Do you think I have a legal case?

[Black_Horse_White]

I totally agree it is wrong to sue. But please unless its actually happened to you don't assume that they don't have a case. I was told that and i lost. The person who brought the pony off me was also experienced more than me apparently.But in court told the judge that i should have told her that the pony was not suitable for her children.

 

[kit279]

The pregnancy as you say is irrelevant. I don't think you have a case - you would have to prove wilful negligence on the part of the owner and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff not the defendant. Even if you did win your case (incredibly unlikely), any money you gain in compensation is going to swallowed by your legal fees. I have also known a judge award costs to the defendant when he considered the case to be spurious. If you are prepared to have a socking great legal bill and you consider this to be worthwhile, then go ahead - I personally think it is an awful lot of hassle for no gain and the possibility of serious financial cost.

 

[LizScott]

Regardless of whether the seller was in the wrong or not, you can't prove it so there really isn't any point in harping on about it! Personally I'd be more furious at myself for putting my baby in such a dangerous situation (you didn't know the woman, horse could have had all sorts of issues) count your lucky stars you didn't lose your baby and get your friend to find someone else to help her next time.

 

[Mithras]

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds to me like the horse spooked, bucked and buggered off. Mine does this sometimes when he's feeling well, that's just horses, however I would happily put a novice on him. I've had a couple of friends on him who have never sat on a horse before and he was a paragon of virtue because all he has to do is plod around, on a long rein, with nothing being asked of him. When someone gets on who wants some real work, sometimes horses object. I'm wondering if this is what happened today, coupled with the horse being a bit melodramatic about something that had scared it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats exactly how I would describe my mare. Nothing ever hots her up, pheasants can shoot up from under her nose when we're galloping across a cornfield and she reacts less than me, I would happily ride her through a city centre in rush hour, yet if something spooks her she MIGHT whip round and get herself away from the percieved danger. It sounds like this horse had a fright and thats why it also was a bit unsettled when the owner got back on. Dose'nt mean to say that horse isn't normally bombproof in most situations.

As for any legal case, I'd be worried that you are holding yourself out as an expert by providing a service (perhaps free this time but have you charged for services such as teaching in the past) and by listing your qualifications. Therefore you are not a novice and are taking away any possible duty of care the owner might have owed you. In other words, you were in a position to make your own judgement and failed to spot any signs that the horse was not as described. You knew the risk of riding a strange horse but willingly took it.

Also, is it possible that being pregnant affected your balance and sense of timing and this was a spook you normally would have stayed on?

black_horse_white - sometimes the judgements of first instance judges can be very frustrating. I remember once I was up as a trainee solicitor in front of a sheriff who had at best a rudimentary knowledge of contract law.

I would hate to get into the situation where it becomes almost impossible to sell a horse because 3 months hence it shies and the rider falls off. Likewise where trying a horse becomes impossible because our insurance companies won't let us do so without completing a risk assessment first and the try out gets cancelled due to wind, or rain, or puddles...

 

[ester]

Am I completley imagining it or have I heard that some horses react strongly to people being pregnant too?

sorry OP no experience of the legal side of this. My only thoughts that anyone who agrees to someone riding their horse while 5months pregnant maybe shouldn't have been trusted. Just because I trust my boy a lot but not that much.

 

[Mithras]

Should also point out that black_horse_white's unfortunate case was in contract law which is more black and white (excuse the pun in such an unfortunate matter) than a claim in negligence or reparation, where you really do have to jump through a number of eviential hoops in order to make a successful claim.

 

[zoeshiloh]

The title of this thread is "do you think I have a legal case" and everyone has pretty much agreed no. If you didn't want opinions you shouldn't have asked. All you can do now is decide whether or not to take it further but if you do it will be long and costly for you with no guarenteed result. I sympathise with you I have taken tumbles from horses that are not as described but sadly that is horses, it's a risky business. I chose to get on them knowing the owner of course wouldn't admit to any flaws.

 

[Honeypots]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It spooked and couldn't really have done much of a bolt, since it was in a school.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree on this point. If the horse had truly bolted, I suspect it would have gone crashing through or jumped the arena fence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree . I know a bolter will usually go through fences but not all...some will just go round and round in a complete panic.
I probably have more sympathy for the OP than most as my friend bought a little horse in a similar situation.
She was a first time buyer looking for a first horse for her 13 yr old competent daughter. She tried the horse twice and bought him but found out soon after she got him home that he had a tendancy to take off in the school...never out hacking. If she had been told about this she would never had considered buying him or indeed even put her daughter on him.

eta: a bolt or a proper 'take off' is very different to a horse spooking and whipping round or taking off for a few strides. If this horse actually bolted or took off in the school then he most definitely is not as described.

