Buyer Beware

[arwenplusone]

Quick reply - no real comment on the overall situation - sounds like it is unfortunate for all concerned. But I find myself on the dealers side a little bit - having just had a problem with a horse I sold as a private seller (threatening to sue etc) I can sympathise

Who'd be a dealer in this day and age - you'd be sued every flipping week, even if you did sell in good faith.

*sigh* we are all too quick with legal action/blame these days I think.

Mog - I am sorry about your situation & I hope there is a good solution for your horse.

 

[Lizzie66]

OK, so just to get this right, people think that dealers should:
- carry out vettings to include x-rays, MRIs and scintigraphy even when there is no other indication of a problem
- refund for any horse that develops a 'pre-existing' condition at any time in the horse's life and regardless of whether the dealer knew anything about this or could have known about it
- and that this is a legitimate cost of doing business.

Even if this turns out to be a legal requirement, personally I find it ridiculous and I do feel sorry for dealers. Although there are many crooks out there, there are also many buyers who are totally unrealistic about what it means to own a horse and I don't see why the seller is responsible for them!

The seller is responsible because they are selling the horse as part of their business.

They don't have to have all the scans, x rays etc, BUT if the horse later is found to have a pre-existing problem that made it unsuitable for the purpose it was sold then they are liable. They take this risk knowingly and they budget for this as part of their business.

This only applies where the seller is a dealer.

If the seller is private then the situation is more in favour of the seller and the buyer would have to prove that the seller deliberately misled them.

 

[Booboos]

The seller is responsible because they are selling the horse as part of their business.

They don't have to have all the scans, x rays etc, BUT if the horse later is found to have a pre-existing problem that made it unsuitable for the purpose it was sold then they are liable. They take this risk knowingly and they budget for this as part of their business.

This only applies where the seller is a dealer.

If the seller is private then the situation is more in favour of the seller and the buyer would have to prove that the seller deliberately misled them.

How long for? The rest of the horse's natural life? If so, could I buy a dressage horse from a dealer, ride it for 6 years and if it then has problems with navicular (a pre-existing condition) return it for a refund? Even hairdryers are not expected to work for years and years.

And does this hold regardless of what the buyer does? What if the buyer exaccerbates an existing condition? Or does not seek veterinary help when the problem is minor? Or uses the horse outside of its 'purpose'?

And who determines what counts as a pre-existing condition?

(BTW I would imagine any lawyer worth his money would have advised OP not to discuss any of this in public before the legal proceedings were over, but there you go).

 

[Seahorse]

Exactly!! To even suggest to a buyer that they rely on a previous vetting - even if it was done in the UK a week earlier - suggests the dealer doesn'tWANT the horse vetted (probably because a 5 stage vetting includes a blood sample!)

Even when I sell a foal I know is healthy I always suggest that the buyer SHOULD get a 2 stage vetting (you can't 5 stage vet a foal very easily!) And for ridden horses I always recommend that they get a 5 stage vetting! (And to date I've never had one fail, nor did I expect them to!) But that 5 stage vetting protects the buyer against something I couldn't know about (e.g. a heart murmur under strenuous exercise) - and it also protects ME against a buyer who comes back 6 weeks later - having lamed a horse - or screwed up its wind - and tries to get a refund on the basis that the horse MUST have been a crock when they bought it.

I think it's highly likely the dealer knew the horse would not pass a vetting without Bute (which would of course be detected later when the horse went lame and the buyer asked for the blood to be tested!)

Couldn't agree more!

 

[Silverspring]

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.

Sorry but hell slap it into you. If you go shopping for a prospective dressage horse you either go with knowledge or someone else who has knowledge. You clearly had neither when buying this horse. I have run in dressage circles for many, many years and I can assure you not a single person I know would ever consider buying a horse without full xrays and a 5 stage vetting UNDERTAKEN BY THEIR OWN VET. I have to say I hope you lose.