5* Vetting missed major problem, where do I stand?

KatieLluvia

KatieLluvia

Active Member
Joined
31 May 2013
Messages
42
Visit site
I had my horse vetted in August last year and the only problem noticed was a splint on her near foreleg. Since we have purchased her my farrier brought a problem to our attention which was that she has a deformity on her heel on her off fore which has been caused by over reaching. He said that this is detrimental to her career as it could cause her to be lame on anything other than an arena surface. I just wondered where I would stand in terms of money as we paid £250 for the vetting with her main problem being missed. I am unhappy with the standard of an expensive vetting!
 
Presumably your farrier made this comment very shortly after purchase?

How often has the horse been lame?

And what is your own vets opinion?
 
Last edited:
It is now May if you have been riding her with no problems since August it is a bit late to start complaining now, yes you would have expected a mention but unless she was showing signs of lameness at the vetting or been lame ever since I do not see a problem, it is also something that may be getting worse if she is overreaching still so more obvious as time goes on.
 
Being a miserable old git, I would definitely be writing to my vet asking what he was going to do about it. Depending on his reply, I would probably then get a second opinion. Maybe he didn't notice the fault for a very good reason. Equally, it may just have been incompetence.

That is the reason why you get a horse vetted in the first place and the reason why a vet spends so long in college. Then, when in practice, why the vet pays a lot of money for professional indemnity insurance and why they never seem to have any trouble issuing a very large bill for doing very little.
 
He commented the first time he saw her and said it could cause problems down the line which in my opinion is something I should have been told from the vetting. She has only been lame recently as the deformity has weakened her hoof and her pulling shoes has meant her feet are not the quality they should be. I personally would go to my carrier before a vet as he is very experienced in remedial shoeing so have not been to my vet.
 
But it was a problem they should have picked up as a potential issue whether or not she was lame at the time. I payed a lot of money for the vet to really do very little as they were clearly not competent in their investigation...
 
So recently lame 9 months after purchase, for no clear reason....

Obviously when your own vet commented on the horse last year (and your farrier) that was the time to take action. 9 months on? No chance I'd say.

Sorry just re read your post and see that your vet hasn't seen the horse.

Why on earth didn't you consult with them immediately after your farrier made the comment?
 
Last edited:
Exactly my thoughts, the injury was obvious when pointed out to me but I am not a vet so surely they should be able to see it too? My farrier noticed it before I even got her out the stable so surely as something potentially detrimental to her career, the vet should have pointed it out in a £250 vetting!
 
Because she was not lame at the time but it was a potential problem. My vets work very closely with my farrier so would more than likely have referred me to him anyway. Unfortunately not all of us have the money to spend on a call out for a vet for them to feel the foot and tell me I need remedial shoeing, it's a waste of time.
 
But Katie, having just been told by your farrier that your new horse potentially has a problem that could cause a significant problem in the future the immediate course of action should have been to consult your vet.

And, no, we don't all have the money to get the vet out on every whim - but if you are now considering a suit against the vet who vetted the horse your failure to do this means that you don't have a leg to stand on (imo).

Interestingly the vet could have looked at the horse as recently as when they looked at your sisters horse....
 
Last edited:
Same horse, its my sisters post. The thing is, the farrier said he can control it, so therefore wouldnt be a problem, however, as the vets ring our farrier for advice on these types of problems anyway, there is literally no point in doing so. It wasn't pursued in August as our farrier said it may develop, but the chances of it doing so are slim. The point we are making is that we wouldn't have bought her if we had known this, the vetting didnt provide this information. It has only cropped up recently because the hoof that has been over the deformity has come to the ground and is causing concussion with the hoof. Farrier said no one could have known this would have happened. Just dont know where we stand.
 
I don't think you have any comeback tbh, something should have been done the first time your farrier mentioned that it may cause a problem in the future.
 
I don't know what to tell you, OP, other than regardless of the rights and wrongs of the vetting, this horse needs to be seen by a vet. As per your first post about the horse.
 
KatieLluvia said:
Same horse, its my sisters post. The thing is, the farrier said he can control it, so therefore wouldnt be a problem, however, as the vets ring our farrier for advice on these types of problems anyway, there is literally no point in doing so. It wasn't pursued in August as our farrier said it may develop, but the chances of it doing so are slim. The point we are making is that we wouldn't have bought her if we had known this, the vetting didnt provide this information. It has only cropped up recently because the hoof that has been over the deformity has come to the ground and is causing concussion with the hoof. Farrier said no one could have known this would have happened. Just dont know where we stand.
Click to expand...
Then when your farrier pointed out a potential problem in August when he first saw the horse, you should have contacted the vet who did the vetting... as the horse has been sound for th 9 months, til now, you have not got a leg to stand on
 
I would speak to the BVA, then speak to your vet. I've found that approach with a professional often produces remarkable results! They really don't like it if you speak to their governing body and like it even less if that body says they have a responsibility they need to step up to! But then, as I've said, I am a miserable old git and I don't play by their rules.
 
