Microchipping of dogs: guidance for local authorities

Exemptions

The only exemption to the requirement to microchip provided under the Microchipping of Dogs (Scotland) Regulations 2016 is where a veterinary surgeon certifies that a dog should not be microchipped for reasons of the dog's health. This could be via a letter on headed notepaper or by a standardised certificate.  Either way, the document issued must state the period for which a dog will be unfit to be microchipped, should be signed by a named veterinarian, and should include the name and a description of the dog, the name and contact details of the keeper at the time the dog was presented, and the name and address of the veterinary practice.

The situations in which such an exemption would be necessary are very limited and would only very rarely require permanent exemption. Below are some examples where an exemption might be appropriate; however individual cases will be considered on their own merit by the veterinarian concerned.

• size of dog - while the majority of dogs can be safely implanted with a microchip before eight weeks of age there may be cases in toy or miniature breeds of dog where, in the professional judgement of the veterinary surgeon, microchipping should be delayed for a matter of weeks to allow the puppy to grow

• severe illness - where a dog has a severe debilitating illness it may be appropriate for the veterinary surgeon to recommend that microchipping is delayed for a short period to enable recovery to take place

• infection or injury at the normal site of microchipping - where a dog has an infection or injury at the normal site of microchipping (between the shoulder blades) it may be appropriate for the veterinary surgeon to recommend that microchipping is delayed for a short period to enable recovery to take place. If the injury is likely to permanently preclude microchipping at the normal site the veterinary surgeon should consider alternative implantation sites as close to the normal implantation site as possible. Where a microchip is deliberately implanted at a different site this should be recorded on both the client and the microchip database records

• abnormalities of blood clotting - where a dog has any condition which interferes with blood clotting it may be appropriate to delay microchip implantation until the situation has been rectified or stabilised

It would be helpful if the veterinary surgeon includes the reason for the exemption by noting it on the certificate or letter. It would also be useful to ensure that the keeper of the dog, or person authorised to represent the keeper, signs the certificate to confirm that they understand that the certificate is only valid for a certain period. If the dog is transferred to a new keeper during a period of exemption, a copy of the certificate should be passed on with the dog.

Appeals

There are two situations for which there is a right to appeal under the Microchipping of Dogs (Scotland) Regulations 2016:

• an individual may appeal to the sheriff against a notice served on that individual under regulation 3(3) (prohibiting a person from implanting microchips)

• a database operator may appeal to the sheriff against a notice served on it under regulation 9 (to provide data and/or cease holding themselves out as compliant with the Regulations)

An appeal must be lodged with the sheriff clerk within the period of 21 days from the day on which the notice being appealed was served.

There is no right of appeal for a person who has a notice served on them under 12(1)(b) of the 2016 Regulations (requiring them to ensure that their dog has a compliant/functioning microchip implanted and/or that their details are registered on a compliant database and are correct and up to date. No right of appeal is required in this situation because:

• the regulations impose requirements on the keeper to ensure that their dog is implanted with a compliant and working microchip and that certain information is registered on a compliant database and kept up to date

• any notice served under 12(1)(b) by an authorised person will be on the grounds that, to the knowledge of the authorised person at the time, some aspect of this has not been complied with; the notice gives the keeper 21 days to rectify said non-compliance before an offence comes into play

• if the grounds for such a notice are subsequently proven to be false (e.g. the dog is actually chipped and/or the details are not actually missing or out of date), all requirements in the legislation have been met and there is no issue

• if this is proven within the 21 days, the notice would simply not have any further effect as what it is requesting has already been complied with

• in the unlikely event that this cannot be proven until after the 21 day deadline and an offence appears to have been committed, it would be a defence to that offence that the dog is actually microchipped, has a working chip or the information is already up to date