Following on from "vetting" thread...

Lippyx

Lippyx

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 September 2008
Messages
3,870
Location
Essex... In my bubble, floating above reality!!
Visit site
How many of you bought a horse that failed a flexion test?

Intrigued as to how many of you didn't worry about it.

Also, do people buy a horse that passed a flexion test, then actually sue a vet if it ever went lame? Is there a time frame in which a horse has to become lame before you couldn't sue a vet?

This is all just hear say, as I am interested to others thoughts/experiences.
 
Yes a girl in the yard bought one that failed hind flexions.I had tried it with her and it had a recent injury to it hocks but still moved so well and was really active.The vet was fairly insistent but as it was at the time being bought as a forever horse and at 13yrs a schoolmaster we went ahead at a slightly reduced price.
Two years on a change of plan meant he was sold, the vet was amazed at how sound he was he flew through a 5 stage with no problem at all and at 15 the vet said he was better after flexion than most younger horses.
He had no treatment in 2 years and had been worked fairly hard,SJ/XC/ODE he is now doing the same and hunted all last season in his new home.
 
I don't think you can sue a vet when a horse goes lame - no matter how long after a vetting! The vetting is just meant to be a snapshot of the horse on the day of the vetting. If it's sound then it passes - end of. If you're sensible then you have bloods taken, if the horse then goes lame later and you are suspicious then the bloods are analysed and if the horse was drugged then you get back to the vendors.

I've just sold my lovely horse who despite having bi-lateral bone spavin passed three lots of flexion tests, so IMO they're fairly meaningless anyway.
 
I bought one which failed a hind limb flexion. He was never lame behind in 5 years of ownership. I bought another which passed without problem and she later developed a bone spavin.

Flexion tests are designed by the devil!
 
I think it depends upon the precise result of the flexion, the age of the horse and the intended purpose.

I had a horse I was looking to buy fail the flexions, it was marginal on one side but then quite marked the other side. The vet felt that there was some uneven muscling too which could possibly have indicated that the horse was already using that hind limb less, although she pointed out that the muscle could simply have been down to poor schooling.

The vet felt that given the sort of use that we wanted it probably wasn't worth the risk on a 7 year old, but we wanted a fairly decent allrounder that would be able to jump and dressage at riding club or low level affiliated. She said that had we been looking for a hack or a hack that could also pootle round 2ft3 and do the occasional intro or prelim test unaffililiated once or twice a year then she would be less concerned. She also said she would have been less concerned had the horse been 14 but at 7 it was a worry.

Having said that we went on to buy a horse that the vet couldn't do the flexions on as she wouldn't pick her feet up...... so who knows whether she would have passed!

The other key thing is the price, are you looking at a £1k horse, a £5k horse or a £10k horse? If you buy a cheap horse and get three years of use before it is only suitable as a light hack this is less of a concern than with an expensive horse. It also makes a difference for insurance.

Flexions are one reason I would want to be present at a vetting, to see the extent of any lameness and to talk to the vet in person.
 
You'd never ba able to sue a vet following a vetting - especially for something that they'd flagged up anyway..

As I said on the other thread, my friend bought a 11yr old ex BSJA horse for £2k several years ago when the market was good. I was worried that there was something wrong, and it was his first horse, so I persuaded him to have a vetting. The horse turned out to be nearer 13/14, and failed the flexion test. But the vet was a good, old fashioned, experienced type, and pointed out that despite that, the horse was a nice type and would be great for my friend. He bought the horse, had a couple of fun years with it (and no problems) and the horse was then sold onto someone else, who again had no problems.

I do think price is an issue. For a cheaper horse I wouldn't expect perfection.
 
I agree about value of horse, If its only 2k, then I guess you wouldn't be too concerned if the horse was 100%. How does this affect insurance though? Is it still the case that unless you pay over 5k for a horse, you dont have to submit a vetting certificate? I remember it was something like that a few years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top