Skip to content

Former Squamish resident fined $6,000 for animal cruelty

Neddy Tsin was fined and prohibited from having more than one dog as a pet for life as a result of being found guilty of two counts of animal cruelty.
Provincial Court Of British Columbia in North Vancouver, where the sentencing was delivered today, Oct. 20. |Photo Kevin Hill, North Shore News

A former Squamish resident has been fined $6,000 in total and prohibited from keeping more than one dog as a pet for life as a result of being found guilty on two counts of causing animals to continue to be in distress.

Among the consequences, Judge Joanne Challenger imposed a $3,000 fine per guilty count on Neddy Tsin, who has since moved to Richmond, on Friday, Oct. 20 at the North Vancouver Provincial Court. Challenger said Tsin has one year to pay the total amount. 

Other consequences included a limit on the number of dogs Tsin could have as a pet.

“Miss Tsin is prohibited from possessing more than one dog as a pet for life and is specifically prohibited from engaging in the breeding of dogs in any manner, including the provision of stud services,” said Challenger. 

Challenger said Tsin would also be subjected to unannounced SPCA officer visits to inspect her home and animal.

The sentencing is a result of Tsin being found guilty in 2022 of having 29 dogs in unsanitary conditions at her former Brackendale residence in 2016. 

Challenger noted in her guilty decision that “many of the dogs were neglected to the extent they were matted and unclean,” and the home had “urine and feces-covered newspapers left lying about.” Moreover, Challenger wrote dogs were found in vehicles, which “deprived them of adequate space, water and ventilation.”

For her defence at the time, Tsin’s then-husband, Robert Minions, testified the dogs in the vehicles belonged to friends. But, Challenger’s decision noted that Minions was unable to provide the last names of the friends despite having known them for one year. Minions also said Tsin had arranged to groom the dogs for free and was aware they would be in the vehicle.

Also, according to Challenger’s summary, Tsin suggested she was not responsible for the dogs in the vehicle. However, Challenger did not accept that the dogs belonged to friends, as it was “beyond a reasonable co-incidence” that the dogs to be groomed were similar breeds to those already in Tsin’s possession. Even if she did accept it, Challenger wrote there was no evidence that Tsin checked on the conditions of the animals.

In previous hearings, Challenger shared concerns about Tsin’s living situation, as it has been inconsistent during the last several years. At the Oct. 20 sentencing hearing, Challenger told Tsin she would have to provide a written 14-day notice to the Richmond SPCA if she plans to move and then report to the nearest SPCA office of her new address.

Challenger denied a request for the fine to be paid out over two years instead of one but stated Tsin could later come back to court with proof of her finances if she needed more time.