Buyer Beware

M

mog

New User
Joined
2 July 2010
Messages
4
Visit site
I am currently engaged in a legal battle for a refund on a horse that went lame within 3 weeks of purchase and for no obvious reason. Although this dealer would be subject to the sale of goods act it has still cost us thousands and continues to, to get her brought to justice. Only x rays would have shown up the chronic foot problems and the horse had been recently imported with no blood tests or x rays.
The case will be made public soon but in the meantime i can only strongly urge anyone buying a horse to have a 5 stage vetting, bloods and x rays. Do not be impressed by the fancy websites, testimonials or seeming 'knowledge' of the seller or vet certificates form abroad or previous buyers - prove to yourself it is sound and sane - I have had 6 months of keeping a lame horse that I rode 5 times, have spent thousands and have the heartache and disappointment of a horse gone wrong.
 
Did you get the horse vetted? If not, why not? The dealer may be liable under the sale of goods act, but if you couldn't spot the problem, and it could only be shown by xray, how were they supposed to know? The horse was sound when you brought it, as you say it went lame 3 weeks after. So if the dealer sold you a sound horse, and you didn't get it vetted, then I'm not sure what more they could have done.
Maybe you haven't told the full story, but as it stands it's a bit "dealer beware" to me.
 
I'm always a little wary of interesting 1st time posts like this. They tend to turn into a sort of name and shame...
 
Sorry to hear about your horse :( did you have the horse vetted, if the horse was sound when sold and for a short period after the dealer could claim well it could have injured itself in field fall etc which may have well happened.:(
Also what does it say on your receipt, I bought a pony off a showing judge who stated I was more than welcome to have him vetted, I decided not to she put on receipt sold as seen and told me she would have no comebacks if anything went wrong as it was my choice not have him vetted he had no problems at all, I dont know if this is legally correct but have heard other sellers also do this when no vetting. Also I bought my boy from sales and horses that were vetted I think I may be mistaken had 7 days from purchase to return horse to seller if something went wrong, if there was no vetting it was tough you had no comeback
 
I bought my horse and vetted and xrayed and it turned out to be a headshaker two weeks after we bought it. Despite a warranty we are still fighting him for a refund. Thank god for household insurance covering us for legal fees because it means we can throw the book at our dealer and it won't cost us a penny.
 
Your basically saying that you bought a horse that was sound, and two weeks later it was lame. Sorry, but if i were selling to you I would tell you where to stick it, esp. if you were a.) offered the chance to have it vetted and refused and on receipt it says "sold as seen without vetting on purchasers choice" b.) had it vetted by your own vet. Dealers haven't got x ray eyes! they wouldn't be able to tell if horse had anything going on underneath and its up to you as a buyer to make any checks pre purchase on the horse, this includes having it x-rayed, vetted and finding its past history out. Your buying a living thing and sadly some do go wrong. you could have lamed it yourself in two weeks, and who's to say the dealer knew it was unsound when they bought it? The only thing you could possibly get them on would be if the horse was sold as a proven comp horse in X,Y,Z and was unfit for purpose, but if they had had it out competing till the date you bought it I would strongly doubt this would stand up.
 
Only x rays would have shown up the chronic foot problems and the horse had been recently imported with no blood tests or x rays.
Click to expand...

So what exactly is your issue??? Was the person that sold you this horse supposed to know there was a problem if the feet had never been x-rayed and the horse never shown any lameness?? And an imported horse from Europe needs none of what you have stated.

I have no doubt that there are some very unscrupulous people out there, selling horses that are not fit for purpose.

But to give yourself the best chance of not getting caught out - get a vetting. At least then you stand half a chance of getting something decent.

However, even a vetting isn't any kind of assurance really that you're going to get a healthy horse. So ultimately we all pays our money and takes our chances........
 
Totally agree with natalia and amymay.......if the horse was sound and went lame after you had been riding it for a couple of weeks, and only x-rays could pin-point the problem.....which you didn't have done before you bought the horse......how can you blame the dealer?


Fair enough if she had had xrays, knew there was a problem and hid it from you....but it sounds as if she didn't know either. Possibly an underlying problem was brought to the fore when the horse was in full work?
 
If this is going public I assume you have a solicitor who has advised you that you have a case, so maybe things are more complicated that is suggested by your post. From what you write here, it was very unwise not to have the horse vetted and I am not sure why this was the dealer's fault. I would imagine you need to show that the horse was lame before you bought it, the dealer was aware of this and did not tell you - if you have evidence to back this up, I would assume you have a case, otherwise not so sure.
 
i'm glad this post has come up... after all i was thinking of buying a horse without vetting because it had a 5 stage done in march. deffo gonna get a vetting now for the peace of mind and reassurance!
 
mog said:
- I have had 6 months of keeping a lame horse that I rode 5 times, have spent thousands and have the heartache and disappointment of a horse gone wrong.
Click to expand...

Assuming its true, no one deserves this. Good luck OP I hope you get your money back.

