Heartbreaking situation at District Dogs - flooding on Rhode Island ave

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the owner thinking? Worth the risk with no apparent bad weather plan in place or changes made inside after the flooding last year when he decided to stay one? And where was the city in it’s oversight? Reckless and irresponsible. Those poor dogs and employees that sound so devoted. Awful.

They put in a flood barrier so clearly it was a known issue. They should have broke the lease and moved.

Have you ever tried breaking a lease?

Would have been cheaper than what’s coming now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the owner thinking? Worth the risk with no apparent bad weather plan in place or changes made inside after the flooding last year when he decided to stay one? And where was the city in it’s oversight? Reckless and irresponsible. Those poor dogs and employees that sound so devoted. Awful.

They put in a flood barrier so clearly it was a known issue. They should have broke the lease and moved.

Have you ever tried breaking a lease?

No, but this building was not safe.

[Anonymous]

It is horrific the owner had both their staff and dogs at risk.

[Anonymous]

For those of you insisting that District Dogs should have just closed the site regardless of cost, are you also the ones recommending daycare for people who have to go back to the office?

My dog goes to a different District Dogs, and it is loads better than the other daycare in our neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is on the Mayor - just like the crime wave in DC.

The executive branch of the District of Columbia should have addressed this manifestly unsafe flooding situation long ago. And given their failure to do so, they should not have allowed this and other businesses to operate in an unsafe area.

This is a heartbreaking situation, and a heartbreaking failure by Mayor Bowser.

The mayor and DC Water have yet to make a statement or acknowledge the situation, no?

Why should the mayor be making a statement on this? These are DOGS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those of you insisting that District Dogs should have just closed the site regardless of cost, are you also the ones recommending daycare for people who have to go back to the office?

My dog goes to a different District Dogs, and it is loads better than the other daycare in our neighborhood

You understand multiple dogs died and the staff were at high risk. Better is not good enough

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you insisting that District Dogs should have just closed the site regardless of cost, are you also the ones recommending daycare for people who have to go back to the office?

My dog goes to a different District Dogs, and it is loads better than the other daycare in our neighborhood

You understand multiple dogs died and the staff were at high risk. Better is not good enough

I understand that it was dangerous. I don't know why you think anyone on the DD side should know as much as a civil engineer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is on the Mayor - just like the crime wave in DC.

The executive branch of the District of Columbia should have addressed this manifestly unsafe flooding situation long ago. And given their failure to do so, they should not have allowed this and other businesses to operate in an unsafe area.

This is a heartbreaking situation, and a heartbreaking failure by Mayor Bowser.

The mayor and DC Water have yet to make a statement or acknowledge the situation, no?

Why should the mayor be making a statement on this? These are DOGS.

First, these were beloved family members to the people who lost them. Many people rely on their dogs for emotional support. Why do you think dogs are brought into nursing homes, disaster areas, schools and hospitals? Because dogs provide therapeutic benefit and many studies support this idea.

Second, the DC government owes an explanation as to why a permit was granted to this business in a flood zone. DC government also owes an explanation for the 911 failure. DC owes and explanation as to why the tunnel project is delayed given the cost. DC taxpayers expect a functioning government. It was completely appropriate for the mayor to be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the owner thinking? Worth the risk with no apparent bad weather plan in place or changes made inside after the flooding last year when he decided to stay one? And where was the city in it’s oversight? Reckless and irresponsible. Those poor dogs and employees that sound so devoted. Awful.

They put in a flood barrier so clearly it was a known issue. They should have broke the lease and moved.

Have you ever tried breaking a lease?

Would have been cheaper than what’s coming now.

DC is one of the few states with no caselaw on whether you can recover for the emotional value of a pet- I think we're about to get some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the owner thinking? Worth the risk with no apparent bad weather plan in place or changes made inside after the flooding last year when he decided to stay one? And where was the city in it’s oversight? Reckless and irresponsible. Those poor dogs and employees that sound so devoted. Awful.

They put in a flood barrier so clearly it was a known issue. They should have broke the lease and moved.

Have you ever tried breaking a lease?

Would have been cheaper than what’s coming now.

Nothing is coming now. The dog owners will have a better outcome suing the city than the District Dogs owner. I know the contract I signed at my dog's daycare says that they are not liable for injury caused at the facility or by other dogs at the facility. Nor are they liable for any illness or death that results from attending the facility.

A dog got pretty badly bitten where I take my dog and they tried to sue. The case was dismissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the owner thinking? Worth the risk with no apparent bad weather plan in place or changes made inside after the flooding last year when he decided to stay one? And where was the city in it’s oversight? Reckless and irresponsible. Those poor dogs and employees that sound so devoted. Awful.

They put in a flood barrier so clearly it was a known issue. They should have broke the lease and moved.

Have you ever tried breaking a lease?

Would have been cheaper than what’s coming now.

Nothing is coming now. The dog owners will have a better outcome suing the city than the District Dogs owner. I know the contract I signed at my dog's daycare says that they are not liable for injury caused at the facility or by other dogs at the facility. Nor are they liable for any illness or death that results from attending the facility.

A dog got pretty badly bitten where I take my dog and they tried to sue. The case was dismissed.

Yep people are getting all worked up about this but there isn’t going to be some huge reckoning or change in case law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is on the Mayor - just like the crime wave in DC.

The executive branch of the District of Columbia should have addressed this manifestly unsafe flooding situation long ago. And given their failure to do so, they should not have allowed this and other businesses to operate in an unsafe area.

This is a heartbreaking situation, and a heartbreaking failure by Mayor Bowser.

The mayor and DC Water have yet to make a statement or acknowledge the situation, no?

Why should the mayor be making a statement on this? These are DOGS.

First, these were beloved family members to the people who lost them. Many people rely on their dogs for emotional support. Why do you think dogs are brought into nursing homes, disaster areas, schools and hospitals? Because dogs provide therapeutic benefit and many studies support this idea.

Second, the DC government owes an explanation as to why a permit was granted to this business in a flood zone. DC government also owes an explanation for the 911 failure. DC owes and explanation as to why the tunnel project is delayed given the cost. DC taxpayers expect a functioning government. It was completely appropriate for the mayor to be there.

Third, these people were trapped because the exit door would not open. Human lives were very much in danger.

[Anonymous]

Oh, the dogs who died were caged.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/weather/severe-weather/dogs-that-died-in-flood-were-in-bottom-kennels/65-ac1cca3f-4b16-449a-9cdf-aa34d4ada4ed#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20D.C.%2C%20DC%20%E2%80%94%20D.C.,they%20discovered%20the%20dead%20canines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, the dogs who died were caged.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/weather/severe-weather/dogs-that-died-in-flood-were-in-bottom-kennels/65-ac1cca3f-4b16-449a-9cdf-aa34d4ada4ed#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20D.C.%2C%20DC%20%E2%80%94%20D.C.,they%20discovered%20the%20dead%20canines.

What a nightmare.

[Anonymous]

F the people responsible for this. I hope they suffer immensely.