How do you know this deformity will cause major problems?

If caused by over-reaching it could be simply old scar tissue or a major accident as a youngster now healed so could always look different? But it doesn't necessarily mean that it will cause lameness.

My horse has a scar on outside of pastern low down, and has some scar tissue underneath but nowhere near a joint, happened as a young horse (foot in wire afaik) and was stitched up and healed when occurred. He sailed through 5* vetting as a 4 year old and has Never caused any problems since!

Can you post any pictures? A deformity can be many things, but not all cause problems, horses can just be odd! :)
 
I am confused OP? You had your horse 5 stage vetted prior to purchase. Nothing was mentioned at all about the foot deformity? You then get the horse home and the farrier comes out, im guessing relatively soon after getting the horse home? He tells you about the deformity and that it has potential to cause problems in the future.

Why did you not contact the vet who did the vetting at this point? So much time has passed now that you don't have a leg to stand on I'd say.

Did you buy the horse from a dealer or privately?

Did you not notice the deformity when checking over legs/picking out feet etc?

What did you buy the horse to do?
 
KatieLluvia said:
Same horse, its my sisters post. The thing is, the farrier said he can control it, so therefore wouldnt be a problem, however, as the vets ring our farrier for advice on these types of problems anyway, there is literally no point in doing so. It wasn't pursued in August as our farrier said it may develop, but the chances of it doing so are slim. The point we are making is that we wouldn't have bought her if we had known this, the vetting didnt provide this information. It has only cropped up recently because the hoof that has been over the deformity has come to the ground and is causing concussion with the hoof. Farrier said no one could have known this would have happened. Just dont know where we stand.
Click to expand...

I'm confused so far your farrier has said

It could cause a significant problem

he could control it

it could develop, but chances are slim

no one could have known this would happen

?????????

I don't think you have any legal or moral right to accuse vet of anything
 
KatieLluvia said:
Because she was not lame at the time but it was a potential problem. My vets work very closely with my farrier so would more than likely have referred me to him anyway. Unfortunately not all of us have the money to spend on a call out for a vet for them to feel the foot and tell me I need remedial shoeing, it's a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Sorry but if you can't provide timely veterinary treatment for your horse then you can't afford one.
 
Should have contacted vet with your concern about them missing this in the vetting as soon as your farrier mentioned it. 9 months on I cannot see you having any comeback whatsoever.
 
Dry Rot said:
I would speak to the BVA, then speak to your vet. I've found that approach with a professional often produces remarkable results! They really don't like it if you speak to their governing body and like it even less if that body says they have a responsibility they need to step up to! But then, as I've said, I am a miserable old git and I don't play by their rules.
Click to expand...

Thankyou for some advice, rather than 'ring the bloody vet' who will take one look and say, 'well that's a hoof deformity, we'll ring Varnham'. Will defiantly look at this, thank you.
 
KatieLluvia said:
Thankyou for some advice, rather than 'ring the bloody vet' who will take one look and say, 'well that's a hoof deformity, we'll ring Varnham'. Will defiantly look at this, thank you.
Click to expand...

I think the point people are making is more, you should have rung the vet when the farrier made the discovery. You could have then used both the vet and farriers opinions to go back to the vet who carried out the original vetting. 9 months down the line is far too long to do anything about it.
 
As a key person in a law firm and married to a litigator I can tell you that 9 months down the line you don't have a leg to stand on.

Your vetting is to state whether your horse is 'fit for purpose'. An old overreach wound, unless causing an issue at the time (i.e. making your horse lame) is not going to be 'not fit for purpose'.

And if your farrier noticed 9 months ago, why didn't he take action?
 
From our point of view, if that was a problem the horse has sustained as a youngster, shouldn't the original vetting have picked that up? Surely that's not our fault as it would have changed our buying opinion? We're just looking for advice, not criticism! :(
 
HeresHoping said:
As a key person in a law firm and married to a litigator I can tell you that 9 months down the line you don't have a leg to stand on.

Your vetting is to state whether your horse is 'fit for purpose'. An overreach wound, unless causing an issue at the time (i.e. making your horse lame) is not going to be 'not fit for purpose'.

And if your farrier noticed 9 months ago, why didn't he take action?
Click to expand...

Thankyou for your advice, sorry, the injury wasn't caused by over-reaching, but a trauma, it has been made worse by over-reaching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top