Animal sanctuary owner banned for life in 'one of worst cases ever seen' (2024)

A former animal sanctuary owner has been banned from keeping animals for life after an investigation found she kept them in appalling conditions. Tamara Lloyd, who owned and ran the Alternative Animal Sanctuary in New York, near Boston, launched an appeal after being convicted of animal welfare offences - but has seen her sentence increased after losing in court.

As well as the lifetime animal ban, she was sentenced to eight months in prison, suspended for two years, and ordered to pay £65,000. The offences came to light after the RSPCA executed two separate warrants in May 2019 and January 2020 after concerns were raised about the welfare of animals in her care.

More than 70 cats, 14 pigs, along with dogs, horses and terrapins were among the animals which were being kept in appalling conditions by Lloyd. In 2020, Lloyd was convicted of 17 animal welfare offences, following an investigation and prosecution by the RSPCA. At the time, she was sentenced to a 10 year disqualification order.

She chose to appeal some of her convictions and was sentenced to the life ban and suspended prison sentence at Lincoln Crown Court on September 27 after the convictions she appealed were upheld. She returned to the same court for a costs hearing on October 11 where she was ordered to pay £65,000.

Animal sanctuary owner banned for life in 'one of worst cases ever seen' (1)

In the appeal verdict outcome from the court, it was heard: "We found that Ms Lloyd prioritised her beliefs about animals’ psychological difficulties above their concrete and obvious physical ailments. It was striking that she struggled time and time again to accept the pain and suffering of animals in her care.

Adding: "In contrast to what would be expected of a reasonable animal shelter, she kept next to no records of the animals and any medical treatment they received, so much of what she says is a matter of assertion. We note that she says that she carried the information in her head, but also asserts that she is no good on dates and times, which would make it even less appropriate to keep no paper records. Her evidence was wholly unreliable and lacked credibility."

PC Martin Green of the Rural Crime Action Team at Lincolnshire Police said: "This was one of the worst cases of neglect involving animals I have seen in many years, mainly due to the number of animals that were present, with only one person responsible for their welfare."

Animal sanctuary owner banned for life in 'one of worst cases ever seen' (2)

It was heard how Ms Lloyd's care provided for the animals in the charges was not sufficient for their needs. The outcome report added: "This is not sadistic behaviour, but it is driven by your unshakeable belief that all experts are wrong and you are the only person who knows and understands your animals.

"This led to prolonged and repeated incidents of neglect and deliberate disregard for the welfare of the animals."

Speaking after the appeal hearing, RSPCA Inspector Kate Burris, who investigated for the animal welfare charity, said: "Lloyd failed in her duty towards these animals. Instead of providing the safe and caring environment she promised by setting up a sanctuary, animals were kept in awful conditions, with some left to suffer as a result.

"It’s been a long road to recovery for many animals who were rescued but thanks to the care and expertise shown to them since they are now thriving. Animals are completely reliant on their carers to ensure their needs are met and they are kept safe and healthy.

"Ensuring appropriate veterinary care is a key part of the responsibility we have towards them. It’s sad that animals were deprived of the chance to live happy and healthy lives."

Animal sanctuary owner banned for life in 'one of worst cases ever seen' (3)

The court also ordered a deprivation order for all the animals in the care of the RSPCA. These are nine cats and a horse, who is being cared for by the equine charity World Horse Welfare.

Lloyd was also deprived of ownership of one dog, six horses, four bullocks and a cow, which she had in her care. All the animals can now legally be rehomed by the RSPCA.

World Horse Welfare Field Officer Sarah Tucker, who worked with the RSPCA to assist in rounding-up the ponies alongside field officers from Bransby Horses, said: "These ponies had not been handled or had a head collar on for a very long time, if ever. Using their herd instincts we finally managed to corral them safely into the pens. Watching the last horses finally being removed from these appalling conditions was a huge relief."

Full details of appeal offences that were upheld

  • That between 16 February 2019 to 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely a large white castrated boar, by failing to seek appropriate professional veterinary care for an ingrown tusk, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 2 May 2019 to 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely two domestic longhaired cats by failing to seek appropriate professional veterinary care to explore and address ear infection, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 16 April 2019 to 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely eight domestic shorthaired cats, by failing to explore and address chronic dental disease, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 2 May 2019 to 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely 3 Shar Pei type dogs by failing to explore and address untreated and infected wounds on their bodies, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • On and before 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely an adult female Husky type dog by name Flo,by failing to explore and address a ligature injury to her leg, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 11 May 2019 to 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, she/you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely 3 horses by failing to explore and address the presence of external parasites, provide routine dental treatment and address poor bodily condition, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • On and before 16 May 2019 at Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely three dogs for which you are responsible were met to the extent required by good practice namely their needs to be protected from pain, suffering , injury or disease, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006

  • That between 1 January 2020 and 8 January 2020 at The Alternative Animal Sanctuary, Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, she/you did cause unnecessary suffering to certain protected animals, namely a Staffordshire Bull Terrier type dogs by the names Mitzi and Buzz by failing to seek appropriate professional veterinary care to address their ear infections, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 1 January 2020 and 8 January 2020 at The Alternative Animal Sanctuary, Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, she/you did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain protected animal, namely a Staffordshire Bull Terrier type dog by the name Roxy by failing to seek appropriate professional veterinary care to explore and address her dental disease, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 1 January 2020 and 8 January 2020 at The Alternative Animal Sanctuary, Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did not take such steps that were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely 11 dogs for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment in which to live, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 1 January 2020 and 8 January 2020 at The Alternative Animal Sanctuary, Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did cause unnecessary suffering to certain protected animals, namely a Piebald horse and a Chestnut Mare by failing to explore and adequately address their poor bodily condition, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

  • That between 1 January 2020 and 8 January 2020 at The Alternative Animal Sanctuary, Chapelry Farm, Langrick Road, New York, Boston, Lincolnshire, you did not take such steps that were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely two pigs for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, a suitable diet including access to fresh drinking water, and their need to be protected from pain, injury, suffering and disease, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

Story Saved

You can find this story in My Bookmarks.Or by navigating to the user icon in the top right.

Animal sanctuary owner banned for life in 'one of worst cases ever seen' (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Nicola Considine CPA

Last Updated:

Views: 6362

Rating: 4.9 / 5 (49 voted)

Reviews: 80% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Nicola Considine CPA

Birthday: 1993-02-26

Address: 3809 Clinton Inlet, East Aleisha, UT 46318-2392

Phone: +2681424145499

Job: Government Technician

Hobby: Calligraphy, Lego building, Worldbuilding, Shooting, Bird watching, Shopping, Cooking

Introduction: My name is Nicola Considine CPA, I am a determined, witty, powerful, brainy, open, smiling, proud person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.