A pair of dog trainers who had claimed their firm provided dog training services for a host of celebrities, including Bruce Forsyth, have been banned from owning dogs after it emerged they had falsified their association with the high profile stars and allowed a dog in their care to be 'seriously injured for financial gain'.
Grant Chanin was prohibited for looking after animals for 10 years along with his partner, Laura Kahane who received a 12-month ban.
They both admitted responsibility for breaking the leg of a a German Shepherd puppy called Kim during one of their training classes in Farnborough.
RSPCA, prosecuting, said "Chanin pushed Kim to the floor and spread her entire body weight across her whole body during the class in June 2009."
Chanin also admitted six additional animal cruelty charges.
Incredibly, defence lawyer Granville Rooley cited how there was"an awful lot of people who are extremely pleased with the service they received and the training that their dogs got."
Philip Gillibrand, District judge, said Chanin's actions were‘disgraceful and totally’ inappropriate behaviour, including choking one dog ‘to the last breath’.
Chanin was sentenced to just 8 weeks in prison. Kahane was given a 12-month community order for her role in the abuse and must also complete 80 hours of community service.
The pair also told the judge that they would take down their their Evolution Dog Services Ltd website within a week.
RSPCA, prosecuting, said "Chanin pushed Kim to the floor and spread her entire body weight across her whole body during the class in June 2009."
Chanin also admitted six additional animal cruelty charges.
Incredibly, defence lawyer Granville Rooley cited how there was"an awful lot of people who are extremely pleased with the service they received and the training that their dogs got."
Philip Gillibrand, District judge, said Chanin's actions were‘disgraceful and totally’ inappropriate behaviour, including choking one dog ‘to the last breath’.
Chanin was sentenced to just 8 weeks in prison. Kahane was given a 12-month community order for her role in the abuse and must also complete 80 hours of community service.
The pair also told the judge that they would take down their their Evolution Dog Services Ltd website within a week.
Get Our Best Dog Magazine Articles
Enter your email address below and never miss out on our very best dog content
Enter your email address below and never miss out on our very best dog content
This is why dog training needs to be licenced, anyone can set up a dog training school without any qualifications at all, I could go and hire a hall tomorrow? I personally feel I could offer alot to other owners, having taken on rescues with fear aggression and food aggression etc, but that is all I could offer is adviced that worked for me, not a fix it all for every different problem, and although I could also do basic training, which I ensure all my puppies leave with, such as sit down and come, not all dogs going to a training school are puppies, some are dogs with serious problems and need proffesional help. Training schools need to be regulated and only be run by people with professional knowledge, not people out to make money, which is what is happening! I went to a local training centre and while out walking my dogs between classes, I saw one of the instructors hit her dogs, she didn’t realise I was there, I certainly haven’t been back since, as violence does does not make an obedient dog only love, time and patience works, and that is with both puppies and rescues! These training schools should be run by professionals, and be regulated, where assessors check up on them regually, as even people with qualifications aren’t always the best people to be teaching others as it is easy to fool someone that you know what you are doing then when on your own act totally differently, how many wife beaters seem like butter wouldn’t melt, same with some dog breeders and trainers, act all nice when needed, then not so nice to the dogs when authority isn’t about?
