XL Bully Owners Set to Lose Insurance Requirement in Jersey
Owners of XL bully-type dogs in Jersey are set to be freed from the legal requirement to hold third-party liability insurance, with the government confirming that the rule is being removed.
The move follows the decision by the only insurer offering specialist cover for banned breeds in Jersey and the Channel Islands to withdraw the policy.
The requirement came into force in Jersey in December 2025 as part of tougher regulations surrounding dangerous dogs. However, the government has now confirmed that the legislation is being changed.
A spokesperson for the Infrastructure and Environment Department said the process of removing the third-party insurance requirement from the law was "underway", although no date has yet been announced for the change to take effect.
The decision follows the withdrawal of specialist insurance cover by Dogs Trust earlier this year. The charity said demand for the policy had doubled, resulting in a significant rise in claims. It had been the only provider offering the insurance in Jersey, the wider Channel Islands and the UK.
The UK Government has already removed its own requirement for third-party public liability insurance for XL bully-type dogs.
Jersey's decision follows discussions involving the parishes, the government and the States Veterinary Officer.
Owners warn of lack of protection
American bulldog owner Nina Morgan welcomed the removal of the legal requirement, saying it would relieve owners of the pressure of trying to find insurance that is no longer readily available.
However, she warned that removing the requirement does not solve the wider problem faced by owners who want protection against potential claims.
Morgan said she would have preferred the government to introduce a scheme of its own to provide cover for owners unable to obtain insurance.
She normally makes sure her dog Frankie has third-party insurance but said she can no longer obtain a policy for him, despite being able to do so for other breeds.
"While the removal of the requirement does take off the pressure from owners, it leaves us utterly exposed," she said.
Morgan also stressed that the risks associated with owning a large dog are not necessarily linked to aggression.
"The risk isn't limited to the dog attacking someone out of aggression. Everyday accidents happen," she said.
She believes owners are now left with difficult choices over how they manage their dogs.
"This leaves owners with three practical choices; keep walking the dog normally and hope nothing serious ever happens, severely restrict the dog or put the dog down.
"There isn't really a middle ground," she added.
