Dog owner 'baffled' as to why her dog is banned from Pets at Home

Leanne Wright, 32, says she last visited the store in Barrow with her dog Kev around seven months ago.

Kev, an Alaskan Malamute dog, needs to be groomed around twice a year and she returned on February 6 for a trim.

Leanne said: "We've only visited once before. Last time, the groomer was lovely and told me he was 'a good boy' and that they just needed more time with him.

"This time, I was told there were some terms and conditions to go through. I thought this may have been a new policy but then I was told that Kev had actually come with a warning for being aggressive and was actually banned.

"I was then told that last time my brother had to come in to come pick him up. I do have a brother but he's not a dog person at all and I certainly wouldn't be able to get him to come and pick up Kev. I was with my mam last time I came.

"At that point, I was like 'are you sure you have the right dog?' and it was a bit like 'well how many other dogs are named Kev?'

"They then said they'd see if they could still do it but at this point, I didn't like how we were being treated and they just wouldn't entertain the idea that they may have got the wrong dog. 

"I was angry and upset, it didn't get to the grooming as I took Kev back as I didn't feel comfortable. Kev's a large dog and it only takes one bad thing to be said about your dog with there being so much talk around dangerous dogs at the moment."

Leanne said she had since spoken with the manager of the store who was very accommodating however she has tried to escalate her complaint further in order to get the ban removed or for the notes to be investigated.

"I'm a responsible dog owner," Leanne said, "and if they had told me that Kev was aggressive last time I would have done everything I could. None of this information was communicated to me though and there was discussion that there was a possibility that this may have been a mix-up.

"When I've tried to investigate since I was told the notes are 'confidential' but some details I've been told aren't correct - such as my brother coming to pick him up and the fact that Kev wears a collar, he doesn't he wears a harness.

"I just felt they wouldn't look at whether their information was correct and Kev was treated like some kind of thug on a Pub Watch ban or something."

The Mail contacted Pets At Home to try and establish more details of the previous visits including if and when warnings were put in place.

The store maintained that Leanne was told of a warning and confirmed that her deposit was refunded because the groom wasn't completed.

A Pets at Home spokesperson said: "Creating a safe environment for our colleagues, consumers and other pets is of upmost importance to us.

"As mentioned in our terms and conditions, it is within our colleagues’ rights to stop a groom should a dog be showing any signs of aggression, which unfortunately was the case on this occasion, with Kevin attempting to bite our groomer multiple times.

"It is unfortunate that the groom could not go ahead however the deposit has been fully repaid to the owner."