How much does scarring affect price?

[L&M]

Just musing really - my little hunting cob got knocked over on a gravel track by a loose horse a few seasons ago, resulting in a pair of broken knees. It left him permanently scarred, although hard to see through his hair. He never had a days lameness from them and had a vet out when it happened so am confident there was no joint damage.

How would this affect his price if I decide to sell? He is a 12yrs old allrounder, obviously hunted, but also a great hack and loves fun rides, always placed SJ and won local showing classes(w/h and cob classes). So in terms of 'what he can do', his knees haven't mattered a jot......but cosmetically should I take it into consideration when deciding on what to price him?

Would they be an issue for passing a vetting?

Also should I mention it in any advertising?

Many thanks

 

[ihatework]

Minimal, to a pragmatic buyer who isn’t into showing. Provided he is sound. If I were spending proper money I might X-ray the knees to rule out any arthritic changes.

I wouldn’t put it on advert but disclose over phone and have photos ready to send.

Most vets would have to comment on the scars. Provided horse was sound they should pass. Insurance could be iffy

 

[Pearlsasinger]

If you were selling him as a hunter, superficial scars don't make any difference to price.

 

[w1bbler]

I naively bought a horse with very minor scars on her knees, mentioned on the phone call with simple explanation.
No sign of tripping on viewing & flew a 5 stage (the scars were so minor vet didn't note them on the cert.
Fast forward 10 months, she was out of work with 'navicular' kissing spines & ulcers.
So personally it would be a deal breaker for me, in the unlikely event I ever bought another horse

 

[L&M]

Sorry to hear that w1bbler.

His was a traumatic injury though, and through no fault of his own - I assume the poor horse you mention had tripped, resulting in scarring, which was related to the other health issues?

But take your point on board.....

 

[popcorn1]

Wouldn't bother me at all

 

[Lillian_paddington]

I don’t think the scars would be an issue at all - but the historic injury would worry some people I think. So it might lower the price in terms of fewer people willing to take the ‘risk’ of buying the horse, even though, as you say, it hasn’t caused him any damage.

 

[EventingMum]

I viewed a horse with a scarred knee once from a fall on concrete and he appeared sound, was neat in front jumping etc, however, when the vet went to do flexion tests he couldn't fully flex his knee to the extent required so we decided to pass on him.

 

[AFB]

Cosmetic scarring wouldn't worry me too much - I would need to know it was purely cosmetic though and at my budget wouldn't particularly want to start paying for X-rays etc.

So it wouldn't stop me buying, but would potentially put me off - if that makes any sense at all...

 

[ycbm]

It would definitely put me off I'm afraid. If I was spending thousands of pounds on a new horse I really wouldn't want to buy obvious blemishes right at the start. I'm sure there will be a lot of more pragmatic buyers, but I suspect you might need to knock some off the price he's worth unblemished to attract them. I think he will sell much easier if you have x rays to hand.
.

 

[DabDab]

Cosmetic scarring wouldn't bother me. An old injury to a joint would though I'm afraid

There are lots of people who wouldn't be remotely bothered though. Possibly 10-20% off the price he would be without would sell him easily I would guess.

 

[Wishfilly]

It might not be worth it, but I'd consider getting a vet you trust out to flexion test them etc, just in case (maybe if they were coming to the yard for another reason?)- if you are confident he will pass a vetting, that's very different to a horse who is sound but won't pass a vet.

If he will pass a vetting, I would say maybe 10% off the price you would otherwise market him at, and he will probably be snapped up!

 

[scats]

I bought a Horse with a substantial scar. Doesn’t bother me at all and I got a good deal on her, but it did affect insurance for that leg to some extent.

 

[L&M]

Thats

It might not be worth it, but I'd consider getting a vet you trust out to flexion test them etc, just in case (maybe if they were coming to the yard for another reason?)- if you are confident he will pass a vetting, that's very different to a horse who is sound but won't pass a vet.

If he will pass a vetting, I would say maybe 10% off the price you would otherwise market him at, and he will probably be snapped up!

