Horse on full loan advice

[Cinnamontoast]

Contract says:
The loan will terminate in the following circumstances:
either party giving xx days notice; or
breach of the terms of the agreement; or
horse not fit description given by owner or not fit for purpose as set out in clause xx; or
death of horse


Horse is loaned for the purpose of the borrow bringing horse on to event.

So you cover 2 of those re notice/not fit for purpose. I’m pretty sure the vet will say it’s a pre-existing condition. Arthritis is a relatively slow process.

I think the owner is trying to pull a fast one due to not having the horse insured. He/she can demand the moon from you, but ultimately, I think the vet and the law will side with you. I would ask the vet for a written report and return the horse. This will probably need organising and paying for by you. Try not to let the owner intimidate you.

 

[SO1]

If horse unfit when loaned to you could it have been that the plan was that they loaned to you, you bring horse back into work and get it eventing and then they take back and sell it and this arthritis diagnosis may mean not only do they have to treat horse but harder to sell. Or perhaps they knew horse not quite right when in full work work and was expecting this and going to get loaner to foot the bill and rehab so they don't have to.

It might be a bit costly but I think you need to get vet to do x-ray to prove arthritis and say in writing that horse not suited for eventing and it was a pre existing problem. Treatment such as injections can be expensive if not insured but whilst the horse is in your care you should ensure that the horse is comfortable a few months on bute hopefully not too expensive. Give notice to return horse as of 90 days and say you will ensure the horse is comfortable during that time but not pay for more expensive treatment and rehab but that you will follow vet advise in terms of keeping horse comfortable and exercise.

As these people may be difficult I would also get your vet to give horse a quick once over before you return in case they say horse returned in poor condition. I would also take dated videos again to prove condition.

You have every right to return horse. You have a duty of care to ensure horse is not suffering whilst in your care and hopefully your vet can advise you on the appropriate action to ensure this in a way that is not hideously expensive. I can see from their point of view that if you want to return sooner than 90 days due to arthritis then they would want proof of diagnosis and it would be your responsibility to pay and provide this proof if wanting to return before 90 days.

 

[GrassChop]

Ok so looking at the timeline, this all started after you had had the horse for 3 weeks. You have paid for and treated the splint appropriately as recommended by the vet. It appears that the box rest has done his arthritic hocks no good and he has stiffened up so it is more obvious. This has made it clear to you, again having received veterinary advice, that the horse is unsuitable for the purpose for which you want it. As the horse is on loan, you are perfectly entitled to give notice and return it. The welfare of the horse is your responsibility until it is returned. So I would say that if the horse is in pain then you should be treating him for that to keep him comfortable - again take the vet's advice on this and perhaps it is just that keeping him moving and no longer on box rest will ease the issue anyway. I see no reason at all why you need to treat or investigate a clearly pre-existing condition beyond that. The horse belongs to the owner and they need to pay if they wish to do that. Even if the condition was not preexisting to be honest, I think that is as far as your obligations go unless the contract specifies otherwise. Of course if you wanted to keep the horse and try to get it right in order to continue the loan, then you should pay (or come to another agreement with the owner to share costs or whatever) but I don't think full costs of investigation etc are yours if you are returning the horse.

This and treatment can vary down to personal preference so if they have an idea of how they want it treated which is different from how you have been managing it, I would say that would be their responsibility to pay for.

 

[Parrotperson]

Tricky.

This is why I advocate any horse on loan having the insurance in the name of the owner. That way vet claim can be made on continuity of cover.

That said, there is a disconnect in the story as far as I’m concerned. If the vet is saying the horse is not suitable for Eventing then they must feel the horse is showing significant pain / clinical signs (which goes against you saying no pain). LOTS of horses are adequately managed for evening with arthritic changes. And taking a horse on loan for competition I’d be expecting to factor that into my costs.

Ultimately though, if you want out, hand the horse back and call their bluff. But maybe buy your own next time.

yes quite. if lame it must be in pain surely?

Anyway no not your responsibility. Vet needs to write a letter to the effect that arthritis doesn't happen in seven weeks.