With your help we got pet theft reform on the political agenda, now it's time to get microchips working to reunite missing pets!
Write to, or email, your local MP: The Pet Theft debate continues to support all microchipped pets.
This template letter is asking for your MP to support #MakeChipsCount and get the microchip to help all missing pets, not just strays.
It’s really easy to write to or email your MP and your help will go a long way: here’s what to do:-
To find your MP, enter your postcode and hit next to find their constituents address and email address.
Just click on this link:- http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/
My name:
My address:
My postcode:
Subject: Make Microchips Count to reunite all missing pets!
Dear ____MP,
As a constituent of yours, I would like raise the issue of flaws in the compulsory dog and cat microchipping regulations, which are preventing pets from being reunited with their rightful families, this is not only letting down pet owners but also the new Pet Abduction Act, which was made law on 24th August 2024.
As I’m sure you are aware, it is compulsory for all puppies to be microchipped at 8 weeks old and kittens before they reach the age of 20 weeks.
Many Defra documents for the Government as well as rescues, animal businesses and authorities praise the microchip as the way to be reunited with your lost or stolen pet but microchip registrations much be checked for them to work the way they were intended to work.
Pets will only be reunited if there is the will to do so, by supporting the microchip system and the public, who have been led to believe a microchip will reunite them with their lost or stolen pet.
There are many pitfalls and complications in the present microchip regulations and the way it is portrayed. The microchip databases themselves have caused a lot of distress, with missing registrations, not offering 24/7 GDPR service to update contact information, when time is of the essence! There is no advice about how to get your pet back if someone tries to transfer your pet’s registration.
Defra, under the previous Government, were working on a number of improvements to help check microchip registrations quickly and easily byway of a centralised point of access for the veterinary profession, animal warens, Police and rescues, to speed up reunifications, saving time on having to check 23 independent microchip databases.
A big and growing problem now is the number of unregistered microchips, mainly caused by the lack of information for pet owners and the noncompliant database, which stands at the top of Google search: ‘PetChip Info or PetChip Network’. We have been informed that there are 2 1/2 million UK dogs and cats registered with them. They trick customers into paying for what is an unregistered microchip. I believe, as many do, that if the veterinary profession got behind microchipping to reunite pets, they could help pet owners to understand why and how to update their own contact information and to make sure they are on a UK database that meets Government standards. The consequences of an unregistered microchip are devastating as after 7 days a dog legally becomes the property of the rescue and they will be rehomed and if there are any health complications, they can be put to sleep and a finder can register the lost pet, which is showing as unregistered, in their own name, meaning the family searching for their missing pet will never be reunited.
I hope that I can rely on your support on Compulsory Microchip checking. There have been campaigns since 2006: Vets Get Scanning, Scan Me, and most recently with the #FernsLaw campaign and petition to “Make it compulsory to check microchip registration to reunite sold on stolen dogs and cats”, which was debated in Parliament on the 28th June 2021: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300010
Defra also had a public survey on microchipping and asked the question about the need to make checking microchips a legal obligation to support the compulsory microchipping regulations. The update from the Government on the Cat and Dog Scanning and Microchipping consultation was very positive: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/cat-and-dog-microchipping-and-scanning-in-england/outcome/summary-of-responses-and-government-response
99% (10,749) of responses agreed that it should be compulsory for vets to scan cats and dogs upon first presentation.
83% (8,987) considered that a legal obligation should be imposed to ensure that cats and dogs are scanned at first presentation.
As there is a legal obligation to microchip our dogs and cats, then there should be a legal obligation to check microchip registration at veterinary first treatment, rescues to cross check microchip registration on surrendered pets and authorities to check all seized dogs, microchip registration. It’s the only chance a missing dog or cat will have to get home.
I have microchipped my dog with the expectation to be reunited should they be lost or stolen and feel extremely let down by the loophole created by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) and British Veterinary Association (BVA) and their best practice recommendations.
Can you please assure me that you will investigate and support Defra’s work on updating the present microchip system to protect dog and cat owners like myself by creating the centralised point of accesss for microchip registrations, making it easier for animal authorities to reunite missing pets and making it compulsory for the veterinary profession eg: vet nurses or receptionists, to check pets microchip registration at first treatment.
This has dragged on for too many years and needs to be addressed as we have been sold a system not fit for purpose. There are thousands of missing microchipped dogs out there, just check DogLost.co.uk
A microchip only works if the registration is checked and the contact information is correct.
I look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Feel free to use the template letter including your own feelings and/or experience of your missing or stolen dog, cat, horse or any other pet and include a poster.
MPs are far more likely to reply if they receive personal correspondence from you and don’t forget to ask family, friends and neighbours to write in, as the more letters they receive on one topic pushes the issue to the top of the pile.
