Formal agreement for part loan?

[Rusty Rider]

Hi all!

So, after months searching, I have finally found a part-loan that works for me! I am now sorting out the somewhat less exciting admin part of getting insurance, listing all the info I need (who to contact if there’s a problem/accident and owner is unavailable, etc.) and… Considering if we need a formal (albeit short-form & flexible) agreement in place. The lawyer in me thinks it’s always best, the lazy-backside is of the view that, since the BHS only offers a template for full loans, it is probably neither customary nor really necessary…

On balance I would probably err on the side of caution, but I don’t want to annoy/spook the lovely owner, and as a compromise, making sure we have written records of any important points should be enough, but grateful for your views?

Thanks,

A very excited (and not so) Rusty Rider!

 

[JBM]

I had contracts for full loans but not part loans (but I knew part time loaner well) as I was seeing the horse multiple times a week and the tack
Depends on how confident you are! But it should be clear what is expected to due with tack cleaning, disciplines allowed and anything else before the loan begins
If the owner doesn’t feel they need one I wouldn’t think needed?

 

[ester]

I've never had one, albeit had a spoken agreement of 30 days notice.

 

[throwawayaccount]

Could the BHS template be amended to reflect a part loan instead?
not looked at it for years and also not very legal savvy

 

[ponynutz]

I’ve done two part loans now, both times have asked if owner wanted to draw up a contract and both times they have said no.

 

[Rusty Rider]

Thanks, that’s what I thought! She wasn’t fussed, and will be around quite a bit as she has two others on the yard (and we are team-tagging on morning/evening jobs). Did not strike me as dishonest or difficult in any way, but professional habits die hard!

 

[Rusty Rider]

Could the BHS template be amended to reflect a part loan instead?
not looked at it for years and also not very legal savvy

I definitely could do that, or even draft one from scratch, but as much as I love my career… If I ain’t getting paid for it, I ain’t doing it ?

 

[Merry neddy man]

Yes you need a contract, especially to cover insurance and veterinary costs and any damage to tack costs.

 

[Abacus]

From memory the BHS loan agreement is geared towards someone taking a horse entirely into their care, usually at their location, so a lot of it would have to be changed.

Could you send an email with the salient points for her to reply with an agreement? I’m no lawyer but it would probably cover you, if not legally just to set out expectations on both sides. Plus some reasonable what-if scenarios like: are you responsible for arranging cover on days you are on holiday, or what happens if the horse goes lame.

 

[Red-1]

I part loaned a couple of times and we did set things down in writing but not in any sort of legal agreement. As you are only going on odd days and the owner is around, there is less chance of mis-communication, so less need, IMO, as any inconsistencies can be ironed out.

TO me, the big thing with a full loan agreement is that the horse is not 'sold' to the person, so cannot be sold on. It is more about the horse remaining in the possession of the owner. Also, traditionally, the insurance will remain with the owner in a part loan situation. In my case, if the loan person had wanted to get extra insurance to cover themselves for personal injury, that was fine with me, but down to them, so insurance for me didn't change. I would also have covered all vets bills and tack repair, as I was still the main rider.

Be aware that the cheap 3rd party only insurances like BHS, WHW etc don't cover someone regularly riding the horse. They do not advertise that fact widely.

 

[Surbie]

Be aware that the cheap 3rd party only insurances like BHS, WHW etc don't cover someone regularly riding the horse. They do not advertise that fact widely.

Don't suppose you know where that is hidden in their terms? I know of a few people who this might affect - have their own horses but also a share of someone else's.

On balance I would probably err on the side of caution, but I don’t want to annoy/spook the lovely owner, and as a compromise, making sure we have written records of any important points should be enough, but grateful for your views?

Is a part loan the same as a sharer? When I was being assessed for a loan by my horse's previous owner (I did 3days/week for 3 months at her yard) we did an email setting out key expectations/responsibilities - it's handy to have for worst case scenarios. (It was also really useful for me as a novice sharer/loaner.)

 

[Red-1]

Don't suppose you know where that is hidden in their terms? I know of a few people who this might affect - have their own horses but also a share of someone else's.



Is a part loan the same as a sharer? When I was being assessed for a loan by my horse's previous owner (I did 3days/week for 3 months at her yard) we did an email setting out key expectations/responsibilities out - it's handy to have for worst case scenarios. (It was also really useful for me as a novice sharer/loaner.)

I rung them when Rigs was going to be ridden by other people and they told me. In fact, the BHS handed me on to the underwriters who told me.

