Dangerous rearer - would you send back? Help.

[Winters100]

Personally I would send him back immediately.

Whatever the cause you are unlikely to be happy and confident riding him after this, so he is not suitable.

 

[Esmae]

I would send it back. No ifs or buts.

 

[Casey76]

I’m also in the ‘send him back’ camp. Horses coming from dealers have that warranty.

 

[onemoretime]

So sorry to read this, its a rotten situation to find yourself in with a new horse. I agree with everyone else on here to send it back to the dealer. If you have trouble, get the blood taken at vetting run, its stored for 6 months at Newmarket and can be run any time during that 6 months but you have to pay and it would be at least £300 could be a bit more but if positive, will give you power to your elbow. You could say to the dealer when you tell him you are sending it back that you will be getting the blood run and see what his reaction is. It may just jolt him into taking it back without a fuss and giving you a full refund.

 

[ycbm]

Send

The

Horse

Back.
.

 

[Goldenstar]

Return the horse at once .

 

[blondetraveller]

Agree, a kind All rounder aged 13 should never do that .......unless they were being stabled 24 x7 and fed hard feed to the eyeballs.

He’s been turned out every night so at least 13/14 hours and very settled in the field. This is apparently a similar routine to what he had at the dealers.

Just been on chaff and a balancer

 

[blondetraveller]

So sorry to read this, its a rotten situation to find yourself in with a new horse. I agree with everyone else on here to send it back to the dealer. If you have trouble, get the blood taken at vetting run, its stored for 6 months at Newmarket and can be run any time during that 6 months but you have to pay and it would be at least £300 could be a bit more but if positive, will give you power to your elbow. You could say to the dealer when you tell him you are sending it back that you will be getting the blood run and see what his reaction is. It may just jolt him into taking it back without a fuss and giving you a full refund.

Thank you. I will keep that one up my sleeve if I need it.

I’m now reading lots of horrible stories about horses who are starved and dehydrated so they don’t misbehave. I’m assuming the blood tests would only show if a sedative or painkiller etc was used?

 

[blondetraveller]

The first horse I bought napped, reared and fell over backwards when I rode her at home a week or so after she arrived with us. I asked a local riding school owner what she thought and her reply was 'there's no way back from that'.
We ended up giving her away to a very much more experienced home with all her issues disclosed. We should have sent her straight back, but my husband thought we should try to sort her - until he ended up in a ditch...

Thanks for sharing. This is my worry that it will just be an ongoing problem even after checking every possible cause.

 

[Pinkvboots]

Thank you. I will keep that one up my sleeve if I need it.

I’m now reading lots of horrible stories about horses who are starved and dehydrated so they don’t misbehave. I’m assuming the blood tests would only show if a sedative or painkiller etc was used?

Unfortunately it is a thing that some do to sell some horses I think if bloods are run they would only show if any drugs were in the horses system.

 

[Lois Lame]

Was a vet in the local area (they are a dealer so knew of all the local vets) but not their usual vet if that makes sense.

we took a few saddles to vetting and instructor and vet confirmed one was a good fit (saddler is booked for a few weeks time) so I wouldn’t say it is a terrible fit.

This ring alarm bells to me. I would have wanted my own vet, not the dealer's suggestion, no matter how it was dressed. I'd be inclined to send the horse back and get my money back and keep looking. Rearers are a no-go area for me.

 

[Lois Lame]

I might be over-reacting, but is there any possibility that the bloods could be faked if there is a relationship between that vet and the dealer?

I'd be inclined to forget about the bloods, and get on with returning the horse.

 

[Riding_my_Rozi]

If there are no pain issues, I would say send him back.

 

[Trouper]

And what about the poor horse in all this?? Is he to be sent back to the dealers only to be sold on again - and again - with the same thing happening each time.

I would strongly suspect KS and I would at least be asking my vet to x-ray asap to prove the point one way or another before deciding how to approach the dealer.

 

[ycbm]

And what about the poor horse in all this?? Is he to be sent back to the dealers only to be sold on again - and again - with the same thing happening each time.

I would strongly suspect KS and I would at least be asking my vet to x-ray asap to prove the point one way or another before deciding how to approach the dealer.

It's a valid question but the answer is the same as for indiscriminate breeding. If the sellers of these horses keep being rewarded for selling them by them being bought and kept, they'll keep on doing it.

I also feel there a very limited duty of care if someone has owned the horse a very short time and it behaved that way almost immediately.

I do feel very sorry for the horse, but other horses can be prevented from being in this situation if everyone pushed back against bad dealers. And the new owner doesn't deserve the anxiety and cost of keeping the horse either, so on balance I think it's the right thing to do.
.

 

[ester]

and if people didn't sell their crocked horses on so that the dealers can pick them up cheap and sell on again for ££.

 

[Trouper]

I respect your theory @ycbm and, if only all horse owners were HHO Forum members, then we might have some collective clout to deal with these wretched dealers!!! I suspect half the time dealers palm people off by insisting the horses was fine before and questioning the buyer's competence to handle the horse.

I am not saying that the horse should stay with the buyer as an expensive sick note, but that having at least some evidence with which to challenge the dealer (and maybe place in the public domain?!?) might be more effective and beneficial for the horse in the long run.

 

[ester]

I'd look into doing that if the dealer was difficult about return but I wouldn't in the first instance

 

[ycbm]

I think it could cause some problems returning the horse if nothing wrong is found. It would also delay the return to investigate, and the delay could also cause problems.

So although I see the point and if, for example, active kissing spines or hock arthritis was found it might make the dealer resell with disclosure, and/or sort the issue, I suspect it's more likely that it would be put through an auction.