I know of too many horses who had foot problems, have been "got right" and sold on only to of course happen again. I agree there's no way of telling, not without MRI (not x-rays), it comes down entirely to the sellers integrity whether they disclose the history. Its not just dealers it's one horse owners too. There are a lot of people happy to take your money for a horse they are well aware is likely to go wrong, and a vetting doesn't safeguard you against it all that much as its only as good as the day its done. :(
 
mog,

I'm really sorry to have to tell you this, but I fail to see how your claim can have any chance of success, and I'm surprised to hear that you have a solicitor who believes otherwise.

I don't know, but I suspect that the vendor will rely on two factors. Firstly, the question as to the soundness, and when was it first detected, and then when did you first make the vendor aware of the problem? Again, I suspect that if it was any longer than a week after you took delivery, then as the horse appeared to be sound at the point of sale, sadly the onus remains with you. Secondly, you have accepted that a 5 star vetting makes for a great deal of sense. Blood tests would have revealed the presence of Bute, I would think. Obviously, a vetting in itself has no implied guarantees, and if this problem is, as you say chronic, and the vetting didn't pick up on it, then you would be no further forward.

There is one possible way forward, however. As the horse was only recently imported, have other prospective buyers, had it vetted? and if they did and it failed, and if the dealer or vendor was aware of this, then you would certainly have a case. It's a bit of a long shot, but I haven't a clue how you do the research, which is probably of little use.

It would be nice to be more positive, sorry.

Alec.
 
I dont think you have a case as you didnt get a 5 stage vetting anyway. Is there a reason why you didnt? No matter how "fancy" the dealer or horse is I would certainly have got one done before buying it. There's nothing dodgy about a horse not having an x-ray... my horse was imported and has never had an x-ray in his life. TBH, even if the horse WAS lame when you bought it - you cannot prove this, if it had been buted to cover it up at the time then this would have been shown in the blood test taken at a vetting had you had one done...
 
From my rudimentary knowledge of the Sale of Goods act, I think a few may be missing the point here, if a dealer is selling a horse they have an obligation to sell something that is fit for purpose.

It is irrelevant as to how long they had the horse or whether they knew the horse had a pre-existing condition, if the poster can prove that the condition was present before they bought the horse the dealer is likely to be held liable.

Your comments about vetting would apply if the poster had bought privately.
 
"It is irrelevant as to how long they had the horse or whether they knew the horse had a pre-existing condition, if the poster can prove that the condition was present before they bought the horse the dealer is likely to be held liable."
There is nothing in Mog's post to indicate that this is the case though. So unless we're being drip fed information, the horse was fine when sold, the dealer had no idea there was an underlying problem that would cause it to go lame, it wasn't vetted at all, and it went lame after a couple of weeks of riding. The condition can only be detected by xray, and the horse hadn't been xrayed before purchase. If there is anything that would prove he had the condition before being brought, it hasn't been mentioned.
 
Sorry - perhaps i was not quite clear in my post - the horse has chronic foot problems that were definitely present before I bought it - Not saying the dealer knew - BUT- i have it in writing that the horse was sound - it probably was not sound when I bought it - it is a subtle lameness and only shows on small circles on a hard surface BUT the sale of goods act says it must be fit for purpose and it is not. I doubt any retailer sells something knowingly broken but the law says they must replace it if it is not fit for the purpose bought - You have 6 weeks minimum but much longer for items than can be reasonably expected to last a long time eg cars. Up to 6 years in some cases.
It is not drip feeding and i will not name anyone on this forum but i fully expect it to be in the equine press soon. I think most people would expect a horse to be sound for longer than 3 weeks unless they had done something ridiculous with it!
 
Actually mog, no, I wouldn't expect a sound horse for longer than 3 weeks - firstly accidents happen. Secondly dealers do not have X Ray vision, they do not pass horses through a scanner to ensure that EVERYTHING is perfect with the horse. If you don't have a horse 5 stage vetted and X Rayed then, IMO, you have no come back whatsoever.

If the dealer believed the horse was fit for purpose, and it was sold in good faith, which seems the case, then personally I feel sorry for the dealer, it is not their fault that you did not want a vetting.

ETA: Just seen above that you DO have come back even if the dealer didn't know about the condition - in that case dealers need to be more careful! I would always advise a full vetting tho.
 
Last edited:
Lizzie66 said:
From my rudimentary knowledge of the Sale of Goods act, I think a few may be missing the point here, if a dealer is selling a horse they have an obligation to sell something that is fit for purpose.

It is irrelevant as to how long they had the horse or whether they knew the horse had a pre-existing condition, if the poster can prove that the condition was present before they bought the horse the dealer is likely to be held liable.

Your comments about vetting would apply if the poster had bought privately.
Click to expand...

this is correct the liability is with the seller!
 
the following q's arise....
how much was the purchase price?
did you try it? schooliong lunging jumping hacking?
did you vet it? 2 stage or 5 stage were bloods taken?
what was the advert?
when was it last shod?
was the shoeing good?
did uit have any corrective shoeing ie extensions bars etc? broadwebs...........
have you re shod since purchase?
the copybook equine does not exist as they are living breathing things that are suject to change in lifestyle, dietary and exercise regimes!
etc etc
sorry anyone can lame a horse in 21 days.........................
 
