Dear Mr Kirkman,

Thank you for your letter of 3 October about the inquest into the death of Lexi Branson.

We take the issue of dangerous dogs very seriously and were saddened to hear of the death of Lexi. The Government has been taking steps to improve responsible ownership of dogs, including increasing the maximum penalties for allowing a dog to be dangerously out of control and extending the scope of the offence of allowing a dog to be dangerously out of control to all places. We have also introduced early intervention measures through the new anti-social behaviour toolkit that will enable local authority officers or the police to issue warning notices to owners, where such behaviour involves a dog.

We realise that these new measures do not fall within the scope of your suggestions to which we have given serious consideration. We understand that re-homing centres need to be aware of any behaviour problems in their dogs. Thousands of dogs are rehomed every year and the vast majority cause no problems for their new owners. Most rehoming centres are responsible and will identify any dogs where the behaviour is a cause for concern or where the owner’s personal circumstances may not suit the dog in question. The problem with trying to apply standards in relation to testing a dog’s behaviour is that it is by no means an exact science. A dog might pass a behaviour test but it would not necessarily be a guarantee that the dog’s behaviour will not be a cause for concern once it is in new surroundings and with a new owner. As I mentioned, most dog re-homing centres take appropriate steps, along the lines you have proposed, to try and prevent such incidents occurring.

The Government is determined to reduce dog attacks and appreciates the comments and suggestions you have made. What would be useful at this stage is for the department to explore with larger recognised dog rehoming organisations such as Dogs Trust, RSPCA, Blue Cross and Battersea Dogs & Cats Home to see whether they would be willing to share their rehoming checks with other smaller rehoming centres.

We will therefore write to the main dog rehoming centres (explaining the recommendations you have made) and explore ways in which best practice in dog rehoming checks can be disseminated to others involved in this activity.

Dear Mr Kirkman Inquest into the Death of Lexi Branson Thank you for sending a copy of your report following the inquest into the death of Lexi Branson. Firstly on behalf of the City Council can we extend the condolences you passed on to Lexi's family at the inquest. You will appreciate that before evidence at the hearing a considerable amount of effort was given to any possibility in which future deaths might be prevented. You will recall that Leicester City Council's only obligation under law is to look after dogs for the first 7 days of being found as a stray. You will recall that a private kennel, Willow Tree of Loughborough, looked after Mulan in order to allow the Council's obligations in law to be met by an external third party contractor. One option which was covered in evidence was simply for dogs to be euthanised on day 8. The four issues you have raised are potentially wider than matters within the remit of Leicester City Council and accordingly in the absence of national standards it is difficult to understand how Leicester City Council could contribute. Even if any national standards were drafted, we can see no way in which any of the usually charitable small organisations could be compelled to agree to those standards if issued as guidance only. The very disparate and varied nature of the sort of bodies which provide that service across the UK, even aside from legal obligations, possibly explains why each different organisation may adopt its own individual rehoming standards. In part this also covers the fourth "concern" you have raised in your report. We can assure you that as part of our investigation into the preparation of this case, various enquiries were made both of a number of different bodies with similar duties, and other organisations such as Dogs Trust, Birmingham Dog Homes and the RSPCA. We can confirm each body approached had some similarities but also some differences in the systems used.

All of the evidence we heard at the inquest would have led anyone to think that Mulan's behaviour was passive. It is perhaps self-evident but worth reiterating that the previous incident and the risk that Mulan's owner perceived after it attacked another dog had not been mentioned when he called us and told the warden (wrongly) that the dog was a stray. Prior details about its history, breed, temperament, reason for being released and any potential for a repeat of that incident might have been helpful to anyone involved in the rehoming process. Without that information, the assessment of the dog can only be based on how it behaved after it was collected. In those circumstances, while of course we understand your concerns, the Council in fact has arguably little or no power in order to prevent such future deaths and can only continue to do its best to ensure that any learning from this tragic case has been conveyed to the current kennel provider acting on its behalf. We do trust that this is of assistance to your enquiries but if we can be of any more assistance at all on this; please do not hesitate to contact me.