Horse on full loan advice

[taylorit]

Hi

After some advice. We have had a horse on full loan for 7 weeks now, 4 weeks ago he came in lame and unsure why then 4 days later his splint bone swelled up, this was checked (Xray etc) and treated by the vet and on box rest 2 weeks. Vet came back out to check and all sound with splint hardened. The horse is stiff in hocks and occasionally lame, vet has diagnosed arthritis and advises not going to be suitable for eventing. Notice has been given to hand the horse back, however the horse owner is demanding we treat the arthritis in the hocks at our expense and has been going behind our back trying to speak to our vet. Owner has been continually harassing, threatening legal action and saying breach of contract.

We have sought legal advice from a equine law solicitor who has check loan agreement and advise only obliged to deal the hocks if the horse is in pain, the vet confirms the horse is not in pain and the solicitor advises we are not in breach of contract.

 

[TheMule]

Just get the vet to write a report saying the arthritis is a pre-existing condition likely to have been present from well before the loan started.

 

[HashRouge]

It sounds as though you have done right by the horse and it has received the appropriate veterinary treatment while in your care. The arthritis will not have developed in the seven weeks that you have had the horse, even if the stiffness is only now becoming visible. I'm sure you could get your vet to write a letter stating it is a pre-existing condition. To my mind it is up to the owner to develop a long term management plan for the horse. I would possibly dispute the argument that the horse is "not in pain" from its arthritis though, as I do think that the stiffness is indicative of at least some discomfort. However, you can't really treat arthritis, you can only manage it - nothing you do is going to "fix" the horse, and I don't see how the owner can expect you to treat a long-term, degenerative condition when you have only had the horse on loan for a short period of time. In your shoes, I would probably ask the vet for some bute/ danilon to ensure that the horse is not in any discomfort, then send the horse back.

 

[ihatework]

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.

 

[Wishfilly]

Legally, I think you can call their bluff- if you refuse to pay for treatment, what will they do?

However, I agree that if the horse is sometimes unsound, and stiff, he is probably in some discomfort and should be appropriately treated in the short term.

What exactly do the owners want you to pay for?

 

[taylorit]

Legally, I think you can call their bluff- if you refuse to pay for treatment, what will they do?

However, I agree that if the horse is sometimes unsound, and stiff, he is probably in some discomfort and should be appropriately treated in the short term.

What exactly do the owners want you to pay for?

Horse is sometimes unsound but always stiff however can gallop around the field throwing shapes like nothing wrong. Owners want us to pay for the cost of investigation and treatment.

 

[taylorit]

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.

We have 3 of our own already, and took this one on loan to bring it on to event.

 

[taylorit]

It sounds as though you have done right by the horse and it has received the appropriate veterinary treatment while in your care. The arthritis will not have developed in the seven weeks that you have had the horse, even if the stiffness is only now becoming visible. I'm sure you could get your vet to write a letter stating it is a pre-existing condition. To my mind it is up to the owner to develop a long term management plan for the horse. I would possibly dispute the argument that the horse is "not in pain" from its arthritis though, as I do think that the stiffness is indicative of at least some discomfort. However, you can't really treat arthritis, you can only manage it - nothing you do is going to "fix" the horse, and I don't see how the owner can expect you to treat a long-term, degenerative condition when you have only had the horse on loan for a short period of time. In your shoes, I would probably ask the vet for some bute/ danilon to ensure that the horse is not in any discomfort, then send the horse back.

Exactly and the owner wont have it, owner believes the condition has happened overnight in the 7 weeks we have had the horse and expects us to pay for the investigation and treatment. We have been using bute but he is not always lame just stiff.

 

[TheMule]

Who asked the vet to attend the horse for the hind lameness? I think you are likely to be liable for the investigation if it was you and for the treatment needed to keep the horse pain free until he returns home at the end of the notice period.
'Stiff behind' is bilateral lameness. It is pain

 

[AmyMay]

Clearly the horse will be in some discomfort so make sure it is at least getting some Bute, and then hand the horse back.