 

[Vicki_Krystal]

Do you have a legal case?

No you dont, so move on.

 

[M_G]

I think you are very foolish to get on an unknown horse & there is a good chance the owner is telling the truth, I popped a girl at the yard up on my lad (she is a good rider competes at novice BE ect) my lad decided it would be fun to have a little buck..

Now he did this once with me over a year ago and he took off across the school not a bolt just taking the piss, I would now be reluctant to let others on him but he is 100% for me

Glad baby is ok & wish you a speedy recovery

 

[LankyDoodle]

QR:
I think the fault lies at your own door. You are pregnant, this was a strange horse and you chose to get on it. I would not take someone else's word for it, as she is trying to sell the horse and is also a stranger to you so is likely to bend the truth. I am pregnant and am even dubious about getting on my cob George, who I have owned for 7 years and had very few mishaps with.

No, you don't have a legal case.

 

[TequilaMist]

I once bought a horse that reared with me.Owners only took it back because on asking around it turned out to be a habitual rearer.Was well known for it and people that had no interest/gain in myself were willing to say this.If you can find out if horse had a rep for doing this and seller KNEW(may be pretty hard that one too) it did this then maybe but may be more money/time wasted than you would gain if you won case.
Wish you a speedy recovery

 

[LankyDoodle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I have added to my posts, this isn't about the fact that I got on a horse while pregnant & I wonder if I would have got a different reaction from some of the other posters if I had ommitted the fact that I am pregnant.

[/ QUOTE ]

not from me....

[/ QUOTE ]

Or from me.

People who make mistakes, errors of judgement etc, and then proceed to blame everyone but themselves, do get on my pips, pregnant or not pregnant. I have nothing against pregnant riders; I am still riding myself, but if I fell off George because he acted out of character (and he does sometimes, although i don't usually fall off my centre of gravity is changing) I wouldn't blame my husband because he'd told me I'd be fine; I'd blame myself because ***I*** chose to get on despite knowing the risks.

 

[LankyDoodle]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks to all those who have made constructive comments. [ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]



Oh so for constructive read ' agree with me '.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeh, makes me laugh my arse off when people think constructive means to agree with them. Your OP asked if you had a legal case; my opinion is that you do not as it is your responsibility to take care of your safety.

Also, don't blame others for bringing your pregnancy into it. YOU brought your pregnancy into this as if it would make your case stronger and you'd have more of a legal case and the vendor of the horse had greater obligation to inform you of the horse's flighty nature.

 

[harrihjc]

The advert was actually worded as 'safe, sensible, not dangerous allrounder'

the advert actually said that?? Maybe it's just me, but describing a horse as 'not dangerous' strikes me as a little strange..?

I had a loan horse that I would have considered safe and sensible, until 6 months after I had her she went absolutely crazy for no apparent reason when walking round the school. Turns out she had a history of this type of thing and the vet had advised that she was put down because of her dangerous behaviour before she was loaned out to me, and that's why owner no longer wanted her. They're strange animals, difficult to prove anything because they are just unpredictable.

Hope you get better soon, it could have been so much worse

 

[MrsMozart]

Don't have time to read them all, but I'm with the others on this (posts on first page).

Hope you mend quickly and well and that your baby is and remains okay.

Getting on any horse, whether advised as sane or otherwise, is always a risky business. As an experienced horsewoman it would be reasonable to expect you to know that: as others have said, every horse can have its off-moments. The chances of proving this horse is not a novice ride are slim, and a court would look at all the salient points of the case, if it were to become a case.

 

[ladyt25]

I feel very sorry for you in your predicament and being stuck in hospital in pain is no fun. BUT I have to say i agree with the majority here in saying that you chose to get on the horse, pregnant or not and that is the risk you took.

We all do it every single day when we get on our horses as, no matter how well we 'know' them they are at the end of the day and animal and unpredictable.

I think you should think yourself lucky your injuries will heal but I do not think you have a legal case at all I'm afraid and I do not like the whole idea of suing someone for what are essentially your own mistakes/errors.

I have been to see many horses - one in particular I will never forget as it threw me so high in the air (it really wanted to get me off) I bounced when i hit the ground. Luckily no damage done then but even if I have injured myself I wouldn't have ever considered suing the guy selling it!

