A FATHER of three was hauled before the courts and fined £500 - because his children neglected their pet rabbits.

Martin Fairbrother, 44, issued a warning to all parents after he was prosecuted by the RSPCA for animal cruelty.

He had to take the blame because his children were all too young to be held responsible for the care of their pets. Mr Fairbrother told how his two sons aged eight and 13, and his 15-year-old daughter `nagged and nagged' him for pets until he `gave in'.

Mr Fairbrother spent £45 on Fasty, Bubbles and Squeak and installed them in a wooden rabbit hutch in their garden in Horwich, Bolton. He bought the animals on the understanding that the three children would be responsible for looking after them.

Within months the children lost interest in their new pets and the rabbits were not properly cared for. A neighbour tipped off the RSPCA and an inspector called to the house to find that Fasty had died and Bubbles and Squeak were malnourished in the dirty rabbit hutch.

Because all three children were under the age of 16, their father was held responsible and he was prosecuted at Bolton magistrates' court.

Mr Fairbrother, who works for a printing company, pleaded guilty to two charges under the Animal Welfare Act. The court heard he took `full responsibility'. He only bought the rabbits seven months before he appeared in court.

He was fined £500 and ordered to pay costs of £750. He was also banned from keeping any animal as a pet for 10 years.

Outside court Mr Fairbrother urged parents to know the law when they buy pets for their children.

He said: "I would urge all parents to make sure their children keep on top of their duties.

"My children nagged and nagged me for pets and I gave in. Then I find myself in court.

Droppings

"Parents need to know that they are responsible for pets of children under 16. People need to be aware that they can go to prison."

Tony Stock, prosecuting for the RSPCA, said an inspector discovered the animals soaked in urine on March 3.

He said: "Three rabbits were housed in the hutch. Two appeared alert and active. The third was lying dead."

The court was told they only had access to dirty water and there was no food. Droppings littered the floor and no bedding was present.

Police were called and the animals were seized.

Mr Stock said: "If you have children within the home under the age of 16 it is not sufficient to say that they have responsibility for looking after a pet. The death could have been avoided by a suitable diet and fresh water.

"He suggested the day-to-day routine was down to his children but he did say that if he thought that they were not feeding them he would check on them."

Mr Fairbrother is separated from the mother of his children and the rabbit hutch was at his house.

Darin Millar, defending, described Mr Fairbrother, as an `honest, decent and law-abiding citizen'.

He added: "The understanding was that the children would be responsible and look after the pets. It was a learning curve for them. They did look after them in the early days but it would seem that it deteriorated over time."

RSPCA Insp Katherine Hamblin said pets should never be taken lightly.

She said: "This is an example of a parent buying his children pets and leaving the responsibility of them to them. Parents have to maintain a level of responsibility themselves.

"Even the smallest pets require a great deal of attention."