There also a strong possibility that the buyer will not be covered by insurance for the cost of those investigations, either because it was too soon, or deemed a preexisting condition, or they don't have any.

It's a mess for all concerned. The most guilty, as Ester says, being the first person who sold the poor horse knowing it had issues.
.

 

[Orangehorse]

There are substances that can be given to horses that leave the system within 24 hours, so no trace would be found by the vet taking a sample.

 

[Red-1]

Thank goodness it was a dealer and not a private seller, so you can send him back.

 

[dorsetladette]

I'd be sending back asap.

Even if the saddle fitted badly or pain it is quite an extreme reaction. I don't think if it was a badly fitting saddle I would be completely happy riding a horse like that again. It would constantly niggle in the back of my mind that he may of changed shape etc etc etc, (saddle fitters would make a fortune out of me!)

I'd assume OP has spent a not inconsiderable amount of money on this horse. They haven't rehomed it to rehab it through any potentially undisclosed health issue. Not nice for the horse to be pushed back and forth but I don't think its the purchasers responsibility to 'fix' it.

 

[PeterNatt]

When buying (or selling) a horse, it is important to be clear about who you are entering into a contract with. You may consider the important factors are the horse itself, or its price but the identity of the parties to the sale will mean legal rights may (or may not) be implied into the sale.
Certain statutory rights apply only to a contract between a consumer and a trader, such as the rights that goods sold must be of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose.
If you agree to sell a horse on behalf of somebody it is important to be clear about your role to buyer and seller, before the sale is agreed. For this reason, many agents make clear in their advertisements that they are marketing the horse on behalf of a client.

When a buyer is dissatisfied with a horse after purchase, the law provides them with various routes to pursue a seller.

The buyer may be able to rely on the Consumer rights Act 2015 which provides that the horse sold in the course of a business to a consumer must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. If the horse fails to meet any of these provisions, the buyer has rights including the right to reject the horse within 30 days of receiving it.

The buyer may also rely on representations made by the seller before the purchase, although it is more difficult to do so. This could be an oral statement made when the horse was being viewed or a statement in an advert.

If those statements turn out to be untrue, the buyer can allege that the seller has made a misrepresentation and that the buyer is entitled to damages or to return the horse and seek a refund.

An aggrieved buyer must set out their case in writing, and allow the seller time to respond (and to make any proposals to resolve the dispute) before issuing court proceedings, if no resolution can be reached, the buyer would have to issue a claim form at court to pursue the matter.

The parties will go through a process dictated by the court, which is likely to include exchanging documents and witness statements. At a trial the judge will consider the documents and listen to witnesses. If the parties are represented the judge will also hear from their solicitor or barrister.

The crucial issue in a dispute such as this is almost invariably what was said or agreed before the sale. Buyers will face difficulties in persuading a judge the seller told them something if there is no record. Witnesses memories become jaded so judges are far more interested in documentary evidence. Examples are E-mails, text messages and social media messages. If an issue is important to you it is best to have it recorded in a contract of sale, but if that is not practical, make sure you have documentary record of it.

 

[AmyMay]

So have you now spoken to the dealer about returning the horse?

 

[HollyWoozle]

Another joining in to say please send this horse back. I do feel sorry for the horse, absolutely, but morally this lies upon the dealer and not you. Regardless of whether or not this horse has a health issue, saddle pinching or other this is decidedly dangerous behaviour.

 

[criso]

Have you done a search on the dealer, asked questions on the dodgy dealers Facebook page. Not that it changes what you should do but I would want to know if this was a dealer with a history of selling horses with problems and how they have behaved when other people tried to send back.

 

[chocolategirl]

Send it back, immediately.

This, before you get killed ?

 

[MyBoyChe]

Unless you want a horse prone to rearing at the drop of a hat, send it back before it kills you. Sorry to be blunt but thats the awful truth with a rearer Yes, I feel sorry for the poor horse who may well have issues and they may be solvable, but you didnt set out to buy a project so the onus is not on you. If you have money to burn and the option to buy another whilst investigating this one, if you dont mind spending out on a horse that may or may not ever come good then you have that option, but it absolutely isnt your responsibility to do so and Im sure noone on here would feel that it is! I had a similar situation about 12 years ago, bought a "family friend, genuine safe all rounder" from a dealer, first 2 days were fine but from then on she went vertical the minute your foot went in the stirrup. I dont have the experience, facilities or inclination to be dealing with that type of behaviour so after a couple of weeks of toing and froing with the dealer, back she went!!

 

[Sir barnaby]

I have read this with interest, I have had Barney 7 years, bought as a 6yrs old, i had known him since he was broken at 4, I have never ever had a problem he was slightly cold backed as a youngster and we used a pro lite on him, when I bought him i stopped using the pro lite and I have always used a nice thick Griffin numed numnah on him and I warm it before I put it on, i Never use the thin saddle cloths, this morning tacked up as usual and brought him out of stable, I tightened his girth and he started to bronc, he has never done that before ever, I loosened his girth and he was fine when I walked to the mounting block I tightened his girth again and got on no reaction had a beautiful ride out trotting and cantering beautifully. Now I think I must have nipped him or caught his skin when I first girthed him so can see why he reacted the way he did, tomorrow I will take more care when I tighten his girth and walk him out before I tighten it to ride so he is comfortable before we go, he is a thin skinned thoroughbred, so there could have been a problem with that, with your horse if you decide to try again, maybe walk around first before mounting or even lunge in tack before riding, but yes if this is an issue then definitely return horse, maybe if you have an arena put the mounting block in the arena so you can mount safely on a soft surface, and wear a back protector.

 

[mariew]

I'd send back without hesitation if that is an option. Don't get dragged into the poor horse option as that just reinforces the dealer being able to sell broken horses, especially in a desperate market.