Anyone heard of yard owner wanting sharer to pay for use of facilities

Have to say, I personally have never come across a YO that is quite so picky about who they have on the yard - perhaps this is the more the case for small yards while I am used to larger ones?

Either way, the YO is just that - the YO, not the horse owners' mummy, as adults horse owners really should be able to sort their own personal relationships out (yes, I know how yards can be, but even so!)

I can understand a YO wanting a sharer to have their own insurance, if that is a condition for keeping a horse on the yard. But demanding money every time they ride? Totally wrong IMO! Although considering how often sharers seem to be viewed as cash cows I amazed it doens't happen more often, frankly.
 
I personally was shocked
frown.gif
The owner of the horses only want a small contribution from the sharer, the main reason of having a sharer is that the owner has 2 horses and needs help getting them both out. Is it any different if the owner takes one horse in the school then takes the other afterwards? or the sharer
confused.gif


Thanks all again for your replies
 
[ QUOTE ]


that is exactly the point though. If there is a sharer both horses could be ridden simultaneously thereby potentially doubling the usage of facilities. Added to this the fact that many yards offer a discount on the second horse partly based on less storage being needed but also on less wear and tear of facilities because you can only ride one at a time

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't quite see how that is doubling the use of facilities, as presumably the owner could ride one and then ride the other immediately after - hence using the school for twice as long, and causing just as much wear and tear on the facilities surely?

I can't see how a sharer causes any material difference, as surely if the owner is paying for unlimited use of facilities, that would entitle them to ride both horses in the school every single day if they choose - the fact a different person is riding surely makes no difference to the YO.

I would move yards in this position, I think its totally unreasonable. As far as I'm concerned, livery is to pay for the use of the facilities for your horse, and who rides or looks after the horse is your business.
 
Sorry did not have time to finish last post. I do not charge sharers BUT I have had a very nasty experience with people telling me that the sharer is just helping out & to continue billing the owner as normal. On this basis I only have a contract with the owner & not the sharer therefore it changes my Insurance. Yes the person who asked about numbers regarding Insurance cover is correct, mine goes up in multiples of 5. with a max of 25 liveries which is what I pay for.
My example is as follows & it happened twice. My liveries have free full use of both indoor & outdoor arena's but was actually charging the sharer for using these facilities including double the cost of wormer feed etc. I am not here to earn tax free cash for any third party. The sharer uses the toilets puts the kettle on etc etc. Its a bit like 2 people sitting in a warm pub or Cafe whilst only one buys food & drink.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The sharer uses the toilets puts the kettle on etc etc. Its a bit like 2 people sitting in a warm pub or Cafe whilst only one buys food & drink.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry but I'm not sure i see that.
If i had 2 horses I would be paying twice ( 2 meals or liveries) and 2 people are ridng.
If 1 horse 2 people are riding then they come on different nights so no more pressure on facilities.
I try to get my horse ridden 6 times a week
No sharer I ride horse 6 times a week
Sharer I rode 4 times sharer rode twice.
I went away for business between sharer and friend, horse got ridden 6 times a week.
Net result someone is up to ride that horse 6 nights a week. I still came up on the 7th to groom.

What about visitors who don't ride, they use the toilet, have a cup of tea.

Obviously you have direct experience of insurance but if it is per rider not horse does that mean that a family of mum, dad and 2 kids all riding the same horse raise your premiums in a way a single person with one or even 2 horses does not.

I prefer to charge for a sharer not to make money but because I have found that some people if they are paying for something take it more seriously. Sometimes those who don't pay, tend to cancel if they don't feel like it.

I also found as I travel for business that having a sharer meant that my horse got the one to one attention for 2 or 3 hours that he didn't get even at the best yards.
I have always had part livery so the yard does not lose out on services thought they yards I know who charge for sharers are big yards that also charge exhorbitant amounts to exercise your horse which could include lunging or a light hack not even schooling; so they would lose out on charging me for that.
 
For me, I'd be waving goodbye to Mr Businessman and taking my custom elsewhere.

I'm sure any savvy business person would realise a bird in the hand and all that...after all £100+ livery payment, regardless of 2 people sharing the horse, is better than an empty stable...
 
[ QUOTE ]
For me, I'd be waving goodbye to Mr Businessman and taking my custom elsewhere.

I'm sure any savvy business person would realise a bird in the hand and all that...after all £100+ livery payment, regardless of 2 people sharing the horse, is better than an empty stable...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea but your forgetting the YOers that have the "I cant see the wood for the trees" Gene, and the others ones with the "I've had horses for a billion years but still clueless" Gene and the "I've been in business for 40 years but have Zilch people skills" Gene, so those paricular YOers wont see that at all, so wind and pissing into spring to mind.
 
It begs the question, if the yard owner is going to charge for a sharer to come and ride the horse, what happens on these yards if an instructor comes? Would the owner then have to pay extra to the yard if the instructor gets on and rides the horse?? It's the same principle....

I find it an absurd proposition that a yard owner would charge for a sharer.
 
[ QUOTE ]
No not always as both sets of people are often there together. But what about the passing costs with profit on to the sharer. Is that ok also?

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely not. Its pure greed, and any sharer has to be a bit of a mug if they allow themselves to be a cash cow for the owner.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Talk about wanting your cake and eating it. So your YO gets paid the livery from you and then wants to charge your sharer for using those facilities which you pay for?

I think that that is bang out of order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top