I am currently in conflict with my Body Corporate in a home I own, regarding their attempts to muzzle my well trained, non reactive, timid and mildly anxious Therapy dog (in training) because of “the perception of his breed (German Shepherd)”. They believe a muzzle is required enable me to pass 2 empty apartments and a lift from lvl1 to ground. There are currently 10+ other smaller dogs already in the complex who do not require a muzzle. This Condition only applies to my dog specifically and is not a change to the bylaws (which cannot be applied to previously approved dogs).

I have agreed to indemnify the body corporate from any risks, provided professional assessments to show zero aggression and extensive behaviourist evaluation, vet statements, video evidence of his behaviour and multiple hotels in the area that do not require muzzles on German Shepherds and so much more evidence, yet they continue with official action against me based on the premise of “perception”. Using body corporate funds to take action against me and force the muzzle.

This is forcing me out of my home if I cannot make them change their minds to accept the indemnity condition only.

I only hope to allow my pooch and I to live in peace and overturn the ruling I (and professionals) feel is oppressive and discriminatory. 

Please sign if you believe that seeing someone remove a muzzle from an unknown german shepherd in public would raise greater fear or concern than no muzzle at all?