I got a special policy with E&L, £6 a month, which covers him as opposed to me. The BHS policy is primarily to cover the person who took their policy out whilst they deal with their horses, not the actual horses (hence not having to name the horses on the policy). It absolves you against having to pay. But, of someone was riding Rigs and he kicked a Ferrari (for instance) the rider could be sued as the person in charge of the horse at the time, and they would not be covered under the BHS policy. If it were the horse who was deemed dangerous, and they sued me as the owner of a dangerous animal, despite me not being there, then I would be covered.

Rigs is a sensible chap, but people were riding him as a favour to me to get BH going, and I didn't want them in hock for damage if any occurred and it was deemed their fault. £6 a week seemed a good insurance to pay so everyone is covered. I still keep Harry Hall going, as it is for a higher amount for me, but pay the £6 for 1 million cover for them too.

The BHS said each rider should join them (!) and then they would be covered, but he had 3 regular riders apart from me, and it didn't seem fair or economically sound to ask them to do that, hence the E&L policy.

It also only covers domestic use, not paid grooms/riders.

 

[mavandkaz]

Thanks for clarifying that Red, was worried for a minute as I have a couple of sharers.
I insist they have their own PL insurance, as to me makes more sense that way. Also means they (and me) are covered no matter what horse we are on, as it's not unheard of to swap horses, jump on friends horse etc. So better to have individual cover.

 

[Surbie]

Thank you for the detailed reply @Red-1, much appreciated.

 

[Jasper151]

I had a contract when I shared years ago (I had to write it though!) but it just detailed the expected duties, specific tack (i.e. boots always had to be worn), and any restrictions on the horses (1 couldn't jump). I amended the BHS one to suit it being a share.

 

[Fieldlife]

I part loaned a couple of times and we did set things down in writing but not in any sort of legal agreement. As you are only going on odd days and the owner is around, there is less chance of mis-communication, so less need, IMO, as any inconsistencies can be ironed out.

TO me, the big thing with a full loan agreement is that the horse is not 'sold' to the person, so cannot be sold on. It is more about the horse remaining in the possession of the owner. Also, traditionally, the insurance will remain with the owner in a part loan situation. In my case, if the loan person had wanted to get extra insurance to cover themselves for personal injury, that was fine with me, but down to them, so insurance for me didn't change. I would also have covered all vets bills and tack repair, as I was still the main rider.

Be aware that the cheap 3rd party only insurances like BHS, WHW etc don't cover someone regularly riding the horse. They do not advertise that fact widely.

I got the opposite advise from the BD insurance underwriter about 5 years ago.

They said would cover all horses in my fulltime care (in a non commercial sense). And would cover third party injury when anyone handling them who is not not paid to handle them / not a professional. For third party liability. So if another livery was leading in from field and got trampled would not cover. But if same livery let go, horse got on road and hit car, damages to car would be covered.

So if my sharer fell off and horse then hit a car / sharer let go leading and horse knocked a person over etc. the injured third parties would be covered.

No cover for personal accident for any handlers / riders (that is their responsibility to have cover for)

I dont have multiple horses and sharers any more. But I did look into it in some detail at the time, including getting confirmation in writing from underwriters.

 

[Red-1]

I got the opposite advise from the BD insurance underwriter about 5 years ago.

They said would cover all horses in my fulltime care (in a non commercial sense). And would cover third party injury when anyone handling them who is not not paid to handle them / not a professional. For third party liability. So if another livery was leading in from field and got trampled would not cover. But if same livery let go, horse got on road and hit car, damages to car would be covered.

So if my sharer fell off and horse then hit a car / sharer let go leading and horse knocked a person over etc. the injured third parties would be covered.

No cover for personal accident for any handlers / riders (that is their responsibility to have cover for)

I dont have multiple horses and sharers any more. But I did look into it in some detail at the time, including getting confirmation in writing from underwriters.

That is not the opposite of what I said.

The aspect I wanted covered was if a friend was riding and the horse kicked a car whilst being ridden. I would be covered if the car owner sued me. However if they sued the rider, the rider was not covered to pay the damage.

 

[Fieldlife]

That is not the opposite of what I said.

The aspect I wanted covered was if a friend was riding and the horse kicked a car whilst being ridden. I would be covered if the car owner sued me. However if they sued the rider, the rider was not covered to pay the damage.

I think it depends. My understanding is my sharer, hacking my horse that kicked a car, would be covered as when the car owner raised a claim it would be passed to my insurance. Unless it was claimed that my sharer was actively negligent, invalidating the third party cover (as it is invalidated by direct negligence and failure to take reasonable care).

It would be an odd situation where discovering the owner of the horse had applicable 3rd party cover, the car driver choses to pursue the uninsured rider of the horse. Even though the claim is covered by the owner's insurance.

Separately I think the third part liability has a pretty high excess, and who pays that could be debated. Think it was 500GBP.