between Animal Wardens Ltd and Merseyside Dogs Home - the nature of the ownership and "The councils are fully aware of the relationship between Animal Wardens Ltd and Merseyside Dogs Home - the nature of the ownership and governance is transparent and declared to the appropriate authorities. The councils consider that this arrangement provides the best opportunity for stray dogs to be rehomed with a new family when their original owners cannot be found.

"The councils take any allegations concerning animal welfare and any unlawful boarding of strays very seriously and if we receive such allegations, we will investigate accordingly.

"To date, we have received no reports which could be substantiated. We would urge anyone with information about the unlawful kennelling of dogs to contact us direct so that we can investigate."

When asked what oversight is give to the arrangement, the councils said: "The contract requires that robust records are kept about the seizure of each animal. This paperwork is submitted to the consortium members for review.

"An audit was carried out by the consortium in November 2018 to look into the way the contract is being operated and did not find any significant concerns. The audit report stated: 'The contractor is complying with the majority of the conditions and service requirements detailed in the contract.'

Knowsley Council accepted it had not performed any investigation as a result of the allegations, adding: "Knowsley Council has not received any specific information to substantiate the allegations circulating on social media but would look into any reports should they be received."