Hi there,
I do not at all wish to cause controversy or aggravation by way of responding to this article in a comment. I purely wish to state a few facts of the case. Without this I feel I will never have the opportunity to tell people how facts can be skewed and information dictated incorrectly. I too am strongly pro-regulation for this industry and believe that it cannot come soon enough. I am Laura Kahane, a co-defendant in the case above. I’m 23 and have have numerous qualifications in Animal Management, behaviour and training. I had to plead guilty to the offense where sadly a dogs leg was fractured in the obedience class incident. You’ll understand, obviously I have to be careful about what I do and don’t say here for legal matters. I had known my business partner Grant for just a matter of months and was just a trainee of his at the time, approx 8 meters away. The media fails to report that the dog was uncontrolled, and bit Grant, the instructor with 30 years of professional experience, causing him to push her away immediately. There had also been several other issues surrounding the safety/control of the dog running up to the incident, however we were eager to help the owners progress. Although I did not fully witness the incident, as was my view was partially blocked/I was taking notes, we both intensely regret what happened that day and would like to apologies profusely to all impacted, especially for the welfare of the dog involved. It seems no amount of disclaimers, or organization can prevent some accidents occurring and the law does no make provisions for this either. I’ve spent 10 years achieving a varying of valuable experience, working full-time whilst studying part-time in this sector, just ensure I was well ahead of my peers and exceptionally employable. I have never been involved in, nor wished to harm any animal, considering this is my primary passion, vocation and dedicated career path. Before this event, like so many professionals, I was unaware of the ‘language of law and legislation. I was purely prosecuted on the basis that I was a present, co-director and therefore by law equally responsible as my business partner. Not being involved in the action, participation, prevention of such an incident is irrelevant. I think many would be surprised at the amount of professionals with convictions that weren’t involved in an incident, but deemed responsible….and left unemployable due to a conviction which rules them of the their industry. It would be unfair for me to speak on behalf of my ex-business partner, however the judge did acknowledge doubt regarding the minimal evidence on which the other offenses were based. I was also fully unaware of my business partner’s lack of claimed credentials and trusted them purely through seeing evidence of practical training skills and the fact that I he was 26 years my elder. In my opinion, sometimes, when others club together (those that are not dog owners/clients) are involved with intent to ‘bring down’ it is less risky to risk pleading guilty…despite the strength evidence/your statement. I don’t consider that my compassion and love for conserving all species could ever be any more appropriate, but I for one have lost faith in system for now. I am however, committed to continuing a successful career, despite experiencing manipulative maliciousness of others along the way. I personally, should never have been offered a directorship in a business, within such a competitive industry, so young. A single conviction for such an offense pretty much rules me out of my career for a minimum of 5 years, amongst various other limitations as it’s regarded as a ‘violent or mistreatment of the vulnerable’ act. I followed someone I trusted and could clearly see had lengthy practical experience. I never witnessed any maltreatment of an animal and would certainly would not have continued if I had. One accident, occurred here and I believe all of this type of incident could be prevented with the introduction of both full industry regulation and also perhaps…dog ownership licensing in some circumstances. I personally would love to aid bring about these changes and also help prevent innocent, compassionate professionals career’s being ruined/protecting the overall welfare of dogs during training. May I ad the co-defendant received a suspended sentence. I truly hope this comment won’t aggravate anyone, my intent is purely to inform any readers of the facts that the papers won’t report, risks ad to deliver a another side to a argument that many professionals will understand. I’ve strong opinions in full support of positive-reinforcement, reward-based training techniques and and agree with all that campaign for positive change within this industry.
Laura,
I’m afraid you are delusional. You pleaded guilty, you were found guilty. Justice was served and after two years, it was a long time coming.
Please don’t expect people to forget that and absolve you from any responsibility. You were there, you are old enough to know right from wrong. There were many counts of cruelty against you, not just the breaking of the GSD’s leg. I personally know the dog, it is NOT aggressive at all. I have seen how Grant handled dogs (so cannot begin to imagine what he did to them in private) and if you saw that too, please do not expect anyone to believe that you did not know it was an act of cruelty!
Your qualifications (when you a grieve them) are a farce. How can you preport to have a certificate in animal care when you face a conviction for animal cruelty?!
Your post is full of contradictions and it is clear you have no remorse what so ever. Shame on you!
Shame on you both.You both know what you did over a period of years was wrong and still carried on and as far as i am concerned,the sentance should have been a life ban on you both from going anywhere near any animals whatsoever!
As far as i am aware the GSD was still a puppy and was in no way aggressive nor the poor dog that was nearly chocked to its last breath , in both your care in a class situation.In no way ever would any PROFESSIONAL dog trainer EVER use BARBARIC training such as this, as far as i am concerned you were there and saw and are just as bad if not worse for not stopping this or REPORTING this.
As far as i am aware you are both still together so, this can not affect you like you say it does, i just feel so dreadfully sorry for any animal that comes in to your care again and i hope that never happens!!!!!!
To hurt a dog or any animal is unacceptable at every level,shame on you!!!!
Evidence of continued activity from Companies House : EVOLUTION DOG SERVICES LTD
REGISTERED OFFICE CHANGED ON 22/12/2011 FROM
1 NETHERHOUSE COURT
NETHERHOUSE MOOR CHURCH CROOKHAM
FLEET
HAMPSHIRE
GU51 5TS
UNITED KINGDOM
TO 25 WHITMORE GREEN
FARNHAM
SURREY
UNITED KINGDOM
GU9 9AF