 

[taylorit]

Who asked the vet to attend the horse for the hind lameness? I think you are likely to be liable for the investigation if it was you and for the treatment needed to keep the horse pain free until he returns home at the end of the notice period.
'Stiff behind' is bilateral lameness. It is pain

Vet was out for check on the splint after being on box rest not for hind lameness. Vet noticed the stiffness and new lameness in the hind, horse was stiff behind prior to coming on loan, and eased off after a long warm up under saddle. horse had been out of work prior to coming on loan.

 

[taylorit]

Clearly the horse will be in some discomfort so make sure it is at least getting some Bute, and then hand the horse back.

Yep that what we are doing.

 

[AmyMay]

Yep that what we are doing.

Then you’ve done everything right. Give them a collection date, and if the threaten you with legal action tell them you’ll see them in court.

 

[TheMule]

Vet was out for check on the splint after being on box rest not for hind lameness. Vet noticed the stiffness and new lameness in the hind, horse was stiff behind prior to coming on loan, and eased off after a long warm up under saddle. horse had been out of work prior to coming on loan.

Well in that case there is no cost of investigation? The vet was there for an injury obtained whilst in your care anyway? What exactly do they want you to pay for?

 

[taylorit]

Then you’ve done everything right. Give them a collection date, and if the threaten you with legal action tell them you’ll see them in court.

That is the route I was considering. I got a good friend who deals with equine law, I am a year 3 law student and the contract seems a bit ambiguous around notice period, contract terminates when horse is deemed not suitable or with 90 days notice or some other bits.

That's

Well in that case there is no cost of investigation? The vet was there for an injury obtained whilst in your care anyway? What exactly do they want you to pay for?

They want us to pay for the investigation, long term treatment and do the rehabilitation. We had the same with one of our own recently which we retired to a light hacking only home which he thoroughly enjoys, so we know treatment to manage doesnt always work.

 

[ihatework]

Is the horse insured?

 

[Leandy]

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.

 

[Leandy]

They want us to pay for the investigation, long term treatment and do the rehabilitation. We had the same with one of our own recently which we retired to a light hacking only home which he thoroughly enjoys, so we know treatment to manage doesnt always work.

Um, unless there is something in the contract to this effect, and I assume there isn't because you have taken legal advice on it, then this is an entirely unreasonable request. Just return the horse in accordance with the contract terms. You need to take good care of it in the meantime but that doesn't mean you have to embark on expensive and time consuming treatment.

Out of interest, is there any representation in the contract from the owner as to the use the horse is suitable for?

 

[taylorit]

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.

Thank you, this is the route we have gone down, but still the owner will not have it. Since giving notice the owner has been threatening legal action and constant harassment day & night to not only my partner but chasing our vets who wont disclose anything as the vet who dealt with it on holiday, the owner also contacted the vets directly without our knowledge, vets called us out the blue to advise us. Vet has been given permission to give disclose the treatment for splint injury, but the vet who dealt with now on holiday for 2 weeks.

 

[bouncing_ball]

It is possible the owners believed horse 100% sound and fit to event when he left them. And the box rest for the splint has made low level hind arthritis that had been below detection much worse and now it’s obvious.

 

[taylorit]

Um, unless there is something in the contract to this effect, and I assume there isn't because you have taken legal advice on it, then this is an entirely unreasonable request. Just return the horse in accordance with the contract terms. You need to take good care of it in the meantime but that doesn't mean you have to embark on expensive and time consuming treatment.

Out of interest, is there any representation in the contract from the owner as to the use the horse is suitable for?

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.

 

[taylorit]

It is possible the owners believed horse 100% sound and fit to event when he left them. And the box rest for the splint has made low level hind arthritis that had been below detection much worse and now it’s obvious.

Sound again since yesterday after being back out a few day but signs of stiffness

 

[Leandy]

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.

I think you have discovered at an early stage in the loan that this horse is unlikely to be suitable for that purpose (which isn't to say the owner didn't believe it to be at the time). Given that in the very short time you have had this horse you have so far found two different causes of lameness, I would be aiming to return the horse immediately under the provision that the horse is not fit for the purpose you borrrowed it. If you had had the horse sound prior to this for a significant length of time then you may have felt differently and wanted to spend more trying to manage it but as it is, if I were you, I would cut my losses now. So I would notify the owner that you are terminating the loan now and they need to take the horse back. I would also notify the vet of the dispute and tell them not to speak to the owner without your permission. If the owner will not take the horse back, or delays, I would point out they are liable for livery costs of the horse from x date and be clear that if they take action to seek to recoup any other costs you do not consider them entitled to I would be counterclaiming the livery costs.