That's a good idea, and am quite happy to have flexions done. The 10% sounds about right to me. Thanks

 

[blitznbobs]

Scars across a joint would put me off - a superficial scar to a ‘meaty’ part wouldn’t bother me in anything other than a show horse

 

[rabatsa]

If I trusted the seller enough to believe their story then it would not put me off but having come across a lot of horses that trip and break their knees resulting in scars I would not touch one.

 

[Sussexbythesea]

Another one who may be put off by scars not because of the appearance but the potential unseen damage behind them. I bought a horse that had chest scarring, I was told it was as a result of barbed wire cuts. Turns out horse had escaped from the field as a youngster and was hit by a car. He was put down at 8 due to wobblers which may have been a result of the impact. He did pass a 5 stage vetting.

 

[Buster2020]

I would not be put of by scars But a old injury would put me off I bought a horse that had a scaring on the leg my horse was diagnosed with arthritis at 11 years old. I think my horse developed arthritis earlier because of a old injury. I now have a horse that could be facing a early retirement .

 

[Red-1]

If the scar is free moving with the skin, the knee looked normal other than that, it was not recent and I liked the horse, then I wouldn't expect the horse to be any cheaper at all.

If the scar is as small as you say it is (difficult to see under the fur), and you aren't selling as a show horse then I wouldn't even mention them, certainly not until a vetting is being arranged.

I would expect a hunting horse, that has been flowing hounds as opposed to socialising at the meet, to have the odd scar.

 

[Polos Mum]

For anyone who follows the hoof dissection lady in New Zealand on facebook - she's doing a whole horse necropsy and there's a tiny knee scar that wouldn't bother me but damage underneath is quite meaningful, with what looks like stone / dirt adhered to the bone !!

It would bother me with two write offs in 4 years anything that might result in longer term lameness would put me off. OP I suspect it entirely depends on the past experience of the buyers.

 

[Otherwise]

I'm a bit leery of scars and wouldn't necessarily trust what a seller said about them unless I could see the vet records. I bought one horse with a scar on his chest, seller said he got it cross country schooling when he got too close to the horse in front, found out years later from the previous owner it was from sarcoid removal.

 

[AFB]

For anyone who follows the hoof dissection lady in New Zealand on facebook - she's doing a whole horse necropsy and there's a tiny knee scar that wouldn't bother me but damage underneath is quite meaningful, with what looks like stone / dirt adhered to the bone !!

It would bother me with two write offs in 4 years anything that might result in longer term lameness would put me off. OP I suspect it entirely depends on the past experience of the buyers.

Where do we find this please?

 

[Polos Mum]

If you search on 'The study of the equine hoof' you should find her - NOT for the squeamish - it is dissection. But if your brain works in pictures and you like to see how things work / look really informative

 

[AFB]

If you search on 'The study of the equine hoof' you should find her - NOT for the squeamish - it is dissection. But if your brain works in pictures and you like to see how things work / look really informative

Got it - thank you.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

The study of the Equine hoof page is fascinating!

For me, it depends on the scar. However I did buy a horse in the upper 4 digits and he had many scars that were not disclosed by the seller or PPE vet (well known and FEI vet). His winter coat his them since he was a yak. But I specifically asked about any blemishes and/or scars. So that was annoying! Was purely cosmetic in this case (or so it seemed), but still.

 

[AandK]

My late mare fell on her knees on the road about a year or so after I got her age 7, no scarring. About 4yrs later she went very, very slightly lame on that leg, can't remember the full details but what was initally diagnosed as navicular turned out to be an issue with her knee (think maybe a tiny bone chip?) the knee was medicated and she was sound on it. There were some other things going on as well at the same time (spavins and a coffin joint issue) which meant she was retired about 6 months later age 12. She was 29 when I had to say goodbye to her, and it was the knee that was the main issue, it started to affect her a lot over a 9 month period. I can't say how long she would have carried on being ridden if she had not had the other issues, but I would be wary of buying a horse with similar issues. It would be a good idea to get your vet to assess via flexions and possibly an xray.

 

[IrishMilo]

Cosmetic scarring wouldn't bother me. An old injury to a joint would though I'm afraid

This.

 

[scruffyponies]

Even at the bottom end I was put off taking a horse (FTGH) with severely scarred legs (some new cuts too). Not the medical that bothered me so much as the possibility that this idiot horse seemed to have a habit of trying to climb through fences.