Horses vaccinated without owners knowledge or permission

[Gingerwitch]

Yes but as far as the vet is aware the YO has got permission from the owner for all the vaccs to happen...

So again we are assuming that every horse is registered to the same vet ? would the vet be treating a horse not registered with his practice ? -
and from your argument you could rock up one day to find your horse has just been pts - under the instruction of the ym ?

 

[MerrySherryRider]

Yes but as far as the vet is aware the YO has got permission from the owner for all the vaccs to happen...

The vet shouldn't assume anything, particularly for a vaccination that is not routine.
The vet is liable if one of those horses has a reaction and he did not gain consent or inform the owner of the risk.

If he actually asked the YO if consent had been obtained and she said yes, then he was deliberately misled, but we don't know that.

Springy's example is different to the UK where usually owners are local and even when on full livery, they retain responsibility for care unless specifically advised otherwise.

 

[indie999]

Ah havent read all the replies BUT there seems to be a flaw in your posting.

Initially I thought what a nerve without permission.

BUT your friend had the horse on FULL LIVERY she needs to check her agreement as I bet it states that the livery is taking full care for the horse etc, vet etc if needed etc and it sounds like your friend works and lets them do the looking after. In that case if the horse was at high risk of the virus I would say the yard owner had its best interests at heart.

If the YO did nothing and knew the outbreak was around etc and your friends horse caught something then you would be posting something completely different.

So no in this case the YO did what she thought best. Even if expensive!

 

[Gingerwitch]

Ah havent read all the replies BUT there seems to be a flaw in your posting.

Initially I thought what a nerve without permission.

BUT your friend had the horse on FULL LIVERY she needs to check her agreement as I bet it states that the livery is taking full care for the horse etc, vet etc if needed etc and it sounds like your friend works and lets them do the looking after. In that case if the horse was at high risk of the virus I would say the yard owner had its best interests at heart.

If the YO did nothing and knew the outbreak was around etc and your friends horse caught something then you would be posting something completely different.

So no in this case the YO did what she thought best. Even if expensive!

Sorry totally disagree - even if the horse is on full livery I would still expect to be informed when the vet was booked to my horse. Some horses have horrific reactions to "routine" vacs - I know I lost one last year - same as if horse had a bad cut I would always argue against steriods in the 1st instance as again i have 1st hand expericance of a horse developing secondary lami through this.

But yes you are right - if the owner has signed to say that the yo can do what they like with the horses then so be it, but from the inferance of the OP I would say this was NOT the case and furthermore I doubt that anyone would be happy to suddenly find out they had an unexpected bill from their vets for a procedure they did not even know was going on.

 

[mcnaughty]

I would defo expect to be give prior notification of this and if my animals were not travelling anywhere this is not something I would expect!

 

[Clannad48]

Ok - when i go away my ym has a signed dated letter that is used as her autorisation for treatment - even down to the pts if required.

She has 3 contact numbers for me, my husband and my dad if there is a serious issue with one of the horses and I cannot be reached.

She does NOT have authorisiation to book something she wants doing other than at these times.

I am also assuming that all horses are under the same vet at the yard ?? which even to me is a strange thing to get my head round - unless they were all owned by the same person.

My YO has my express permission to call the vet to treat my horse in an emergency, and if necessary to call me after the fact. I would hate to think that in an emergency treatment could be delayed if she is unable to contact me immediately. She also has permissions when I am away on holiday and not available to be contacted . I trust my YO implicitly. I have also notified my vet what I have given permission for and trust him to use his professional judgement if he is called out.

I would like to think that most people have yard owners and vets that they trust to do the right thing. However after reading several threads recently perhaps I am exceptionally lucky with mine.

 

[criso]

BUT your friend had the horse on FULL LIVERY she needs to check her agreement as I bet it states that the livery is taking full care for the horse etc, vet etc if needed etc

The livery contracts I have been given say if necessary but that all efforts will be made to contact and consult the owner first. Full liveries and DIYs have the same contract.

I would debate whether this was 'necessary'. This was not life and death but a routine vaccinations. It could have been done the following day. One of the horses could be known to have a reaction to the vaccine but without consulting the owner or the regular vet they wouldn't have known this.

The YM could impose the policy but needed to tell people and give them the option of going along with it on moving.

When I saw a yard I was at behaving like this had I stayed I was considering having a chat with the vets and seeing if a note could be put in my file along the lines of no non urgent treatment without authorisation from myself.

 

[indie999]

Ok then was this owner not in contact with the YO? Are they in a high risk area/outbreak?
It would be good to get the owner and YO to give us their view on this rather than being judged without the full facts?

I find it amazing that one day the YO woke up and thought hey lets go get them all vaccinated and get the vet out. My vet usually needs an appointment for jabs etc.

Must be more to this? ie did the owner due to their work not answer phone/out of country?
I had a lady ask to put her kids pony in with mine for one week and 3 months later I still had the pony. She rarely called and was an utter pain in the proverbial, very wealthy and cheeky with high exec job. Promised lots but I was her underclass servant. The horse mattered more to me so I did the chores ie poo picked for England even provided hay which she promised to pay me for. Joke.The day it came to be collected she rang to say she was far too busy could I get it loaded on. Only met her once.

So can the OP come on with the YO and owner to let us know what are the two sides to this?

 

[Spring Feather]

I find it amazing that one day the YO woke up and thought hey lets go get them all vaccinated and get the vet out. My vet usually needs an appointment for jabs etc.

Must be more to this?

I totally agree with you here. OP appears to have fallen off the face of the planet so we're just going round and round in circles without any further answers to questions. I do think there is much more to this story than has been let on.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

My YO has my express permission to call the vet to treat my horse in an emergency, and if necessary to call me after the fact. I would hate to think that in an emergency treatment could be delayed if she is unable to contact me immediately. She also has permissions when I am away on holiday and not available to be contacted . I trust my YO implicitly. I have also notified my vet what I have given permission for and trust him to use his professional judgement if he is called out.

I would like to think that most people have yard owners and vets that they trust to do the right thing. However after reading several threads recently perhaps I am exceptionally lucky with mine.

I think most of us do this, but emergency treatment or giving authority to treat non emergency, but necessary ailments is totally different.

Here healthy horses were given a non routine vaccination and the owner was texted afterwards. Why not before ?

Whether or not it was advisable is irrelevant, the visit must have been pre booked so there was no reason not to text owners and seek consent beforehand.

 

[indie999]

I totally agree with you here. OP appears to have fallen off the face of the planet so we're just going round and round in circles without any further answers to questions. I do think there is much more to this story than has been let on.

Yep
Oh well perhaps they will come back to explain what the outcome is? Did they sue the YO and the Vet too?