Thank you
SAMPA
Prefer to tweet? You can use the example below, getting your MPs Twitter address from http://tweetyourmp.com/
Sample tweet:
Please support #PetTheftReform [@MPname] as my MP, please join @sampauk_ @Dr_Dan_1 in this fact based campaign to protect our dogs and cats 🐾
MP's are replying with a standard copy and paste email:
Response to the response:-
As promised here is a template that you can use to respond to the response that you have received from your MP. You are more than welcome to personalise it to suit your case.
Good Luck and let us know his/her answer.
Dear
Thank you for your response
I accept that the theft of a pet is already a criminal offence under Theft Act 1968 and the maximum penalty is seven years imprisonment but the fact is that this is totally misleading as in the debate in July, 2018, the Rt Hon George Eustice, the then Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food said “ applying our interpretation of the most recent guidance, a seven-year maximum penalty is largely theoretical for pet theft unless there are other aggravating circumstances.”
In the same debate the Minister said “Our reading of the current guidance, which was issued in 2016, is that in applying that guidance, the theft of a pet should be considered as either a category two or a category three offence. The custodial sentence is two years for a category two offence and one year for a category three.” Because the financial worth of most pets including dogs is less than £500 then most thefts will fall into category three and with mitigation, this ends up as no more than a slap on the wrist. The worth of a domesticated sentient being should not be based on a financial one so allowing the courts to impose greater sentences.
Since the introduction of Theft Act 1968 much has changed including the lifestyle of pets and their relationship with us humans yet the law bundles it in with laptops, etc while still continuing to separately classify bicycles and motor vehicles.
In the latest Zoom Conference in July held by the Petitions Committee following the petition in 2019, Mr John Cooper, QC said “It’s not a particularly revolutionary thought or proposal to say that the Theft Act should be amended to specifically refer to theft of a pet. And by doing that, it gives it a unique category upon which the Courts then can bite, for want of a better expression, and sentence, so that the theft of a pet, which is far more significant potentially than many other aspects of theft so that it’s a wholly unique category which enables the court to focus closely upon the sentencing parameter rather than it being morphed as it presently is.”
I would ask that you take a few moments of your precious time to read the transcript of that conference: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/1511/documents/13808/default/?fbclid=IwAR04f63YEu8vCce1ye9VQejcn5-hJEvJRIBrJtrhWtDfWxUdTrP405Y2IZc
With the new legislation on breeding and the escalating prices of puppies together with lockdown, dog theft is on the increase and there is never a better moment for the law to be amended and for this I ask that you reconsider your support and help to prevent further misery and heartache.
Regarding your point about microchipping unfortunately due to the inability of the numerous databases to work together and the lack of compulsory scanning the much need reunifications are not taking place and the need for change is demonstrated by the FernsLaw petition.
I thank you for your time and look forward to a positive response.
Yours sincerely,
OTHER INFORMATION:-
SAMPA set out two routes to reform, amending the Theft Act is the preferred and easiest option:-
One is to revise sentencing guidelines in the Theft Act 1968 to ‘reclassify the theft of a pet to a specific crime in its own right’, including a simple ‘domestic pet’ definition.
The second route is to ‘amend animal welfare law to make pet theft a specific offence’ through the Animal Welfare Act 2006. This would ensure courts consider the fear, alarm or distress to sentient animals rather than their monetary value.
Dr Daniel Allen, Animal Geographer at Keele University and SAMPA patron has explained why we need Pet Theft Reform:
Dog theft on the rise: how in danger is your pet and what can be done about it?:
https://theconversation.com/dog-theft-on-the-rise-how-in-danger-is-your-pet-and-what-can-be-done-about-it-125010
Spatialities of Dog Theft: A Critical Perspective:
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/9/5/209
Compulsory cat microchipping is great in theory – but the system is flawed:
https://reaction.life/compulsory-cat-microchipping-is-great-in-theory-but-the-system-is-flawed/
Time for some MYTH BUSTING!
SIGN https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300071
CLAIM:
UK Government – ‘The theft of a pet is already a criminal offence under the Theft Act 1968 and the maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment and so there is no need to introduce a separate offence.’
LAW:
CPS: – ‘Theft is triable either-way with a maximum penalty in the Crown Court of seven years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine and in the magistrates’ court, six months imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.’ – CPS
REALITY:
Pet Theft Reform – Only Crown Court can deliver sentences in excess of 6 months. For a case of theft to be heard before the Crown Court, the cases are either a) secondary offences, so tagged on to Burglary; b) repeat offenders or c) major offences of a value over £100,000. This is where the assumed monetary value of the pet becomes relevant.
As the sentencing guidelines currently stand, it will be impossible to secure a custodial sentence for most pet thefts because of the benchmark value of £500. Reality is, a custodial sentence is unlikely to apply unless it is a secondary offence used to justify and bolster a harsh primary sentence.
