Jump to content

Recommended Posts

She has always had a home! Some people are extremely nosey and interfering! This is a very friendly affectionate cat/kitten and was definitely not LOST or HUNGRY! Please consider how distressing it is for a cat to catnapped and locked up just for being affectionate! Some people have lost the plot, Kindness???????? Don't make me laugh
Believe - the OP said the cat was OUTSIDE, so not exactly catnapped! I can think of quite a few cats near me who have perfected their "starving" routine and it's a mistake that's very easily made - I think it's a little harsh to criticise someone who is acting on best intentions.

Considering she took the cat 'into' her house and not allowing it out, in my opinion is CATNAPPING!

If one is concerned, put a saucer of water and some nibbles on the step!

Her interference, was both cruel and caused distress to a cat who gives much pleasure to 'passer by's.

The cat did/does not look mistreated, or in need of any care, she merely enjoys the outdoors and is free to come in and out whenever!

Since a picture has been posted, I ask that you leave her alone in her travels and wondering. She is happy and needs no interference from busy bodies.

Enjoy her or leave her and stop poking your nose in matters that need nought!!!!

Although I would have thought if someone was catnapping the cat they wouldn't be advertising the fact on a local forum. I agree its upsetting when people assume your friendly cat is lost, I've had the same in past with my sociable cat. But I'd rather people showed concern and checked it out then just ignore a situation. Also just to highlight if people are not aware, there is someone going around London killing cats and the advice given has been to keep them in at night.

Sorry I didn't mean any distress to you, but the cat was roaming the back gardens and wasn't catnapped and locked up in my house. I was in the garden when she came and said hello. I saw your neighbours post of where you are and brought her out to the front of the house


I wrongly presumed she was lost in the original post.

I won't be reporting any lost cats in the future

WOW WOW WOW


YES WRONGLY PRESUMED AND INTERFERING, IT WAS THE CAT YOU DISTRESSED, A MAMMAL THET HAS ENJOYED HER SHORT LIFE ROAMING, IS FORCIBLY INCARCERATED!!! NOT ALLOWED HER FREEDOM.......


MY ONLY DISTRESS IS THAT OF INTERFERING PEOPLE THAT HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO, GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


IF YOU WANT THE CAT AND IT WOULD MAKE YOUR LIFE BETTER, TAKE HER, BUT HAVE THE COURTESY OF INFORMING ME!!!!!!!!


REMOVE HER FREEDOM TO PROTECT HER FROM PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm certainly not surly - it's Friday, so I'm in a delightful mood.  As Earl Aelfheah said, the money has to come from somewhere. But Labour new that hiking fuel as well as employee NIC in would be a step too far - for businesses and consumers. It was the right decision for this moment in time. Suggesting that someone who's against fuel duty increase on this occasion is against and fuel duty full stop is quite a leap. Why do you demonise everyone who doesn't think that owning a car is a cardinal sin?  I'm not sure using Clarkson as an example of your average farmer holds much weight as an argument, but you know that already, Mal. 
    • Hope it's making others smile too! I don't know the background or how long it's been there 😊
    • If you are against the increase in fuel duty then you are surly against fuel duty full stop.  It has not kept up with inflation, I'm talking about getting it back on track.  Ultimately road user charging is the solution. Labour will probably compromise on agricultural land inheritance by raising the cap so it generally catches the Clarksons of the world who are not bothered about profits from land beyond, in his case, income from a highly successful TV series and the great publicity for the farm shop and pub
    • Were things much simpler in the 80/90s? I remember both my girls belonging to a 6th Form Consortium which covered Sydenham Girls, Forest Hill Boys and Sedgehill off Bromley Road. A level classes were spread across the 3 schools - i remember Forest Hill boys coming to Sydenham Girls for one subject (think it was sociology or psychology ) A mini bus was provided to transport pupils to different sites, But I guess with less schools being 'managed' by the local authority, providers such as Harris etc have different priorities. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...