I wish people would stop with the "ooh could I sue?" mentality and realise accidents can and do happen - especially where half a tonne of horse is concerned!

 

[Delta99]

I think the best thing for you to do would be to contact a few solicitors who specialise in equine law. They will give you free advice on the phone. Contact a few though, I found the advice can vary quite a bit.

 

[Honeypots]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I have added to my posts, this isn't about the fact that I got on a horse while pregnant & I wonder if I would have got a different reaction from some of the other posters if I had ommitted the fact that I am pregnant.

[/ QUOTE ]

not from me....

[/ QUOTE ]

Or from me.

People who make mistakes, errors of judgement etc, and then proceed to blame everyone but themselves, do get on my pips, pregnant or not pregnant. I have nothing against pregnant riders; I am still riding myself, but if I fell off George because he acted out of character (and he does sometimes, although i don't usually fall off my centre of gravity is changing) I wouldn't blame my husband because he'd told me I'd be fine; I'd blame myself because ***I*** chose to get on despite knowing the risks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the point here though, is that the OP doesn't think this is out of character and that the seller was being dishonest. However, I'm not sure how she could ever prove this and agree it would be pointless trying to sue unless it turns out this is a well known problem...

 

[ihatework]

I've read through this entire thread and can completely see why you are angry and considering legal action.

As experienced horse owner/riders it is pretty easy to tell what is a freak accident and what is a common behaviour, the owners response would also tell me you had been misled.

IMO it is a far greater probability that the owner of this horse had hidden the truth from you rather than this being a rare one off event.

However proving that legally would be very difficult and I suspect this will be a case to chalk up to experience. Certainly speak to your insurance company or the BHS legal helpdesk but I wouldn't raise your hopes.

I'm a strong believer in karma though so one day the seller will get their come uppance

Hope you heal quickly.

 

[PapaFrita]

I'm sorry to hear about your fall. Very glad baby is OK, you must've been so worried!
Sadly I agree with the others and I don't think you have a case. You'd have to prove, somehow, that the horse was misrepresented, the owner misled you, etc, etc. and I don't see how you could. I think you'd have a stronger case if you'd actually bought the horse, but as things are I think you should breathe a sigh of relief that it your fall wasn't worse and let someone else try out prospective horses. Hope you feel better soon.

 

[LankyDoodle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I have added to my posts, this isn't about the fact that I got on a horse while pregnant & I wonder if I would have got a different reaction from some of the other posters if I had ommitted the fact that I am pregnant.

[/ QUOTE ]

not from me....

[/ QUOTE ]

Or from me.

People who make mistakes, errors of judgement etc, and then proceed to blame everyone but themselves, do get on my pips, pregnant or not pregnant. I have nothing against pregnant riders; I am still riding myself, but if I fell off George because he acted out of character (and he does sometimes, although i don't usually fall off my centre of gravity is changing) I wouldn't blame my husband because he'd told me I'd be fine; I'd blame myself because ***I*** chose to get on despite knowing the risks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the point here though, is that the OP doesn't think this is out of character and that the seller was being dishonest. However, I'm not sure how she could ever prove this and agree it would be pointless trying to sue unless it turns out this is a well known problem...

[/ QUOTE ]

But she didn't know the horse so out of character or not, she should have made the judgement call about the safety of her and her baby. The horse may have been acting out of character like my horse does sometimes, but it might always be flightly; whichever is the case, the vendor of the horse did not tell the OP to get on the horse and that decision was made by the OP herself, just like I make the decision each day whether or not today is a good day to ride my horse when I'm 2 months' pregnant.

 

[JanetGeorge]

A lot of people on this thread obviously have NO idea what constitutes 'negligence' and what facts you need for a winnable case. The horse was advertised as safe etc., the OP told the seller that she was pregnant etc. and was assured it was quiet. It wasn't - end of!

I think the OP has a very good case and would recommend that she talks to Matthew Knight (or one of his partners) at http://www.knights-solicitors.co.uk/ They will give honest advice based on a TRUE knowledge of the law and what is required to prove negligence (and it's not much where horses are concerned thats to a recent High Court judgement that put almost TOTAL liability on the horse owner for anything their horse does!!)

I back and sell young horses as part of my business. I'm insured to the hilt and I still take EXTREME care when allowing anyone to try my youngsters. I'll get them to ride a 'quiet' horse first if I'm not convinced they have the experience to ride a youngster - and if they're not good enough, they are not allowed to try.

