Disgusted by seller

H

hellspells

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 April 2008
Messages
5,268
Visit site
I am not sure how others will feel about this so had to ask if I was a being a bit OTT.

A friend had a horse vetted today. Grade 2 heart mumur was picked up along with a feel details that differed from what vet was told to friend (but that bit is by the by)

Anyway friend phoned vendor this afternoon to disguss a little bit of money being reduced for said mumur, the seller has said no, no price reduction. In fact horse is worth more than I advertised it for (I disagree), so is going to readvertise horse at a inflated price and not tell anyone about the mumur...

Now to me this is fairly disgusting, and equally horse had been advertised for a while now anyway....


Thoughts oh wise HHO people?
 
I can see this horse being advertised for a long long time, especially if she is not going to tell propspective buyers and then they have to pay for a vetting and find out something that the owner could tell them for free.
Move on, there are much nicer horses and sellers out there!
smile.gif
 
I bought a horse cheap a few years ago which had failed the vet for a previous person. He had a bad heart murmer apparently....

I had second opinion, nothing wrong, when i sold him 2yrs later the vet commented on his lovely regular heart beat.
 
Sorry but seller is the owner and it's up to the buyer to get it vetted. I bought my last horse with out having him vetted, but I only want him for hacking. but would strongly recomend vetting if you want to do a lot more with the horse.
 
Its always interesting to ask a vendor if anyone else has had the horse vetted whilst it has been for sale - you get varying replies! To be honest, the way buyers troll the websites looking for ages, they would notice if it had a raised price I would think. If they are asking decent money then one would hope that any prospective buyer would go for a full vetting and then they would be aware of the issues. But in the end it comes down to buyer beware I think. But, no, I don't think it is the right and proper think to do.
 
That is disgusting but I have something more disgusting than that.

Seller is given horse FOC as 'companion only, cannot be ridden and must go to long-term retirement home due to spine problems'. Seller advertises horse as a 'Fantastic Dressage/Eventer' and makes £4200!!!!
 
Yes I am fully aware that murmers can be there one day and not the next as it were. I just feel that this is not a cheap horse by far anyway and to be upping the price and keeping quiet about something such as this is disgusting - but I spose it depends on values.

Johnrobert I never questioned the reasons for/against vetting. It was more a questions of morals.

Maybe I should of said 'what would you do?' in my orginal post
 
[ QUOTE ]
That is disgusting but I have something more disgusting than that.

Seller is given horse FOC as 'companion only, cannot be ridden and must go to long-term retirement home due to spine problems'. Seller advertises horse as a 'Fantastic Dressage/Eventer' and makes £4200!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

That is truly disgusting!

And re the post above (sorry forgot who wrote it
blush.gif
) yes it is buyer beware I do agree.
 
If I was your friend and was as interested in buying the horse as she appears then I would decide whether the price the seller has set is market value and if it is and I liked the horse then I would buy it. A grade II murmur could be something and nothing so it would not be something which would sway my decision.
 
No unfortunatly after excepting the offer pending vetting the seller has now decided she wants more money. And it is most certainly not in line with market value.
 
Oh wonderful! Just how many vettings is this pea brained woman expecting prospective buyers to fork out for. It's not as if they are cheap to arrange. What to total @*&£! IMO. Just the sort of seller every buyer dreads
mad.gif
 
I would be annoyed if I had a horse vetted and it had a known problem that hadnt been disclosed. But I can see the sellers point of view. I think they are a bit daft but it really is up to them.
 
Maybe she isnt that bothered about selling? Could be why she's not in a hurry. I find sellers like that really annoying and a waste of time. Sellers can be just as bad as buyers at being timewasters.
 
i don't know why i think this, and i may be completely wrong... but i thought a vendor, if they knew of something like that had to legally declare it?!?!?

i *think* a friend of mine went to view a horse, had it vetted, it came back that it had a bad heart mumour. vet told vendor. and vendor then gave friend the horse FOC because she was obliged to tell any prospective viewers and therefore wouldn't be able to sell... although maybe that seller was thinking morally rather than legally?
 
Well, I would think most people would vet the horse before they buy it, so it's likely that he's not going to sell quick.
It could also be she didn't really want to sell him, so has used that as an excuse and has wasted everyones time. It's very poor form.
 
but the heart murmur may have gone by the time the horse is vetted again?

i sold a horse to a 4*** eventer and the vetting showed up a heart murmur- he never even asked about the price being dropped as so many horses do have murmurs.

i've also advertised a horse at one price and then decided to up the price as i had so many phone calls (over 40 in one day).

clipcloppop- i think vendors have to answer any questions truthfully but don't have to disclose anything if not asked directly- hence i ended up with a horse that weaves as i never asked if he had any stable vices!
she was a tb broodmare and i had people from Ireland wanting to buy her unseen just for her breeding- nobody blinked an eye when i said the price was going higher.
 
