- Cat owner sues SP for £25,000
An independent Cat rescue charity is facing a legal battle after rescuing a cat belonging one David de Vylnel.
Susan Delaney runs a small and independent shelter on Lancaster road in Enfield where she takes in stray and unwanted cats to provide them with new and permanent homes.
That was how she considered the call she received on May 17 about a stray cat wandering near a chicken factory.
The Scratching Post Cat Rescue, a Charity organization located in Enfield has now accused one Victor David de Vynel of blackmail after David demands £25,000 compensation for allegedly stealing his cat.
One of the founders, Susan Delaney alleged that those attempting to scam her organisation are ‘people who profess to be animals lovers’.
Delaney said the shelter did everything possible to trace the cat owner but the chip yielded a false address.
However, David disagreed, alleging that the Rescue could have done a further search to reunite him with his cat, Loki.
According to a post on its Fan Page, SP said “The cat was nervous and afraid – so, therefore, scanning at the location or placing a paper collar was not an option. On arrival to the shelter, he was found to be chipped. We assumed he had been lost some time by the state of him.
Every step was taken to trace an owner.
“There was no email address and posters hung in the area the cat went missing by this heart-broken owner. After two weeks, with no owner found, the cat was rehomed. He went to a lovely place where he was nursed back to health with the guidance and care of a vet.
“
“He had not changed his microchip details when he moved 3 yrs earlier. His microchip had a different name to the social media name. He did not look for his cat until 2 weeks after it went missing. The cat was emaciated it weighed 4.3 kg. It should weigh, at its slimmest 8kg, for its size. It was flea-ridden, had mites, had a dirty coat, ulcerated mouth,” Delaney told The London Post.
Why I Sued SP For £25,000
Meanwhile, David claimed SP stole his cat, rehomed it without due process. He is demanding £25,000 for emotional distress.
Speaking with the London Post on Saturday, David said contrary to SP’s claims that he did not look for Loki, he posted ‘handbills in local houses after about 6 days of its missing’.
He also claimed he chose to send the handbills directly to letterbox as the street was empty due to lockdown restrictions.
David found Loki after he received some tips via Facebook. The concerned individuals were ‘the person who reported strays in the area and the Trapper’, he said.
Defending his £25,000 compensation suit, David said “There is a claim limit set to protect the charity actually. The claim has an attributed value and I felt it was better to seal it rather than leave it open-ended. It’s actually a protection method for SP but has been, somewhat typically, sounds to say that’s what I want.”
He added “It prevents the courts making silly awards. It’s complicated because we want to be either in the Small Claim or Fast Track in County. Claims over 25k go to multi-track and are likely to be referred up to High from County. This would be very bad for SP due to publicity. In keeping it SMall Claims Track or Fast Track, the view was it could be dealt with somewhat quieter. In hindsight, with lack of remorse shown, I’d possibly say that I WANT High Court as it then sets precedence on what other rescues can do.”
The cat owner said he made an effort to resolve the conflict when he established contact with Susan on how to return the cat. He said Susan got offended and stopped further communication, saying she would ‘take the matter under legal advice’.
David’s statement was defending his legal actions, arguing that it was his last resort as even the police have been mediating for the past three months but to no avail.
This has been argued by Susan who said she requested for time to sort this out but was later bamboozled by ‘hate campaigners’ threats.
SP claimed David did not search for his missing cat two weeks after it was rescued, contrary to claims by the cat owner that he had printed handbills.
“I was accused of stealing this cat myself from his garden while he was mowing his lawn. Yes, I guess it is laughable. The story has changed so many times. The owner has now changed it again to claim the cat went missing on 17th March. I’m guessing this is a get-out clause, to cover our proof that the cat was emaciation and filthy, not to mention very neglected.