This person SHOULD have some form of public liability - either personal or professional. That's what insurance is for!

In this particular case I would say the OP has a GOOD chance - and should at least speak to a GOOD lawyer. It wasn't a pure accident - the horse was NOT as described and I would suggest the owner WAS negligent in allowing a pregnant woman to ride it!

How many people have to be injured or killed?? It's only a few successful court cases against those who ARE careless of the safety of others that will make the irresponsible owners think twice.

 

[Silverspring]

[ QUOTE ]

I however have a factured hip and write this from my hospital bed while drugged up on morphine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very cohesive post for someone on morphine, I have to say I can rarely manage it when I'm not doped up to the eye balls. I also didn't realise you could use a laptop in hospital, I'm not so worried about future accidents now as I'll just harass the HHO users

As for your case, I don't think you can sue anyone for a horse acting out of the ordinary. Horse's do what horse's do, no one of them is 100% safe. You get on, you risk falling off, you decide if you want to take that risk no one else.

 

[WandaMare]

Ditto Ben and Jerrys.

One thing I have learnt from reading this thread is how careful you need to be when trying new horses, especially when the responsibility for rider safety seems only to lie with the buyer in so many peoples minds. I am a trusting person too and know that I could very easily have made this mistake myself.

Interesting thread, wishing a speedy recovery to the poster x

 

[MrsMozart]

Just hopping back on here.

I have ridden horses who, if novice rider gets on they're as quiet as pie, but if an experienced rider gets on then they are 'less so'.

If JG is correct and the OP has a case then fine, go for it. But I would still say it would be questioned as to why someone who is five months pregnant would get on a horse that they did not know - I can see some form of argument on both sides, but as to how it will work in reality. There could be argument that your balance and ability were compromised due to the preganancy.

I think there would have to be some great degree of research into the horse and the owner.

 

[Mithras]

I disagree; more likely if the seller had insurance, she would get some kind of small settlement. I don't like the fact that the OP has held herself out as an expert and taken a risk within her knowledge willingly, from a legal viewpoint. I don't think its a good case and I would'nt take it on myself. If the seller doesn't have insurance, I could not see any point in a solicitor taking it on, other than to write some letters at the OP's expense, to tell her much the same.

IMHO the reason "health and safety" has become so prominent lately is because of insurance company scaremongering - they pay out when they should'nt and then, like Chinese Whispers, the reason they paid out becomes represented as being "the law"- when it is nothing of the kind. Law making requries legislation or the making of a legal principle - not a decision on economic grounds by an insurance company. And health and safety is invariably a misnomer - the Health and Safety At Work Act 1974 is criminal legislation that applies to employees and workplaces, not private individuals in private settings. * rant over *

 

[gemmahodgkinson]

just a thought but 2 lawyers have posted on this thread, both think that there is little or no basis for a strong claim.
To be negligent you have to have a duty of care. I do not see how the seller had a duty of care (in the legal, not moral sense) to the rider here??? The OP is not employed by the seller, had not been paid to ride the horse by the seller etc. She got on of her own free will.
And how can you expect the seller to take into account the fact that the rider was pregnant when the OP was obviously willing to put the unborn child at risk by riding a strange horse in the first place!
It would also be near impossible to prove that the horse hadn't had a one in a million spook and had never done it before and will never do it again and evidence like 'he said/she said' is always unreliable.
OP - I think it's always dangerous ground when you invite people who are not legally qualified to give you legal advice because you will get random half baked theories about what it and is not 'legal'.
If you are that bothered call a solicitor yourself who will fairly quickly tell you whether they think you have a claim as they will not want you taking up their chargeable time if you don't!

 

[FMM]

The OP said that she was an experienced rider. It is perfectly possible that the owner of the horse could counter sue saying her horse was traumatised because the OP was not as experienced as she said she was.

Just playing devil's advocate. You are going on people's word, and recollection of events - neither of which will agree - the owner will say one thing, the OP and friend will say another.

I am just pleased that no permanent damage has been done, and suggest you concentrate on your recovery. Personally, I would rather have had a c section, but could not find a good enough excuse for one.

 

[Dobby]

QR

From what I can see, it's like test driving a car and the owner says "yeah the brakes work fine" you get it halfway down the road and it turns out they don't work. You crash, and break your hip. Same kind of situation.

OP, I think you definatly have a case. The owner (from what I can gather) misled you, and of course you would never have got on board if you'd known it was dangerous.