Kayleigh Bransby

As a registered Radiographer RA75952:

1. On 6 October 2022 at Kidderminster Magistrates Court, you were convicted of the following:

a. Between 23 November 2020 and 25 February 2021, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely thoroughbred type bay mare SS1, by a failure to act, namely the provision of proper and necessary dental care, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the failure would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

b. Between 23 October 2020 and 25 February 2021, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely 4 dogs (MS1, MS3, MS5 & MS7), by a failure to act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care attention for their severe dental disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the failure would have that effect or be likely or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

c. Between 12 January 2021 and 25 February 2021, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely 2 dogs (MS2, MS5), by a failure to act, namely, to investigate and address their poor bodily condition and weight loss, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

d. Between 23 May 2020 and 25 February 2021,you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely a black and white male Cavalier King Charles spaniel called Teddy ( MS2), by a failure to act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care and attention for his ear disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

e. Between 12 January 2021 and 25 February 2021, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely a white cat KP1, by a failure to act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care and attention for his ear disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

f. Between 12 August 2020 and 25 February 2021, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely a black and white cat KP2, by a failure to 8 act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care and attention for his ear disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

g. Before 24 February 2021, you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure that the needs of an animal for which you were responsible, namely 35 dogs (MS1- MS29) (Including MS12a-h), were met to the extent required by good practice in that you failed to meet their need for a suitable environment. Contrary to section 9 and 32(2) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

h. Between 09 September 2020 and 11 December 2020, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely 4 Cavalier King Charles spaniel type dogs called Daisy, Mable and Rosie, by an act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care and attention for their ear disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

i. Between 09 September 2020 and 11 December 2020, you caused unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely 4 Cavalier King Charles spaniel type dogs called Daisy, Lily, Mable and Gino, by an act, namely the provision of proper and necessary veterinary care and attention for their eye disease, and you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the act would have that effect or be likely to do so. Contrary to sections 4(1) and 32(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

2. By reason of the matters set out above, your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of conviction.