My_breadbagel
Well-Known Member
Dodgy yard I know has an unqualified 15/16y/o teaching lessons alone and dangerously, resulting in beginners being pushed too far and falling off. Is this illegal?????
Illegal yard
- Thread starter My_breadbagel
- Start date
COldNag
Wasting my time successfully....
I don't know if it is illegal but I doubt their insurers would be happy.
Nicnac
Well-Known Member
Local yard was recently closed down as license had expired Report to local council.
The Animal Welfare Act states no person is allowed to carry out certain activities unless under the authority of a license or registration.
This includes riding establishments under the Riding Establishments Act 1964.
The Animal Welfare Act states no person is allowed to carry out certain activities unless under the authority of a license or registration.
This includes riding establishments under the Riding Establishments Act 1964.
Flowerofthefen
Well-Known Member
As above , not sure if illegal but there could be a big mess to sort out if someone was injured whilst having a lesson with the 16yo. I know of a young lady, 24, taking kids for jumping lessons at a BHS establishment. She isn't qualified or insured. I did think about saying something but in the end just thought let them get on with it. It might come back to bite them on the backside!
teapot
Well-Known Member
Under the licensing act, someone of a Stage 3/AI standard must be on site at all times when operating as a riding school. Under 18s also cannot be left on their own, but staff have to be 16 and over to provide xyz services.
Can someone unqualified teach? Yes they can in theory but insurance company may have something to say if they've based premiums on qualified staff etc.
Can someone unqualified teach? Yes they can in theory but insurance company may have something to say if they've based premiums on qualified staff etc.
Last edited:
MissTyc
Well-Known Member
Who owns the horses on this "dodgy yard"? Under what arrangements are the horses being used?
Melody Grey
Well-Known Member
They’re on dodgy ground in terms of insurance and first aid provision there. Make enquiries with the council if you’re worried- riding schools have to be licensed.
AdorableAlice
Well-Known Member
The 1964 Act is no longer relevant. The hiring out of horses is governed by new law which came in October 2018. If the premises is not providing horses for monetary gain the district council will not be interested.
If it is and does not have the relevant licence in place it is trading illegally and the council can prosecute . If it does have a licence in place it is in breach of licence conditions and the licence must be reviewed, suspended or revoked.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Really? My 'old' local doesn't have anyone there with AI on a regular basis (and never has done). One does now have both stage 3s.
AdorableAlice
Well-Known Member
it is legal and licence condition compliant to have instructors that can demonstrate suitable experience together with on going professional development. There are plenty of older trainers that don’t have a recorded qualification to their name but are respected trainers.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Ah, that would make more sense. It's been a going concern for decades, mostly with the same/similar staff.
teapot
Well-Known Member
Yup, requirement of the 2018 Act. How they enforce it is a whole other issue (ie that person can be there for the inspection and then never seen again etc). I think there's a caveat of you can prove you have demonstrable experience if you're older/well respected, but that involves a lot of paperwork depending on council - it's a detailed bit of the form and they do ask for actual proof!
Latest wording is this:
'At least one member of staff must have either:
- a recognised qualification such as, a relevant Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) regulated Level 3 qualification
- suitable experience and training, such as, running an equine facility before'
AdorableAlice
Well-Known Member
It helps if the inspector accompanying the vet has an equine background, makes life a lot easier for all parties.
teapot
Well-Known Member
Yes, yes it does! I've met a range shall we say!
ester
Not slacking multitasking
They've been running the aforementioned facility for 30 years, so I guess that covers the 2018 wording?
AdorableAlice
Well-Known Member
Yes it does, but the inspector has to be mindful of increasing age impinging capabilities, and should that be the case the inspector must be satisfied the necessary standards are being met.
teapot
Well-Known Member
Think this is a really good point, and much of the anti license requirement comments that I've seen comes perhaps from those not overly welcome to change/of a certain generation.
blitznbobs
Well-Known Member
this is incredibly weak wording … is there a definition of “before” or “equine facility”
‘before‘ could mean that they were in charge yesterday and ‘equine facility’ could mean they had a pony at home.. I’m not sure you’d get a successful prosecution ever off those words… I’d be interested in any case law around the legislation.
teapot
Well-Known Member
In the actual 2018 Act so the legal wording, it says ‘sufficient demonstrable experience and competence’, so owning one in a field wouldn’t count.
I can assure you they ask for a lot of info when it comes to taking your license out, even more so now, and that can include proof that can be verified by a third party. A mate’s reference may not cut it.