Sorry OP, but for once I have a bit of sympathy for the seller. I don't know anything about the letter of the law and you may well have a case, but morally if this dealer sold you a horse he had no reason to think had a problem and you did not get it vetted I don't see why that is his fault. If he knew about the lameness that is an entirely different thing of course. It all depends on what evidence you have that the lameness was there before purchase and the dealer was aware.
 
I think it's disgusting that the Sale of Goods Act makes no differentation between buying a washing machine and a living, breathing creature. I think that Op is in the wrong here, for not having the horse vetted. Also, I think it's unreasonable that the dealer may have to give a refund when there is no evidence that they could have known the horse had a problem. You may win your case, but I do feel some sympathy for the dealer, unless you can prove that they deliberately misled you, which it doesn't appear you can. Sometimes the law is an ass.
Buyer beware is a reasonable warning, but the first advice always given here on buying a horse is to get it vetted.
 
I am not keen on dealers as they frequently sell horses that are either not fit for purpose or have health issues, and in some cases aren't even fit to be ridden.

But in this case, I find it hard to see how you can hold the dealer responsible.
Firstly because you failed to have the horse vetted, and secondly the horse was sound for 3 weeks. 3 weeks is a long time in the life of a horse, so many things can happen.

It is possible the dealer genuinely didn't know the horse had problems, although I find it very difficult to give dealers the benefit of doubt.
I have bought 2 horses from dealers myself and I would not touch a dealer with a barge pole again, in my experience they will sell you anything and dont bother doing any checks on the horse before hand, or fully assess it to know its suitability to a particular riding group ie. beginner.

If the dealer knew the horse has such problems, then yes they should refund you.
If you have it in writing that the horse was sound, then you may have some comeback x
 
Yes of course they can make a horse lame in 3 weeks but they cannot make established bony changes or stress fractures when the horse has only been walked and trotted on a soft school surface - the dealer was informed immediately and after we rested/ did all the usual checks for injury etc we had it x rayed and she was also told of the outcome of this. She may not have known but the onus is on her to refund - she claimed it had a 5 stage vetting abroad that was equivalent to a UK one and to (quote) 'save my costs why bother with another one?'
My issue is that this dealer is ignoring the sale of goods act - the horse was sold as sound and suitable for dressage - not a cheap hack - it is not suitable for dressage as it has established bi lateral forelimb lameness originating in the feet as diagnosed by a vet.
My point in the post was to say that it will cost thousands and a lot of stress to enforce the sale of goods act - we know we are in the right but the legal system is not cheap and many dealers would get away with this behaviour simply because someone could not afford to sue them.
Even after the horse was diagnosed lame this dealer offered to sell it on for me - luckily we declined or soemone else would be going through this! So those of you feeling sorry for her - how would you feel if you had the horse?
 
I feel for you, but honestly this is why people vet horses themselves before they buy them and not after. I have never heard of anyone relying on a dealer to have checked the horse is fit to pass the vet and you seem to want to hold the dealer responsible for not getting a good enough vetting done.

I am sorry you are having such a tough time of it, but sometimes it's not other people's fault.
 
My horse has had one weeks lameness in 6 years. On Wednesday he came in hopping lame. So, I could have sold him saturday, gone lame wednesday, and you would say he stayed sound for 5 days!

As Weezy says, you cannot guarantee if a horse is going to stay sound. Accidents happen.

When I read posts like this I think I would be terrified of selling a horse nowdays. Thank god ours are keepers.
 
MickeyMoo said:
As Weezy says, you cannot guarantee if a horse is going to stay sound. Accidents happen.
Click to expand...

Accidents do happen. Horses are also sold on with undisclosed histories of intermittent lameness. No accident has happened to the horse in this case as far as I've read.
 
Proves the importants off 5* vettings.
If you had one done and the hoof problems could be proved that they didn't happen in your care you would have had come back via the vet if nothing else.
 
"My point in the post was to say that it will cost thousands and a lot of stress to enforce the sale of goods act - we know we are in the right but the legal system is not cheap and many dealers would get away with this behaviour simply because someone could not afford to sue them. "

I think the point a lot of us are trying to make is that, regardless of the fact that you can use the law to force the dealer to give you a refund, you should have done the sensible thing and had the horse vetted. Especially as you planned a competetive career for it.

It appears that dealers need to develop xray vision these days. I still can't see what is wrong with the dealer's "behaviour". The horse was sound when they sold it to you, even you admit that.

How would I feel if I had the horse? Gutted, but I would have had it properly vetted before buying so at least I'd know I had tried everything I could to make sure I was buying a healthy horse. The dealer will pay, it appears, but I think you are overlooking your responsibility as a buyer.

Out of interest, what happens to the horse now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top