Thank you for the replies.

I don't think this horse will be going anywhere quick, he had been advertised for quite some time already and she had told friend that she had had very few phone calls.

I hope no one else gets their time wasted by her.
 
It is such a shame that people behave in this way, and unfortunately its rife amongst the sale of horses.
I left a yard where I watched one girl sell a horses stating that he had been to county shows and been placed, when he had only left the field on 3 occasions since she'd had him (at least a year) and that was for hacks.
She is now advertising a 4 year old, stating quite truthfully that he has been placed every time out, but as this was only 1 show as a yearling, is bit misleading, as it makes the person reading the ad think its been more than once. She is not telling anyone that when he was sent away and sat on, he was injured (can't remember if it was back or hip). This happened in the last few months, and the horse is still not right. However due to his experience (or lack of it,) he cannot be ridden in a vetting.

This is so unfair, and its people like these who give the horse world a bad name.

Makes me furious!!!!!! But of course, you can't say anything, because I'm sure there'll be some sort of court case for compensation due to loss of revenue (going on todays 'sue' culture) but they get away with it and someone goes home with their new horse which isn't quite what it seems. GRRRRR!!!!!!

Rant over, sorry!!!
grin.gif
grin.gif
 
If it was me I have to say I would not be selling for any cheaper without having horse seen by my own vet at the very least and due to the transient nature of some heart murmurs.
 
Heart murmurs are common enough in young horses. I had a friend who didn't buy a horse because this was detected at vetting. 2 years later the horse is competing at high level Dressage and has no sign of a murmer.
I suppose the seller has the right to tell prospective buyers whatever she chooses, she may not think the heart murmer is significant or even present. She probably has animals being vetted all the time and gets fed up with vets finding the most minor things, bumping up the severity or significance, and having prospective purchasers trying to get a reduced price.
I work on the principle that everything has got something wrong with it, somewhere, whether you take a chance and make an "informed" decision is up to you.
Its the buyers job to be wary and check things out for themselves ( caveat emptor).
I never trust anyone trying to sell me a horse (or car for that mattter!)
I make a decision based on my own judgement, bearing in mind the job I want the horse to do.
frown.gif
 
I don't think the OP's initial question was whether the purchaser should or should not buy the horse but whether the vendor was doing the right (moral) thing in re-advertising the horse at an inflated price to be knocked down to her original asking price should someone have the horse vetted again and the murmur be picked up.
 
It's a bit odd, but I wouldn't say its bad doing what they're doing. IMO she shouldn't tell propspective buyers about the heart murmor because vetting results vary wildly IMO and secondly its buyer beware. I had a horse once who failed its vetting based on an old eye injury and that it failed its flexion test (even though my own vet passed the same horse on it only an hour later!), but then the horse passed easily with the next prospective buyer (and she bought him and has had no problems with him since!). So I would never tell anyone if a horse had failed a vetting, UNLESS it was something serious or something it would obviously fail on again because another vet may pass it! I probably wouldn't reduce the price either based on this.

Don't understand why she's now put the price UP though, considering horse has been on market a while already - sounds like she doesn't really want to sell.
 
[ QUOTE ]
No unfortunatly after excepting the offer pending vetting the seller has now decided she wants more money. And it is most certainly not in line with market value.

[/ QUOTE ]
Was the horse passed as sound and healthy in every other respect of the vetting? If all that was picked up on the vetting was a grade II heart murmur then the seller is maybe not concerned about that and if it passed with flying colours for everything else then maybe she thinks she has under priced the horse. Murmurs can come and go so they often dont put people off the horse. Increasing horses prices can generate new buyers as well because she then puts the horse into a different price bracket so Im not so sure shes as dippy as some may think.

Sellers are obligated to tell about vices but they are not obligated to mention the horse has been vetted, although if asked about anything specific they should answer honestly otherwise they can be caught out if the buyer wants to take it further in the courts should the seller lie.

In your friends situation, again I would have to weigh up the pros and cons about the price increase and if I thought it wasnt worth it then I would pass and find another horse. If I thought it was worth it then I would pay the price. No amount of grumbling changes the fact that sellers are *always* in control of who they sell to and what price they will accept and if buyers dont like it then they have the option to pass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top