 

[HeyMich]

That's the beauty of a loan - you can give notice and hand the horse back whenever you want.

And I very much (100%) doubt the arthritic changes have all happened since the horse was in your care. Does the solicitor understand that? If so, get them to write a strongly worded letter to the owners saying that it is highly likely that the horse was already unsound when you took him in (as arthritis doesn't happen in less than a month), and that the horse is considered to be unfit for purpose. To get the solicitor to write a letter should only cost a couple of hundred pounds at most, and it should put a stop to their threats of legal action towards you. Also get the vet to give you a copy of their examination notes, which should say about the stiffness behind etc, and copy them to the owner. Facts are facts and they can't dispute that.

Good luck and let us know how you get on.

 

[Wishfilly]

Horse is sometimes unsound but always stiff however can gallop around the field throwing shapes like nothing wrong. Owners want us to pay for the cost of investigation and treatment.

Surely you have paid for the investigation to some extent, as your vet has discovered it? What treatment specifically do they want you to pay for?

I think as long as you are keeping the horse comfortable, then once it goes back they won't have a leg to stand on.

Is the owner refusing to take the horse back?

I don't think "throwing shapes" indicates no discomfort, though.

 

[Flyermc]

i dont think the owners can do anything, but i do see there point of view.

You took on there horse 7 weeks ago and neither party had any issues with soundness at this time
The horse had not done anything previously with the owner so was not fit, but you took it on to event
4 weeks later the horse got injured - does anyone know how this happened? im wondering if the owner 'thinks' this could be due to the horses fitness program?
The horse went on boxrest - had the horse previously been stabled?
During this time the horse became very stiff behind which a vet has 'mentioned' is likely to be arthritis, however this hasnt been backed-up with xrays or investigations - Could the owner be thinking that this is not arthritis and could be an injury?
The vet mentioned not fit to event due to arthritis, however many horses do - maybe the owner is thinking this is also strange, making them think its an injury?

Is the horse insured? im wonder if the simple answer is to xray the hocks, get a diagnostics to cover yourself if they do try to blame you for injuring the horse?

 

[Cowpony]

You don't have to prove anything. You can terminate the loan by giving x days notice, per your list above. There doesn't need to be a reason.

Once they get the horse back if they want to sue you for "causing" the lameness that's up to them to pursue and you to defend.

 

[Leandy]

You don't have to prove anything. You can terminate the loan by giving x days notice, per your list above. There doesn't need to be a reason.

Once they get the horse back if they want to sue you for "causing" the lameness that's up to them to pursue and you to defend.

Agree although returning for lack of fitness for purpose would be immediate and the OP would not need to keep the horse for the notice period which is stated above to be 90 days (longer than the loaner has so far had the horse). As the owner is behaving badly, personally I would prefer to terminate the loan and return asap but agree there should be no argument at all after 90 days.

 

[taylorit]

Agree although returning for lack of fitness for purpose would be immediate and the OP would not need to keep the horse for the notice period which is stated above to be 90 days (longer than the loaner has so far had the horse). As the owner is behaving badly, personally I would prefer to terminate the loan and return asap but agree there should be no argument at all after 90 days.

Thank you I agree with this, I have a pony out on part loan legally but is out on full loan same yard for ease of burden but insurance remains in my name. In all the time we have loaned or loaned our own we have never had this issue, to me the owner wants us to fix the horse at our own cost, and likelyhood is the insurance would not pay out anyway as policy was only start day we took on loan. Owner has never previously had insurance from what we can gather.

 

[Melody Grey]

Was the horse vetted at the start of the loan period and passed as fit for purpose (eventing)? If not, then you have no record that the horse was fit for purpose in the first place.
I think you could return as the condition seems to be Pre-existing. Sounds like the owners are trying to pull a fast one for some free treatment to me.

Hypothetically if you did decide to treat and the horse came good, you have set a president in paying for treatment which might be a slippery slope to be on with a horse on loan?